Eh. Usually the type I'm talking about have offended before transitioning.
To be clear, I'm not saying people who haven't committed crimes should be treated as if they have. Just that, as you mentioned, this type is perfectly okay with transitioning, which makes me doubt that it's
just a way to exploit the system. The progressive narrative on these people is that they're just trans people who are criminals, and in a way I think this is correct, insofar as I've seen nothing to make me think what's going on with transitioning criminals who fit the agp type is much different from transitioning non-criminals who fit the agp type.
IMO Blanchard's typology for agp-type mtfs is convincing, and matches with what I've seen. Admittedly, this is only two agp-types people I've interacted with and I cut contact with them because I thought they were weird
before they were publicly trans but it's still 2/3 "trans" people I've known. If that's correct agp-type mtfs can be understood as basically men with a paraphilia who want everyone else to act out their paraphilia, much like, I don't know, someone going out in public wearing a fursuit or bdsm stuff. I think that selecting for people who do that sort of thing selects for people who have little respect for other people's bounadries, so it's no great surprise that there's sexual criminals among them.
Of course, weirdness is not criminality and non-criminals should not be treated like criminals. So while I do think certain people should probably be restricted from roles of authority over children, I don't agree with
@The Immortal Watch Dog prescription. (Also, I think it would hurt the "dumb trans-trender kid" and "discord grooming victim" components of the population in a way I don't think is reasonable).
This shit right here is why the regressive left and the regressive right compare well together - it is always an "either/or" with these two groups.
Sure, bud. So do you consider yourself, then if you're so concerned with not being one of those spooky regressives? Progressive? Or progressives were right about every single issue they succeeded on up until ~2015, but also wrong about every single other issue, so we need to make sure society stays exactly as it is now?
Yes. My position is informed by the fact that I do not think we can balance midway down the slippery slope. I think your discount, watered-down liberalism is simply outcompeted by the harder, more extreme strain. Conservatism as liberalism going the speed limit is an ideology for the designated losers of the current paradigm. I think in order to construct a movement capable of resisting the aspects of liberalism that everyone here disagrees, and even what most liberals
currently disagree with, accepting their premises and then just fiddling a bit with the conclusions is insufficient. What's necessary is presenting a totally different worldview, a complete rejection of liberalism. Weeds have to be pulled up by their roots.