367
JD Vance’s Campaign Won’t Deny That’s Him in Viral Drag Photo
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
367 points (97.4% liked)
politics
19097 readers
4893 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
While I understand we want to point out and ridicule hypocrisy, let’s not make this a thing please? Trans folks in this country get enough shit without Democrats piling on too.
It's more in the lines of "man outraged by people challenging gender norms cross dresses for fun; is hypocrite".
It's not the outfit we take issue with here. It's the hypocrisy.
I don’t think “it’s hypocritical” is a good argument morally or strategically with these things.
The issue isn’t his hypocrisy, it’s “see? You clearly know this is fine. You all know this drag obsession is bullshit.”
Yeah, that is the hypocrisy that is being pointed out.
Snooggums we sometimes disagree but i honestly expected you of all people to be smart enough/not-subject-to-internet-argument-tunnel-vision enough to see the nuance here.
Both parties play the hypocrisy game, it doesn’t convince anyone. This is distinct even if it feels similar.
You are stating the literal hypocrisy and saying it isn't hypocrisy. I have no idea what nuance you are saying is there.
Pointing out hypocrisy is actually fairly effective with uninformed people. If they have only a passing interest in JD couch molester, but are made aware of his anti-trans/drag legislation at the same time they find out he was cool doing it himself, they will be likely to not believe his bullshit in the future. No, it won't swing his base who are already on the cognitive dissonance express, but it might help motivate someone on the fence to get out and vote against him.
The issue is this: hypocrisy is a very surface level complaint. It’s why no one cares about it besides the people complaining about hypocrisy. The hypocrite and their allies do not give a shit. Do any of us give a shit that Republicans calls anyone not-republican hypocrites everyday? No. We hand wave it away and could not care less. We declare the accusation in bad faith and move on.
What Vance did removes the teeth of their major current social argument: that not conforming to ones gender/gender roles makes one a “sexual deviant.” What he did was also in the past, he’s not currently doing it (most likely). So they can easily say “he was young and stupid this isn’t hypocrisy.” But the LARGER issue is his dressing like that meant nothing at all. It represented nothing dark or wrong about him. He did it for fun and that’s ok even if he refuses to acknowledge it.
This is distinct from saying “the issue is he’s a hypocrite” and frankly I think far more impactful. Hypocrisy on its own doesn’t mean much other than you’re an inconsistent person (ignorant or on purpose), which no one honestly cares about outside of close, personal relationships.
The 'rules for thee but not for me' kind of hypocrisy is extremely important.
Dude come on the whole point is to who? No one gives a shit! The issue is his dressing like that does not matter regardless of his position or that of the GOP. That photo is only significant because his party acts like it’s indicative of someone being a pedophile. We need non-weird people to see that. That’s the significance. I know you know what I’m saying.
Yes it’s hypocritical. You keep acting like I’m saying it’s not hypocritical, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that is not what’s important here. Calling out hypocrisy in political campaigns is masturbatory, it’s to rile up people who already agree with you. The issue is how drag has been weaponized needlessly. Call attention to that.
Edit: forget it this is pointless clearly. Truly expected people on lemmy to see the issue here but clearly this thread is not the place where I’ll find those people.
I think there's just a disagreement with your core premise.
There is a subset of people that are not engaged and unaware of Vance's legislative history or public statements regarding drag. Those people will generally not engage with long thoughtful nuanced discourse. Those are the people that pointing out hypocrisy speaks to. An article or long post just doesn't work. A quick meme does. It's a simple cognitive shortcut to get them engaged, and it's effective. Yes, I get a bit of masturbatory joy when I see that stuff, but it shouldn't be meant for me. This stuff is meant to go "viral" so it gets in front of the non-engaged eyeballs.
We need to use every single goddamn tool in the toolbox we have to engage people and get them to turn out. All of it. Including pointing out hypocrisy.
Everyone is aware of the GQP’s obsession with drag queens/trans folks/bathrooms/etc. You can attack this obsession with this photo.
Also it’s not drag, which half this thread is calling the image.
Fair enough on the terminology.
So attacking their obsession is okay, but taking it one step further and explaining that they're not only obsessed but hypocritical somehow makes it out of bounds?
I am truly trying to understand your point, and I think others have too, but it simply isn't there. Can you just specifically say what you would like to see written when communicating this information to someone? What specifically do you want said about JD Vance when someone posts this photo? I think that might help.
I never described it as out of bounds that is wildly mischaracterizing what I said. Move on dude we’re just not going to see eye to eye.
It was a question, trying to understand what the hell you're trying to say. Don't really think it's fair to call that "wildly mischaracterized" but you do you.
Happy to move on. You should really work on communicating your thoughts though. You're not making any sense and wasting a bunch of people's time who are trying to engage with you in good faith, and then getting combative when it's pointed out. We can't see eye to eye while you're facing the other direction.
I don’t need your lectures, thanks. Please move on now.
Make your print more effectively if you want us to understand.
The typo does make this kind of funny ngl. But I won’t be a dick and hide behind it.
Anyway the issue is this: hypocrisy is a very surface level complaint. It’s why no one cares about it besides the people complaining about hypocrisy. The hypocrite and their allies do not give a shit. Do any of us give a shit that Republicans calls anyone not-republican hypocrites everyday? No. We hand wave it away and could not care less. We declare the accusation in bad faith and move on.
What Vance did removes the teeth of their major current social argument: that not conforming to ones gender/gender roles makes one a “sexual deviant.” What he did was also in the past, he’s not currently doing it (most likely). So they can easily say “he was young and stupid this isn’t hypocrisy.” But the LARGER issue is his dressing like that meant nothing at all. It represented nothing dark or wrong about him. He did it for fun and that’s ok even if he refuses to acknowledge it.
This is distinct from saying “the issue is he’s a hypocrite” and frankly I think far more impactful. Hypocrisy on its own doesn’t mean much other than you’re an inconsistent person (ignorant or on purpose), which no one honestly cares about outside of close, personal relationships.
But hypocrisy is the point. No one's mocking him just for wearing drag, just like no one criticizes gop voters solely for getting abortions. The criticism stems from the hypocrisy, not the act itself.
Drag and trans are different things.
Yeah it's a mood when somebody trying to cape for you misunderstands who you are.
Oh hi. I’m actually trans. I’ve already been beat over the head by conservative relatives with “see even democrats think trans folks are stupid”. Which is why I posted the original comment.
The way I see it, it needs to be made a thing. It's okay to be trans, it's okay to dress in drag, it's not okay to do it while you're a homo/transphobe. That's very much like the LGBTQ+ equivalent of cultural appropriation.
Plus I'm tired of the hypocrisy. If they're okay with us having to endure being called slurs, he deserves to go through the same. We will stop if and once they say "please stop, it's okay to be gay".
This isn't making fun of individuals who identify as trans or appreciate drag/drag culture.
This is specifically making fun of an idiot conservative who is the embodiment of what his party hates. Just like I wouldn't make fun of someone for being gay, I'm still going to make fun of a politician who enjoys trying to have sex with random men in airport bathrooms.
My man, you’re missing the point. The ridicule has been well earned and undermines their bullshit views. More importantly, it undermines their bullshit policies, since Harris is going to wreck shit. I ain’t downvote you, btw.
What does TD Vance, well known couch fucker wearing drag have to do with trans people?
I agree with this sentiment on a lot of political attacks - especially ones about physical characteristics or things a person can’t control - but in this case I see it used more as “see? This is fine. He clearly thought it was fine too and now he acts like this makes people automatically pedophiles. What the hell is that about?”
People hand wave the others with “hypocrisy” which I don’t think is enough, but this? It’s not the hypocrisy (and those in this thread saying it are actually missing why this is significant/are piling on for the wrong reasons). It’s “this is a totally fine thing to do yet you and your party have decided it isn’t even when you did it yourself for fun.
He did nothing wrong dressing like that, yet he now insists it is wrong.
What do you think hypocrisy is, if not this? Because this is the textbook definition of hypocrisy.
Where did I say this wasn’t hypocritical?
I don't think anyone is really clear what you're saying, even though we seem to be on the same side. You seem to be suggesting that the hypocrisy isn't the real problem, it's that he once did this thing and now claims that it's wrong for others to do it. And that's literally the textbook definition of hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
JD Vance claims dressing in drag is morally wrong yet he himself has dressed in drag in the past. That makes him a hypocrite. That's the hypocrisy that people are pointing out. I don't know what counter-argument you're trying to put forward.
I explained it thoroughly in two comments. You get it or you don’t, I’m done.
One last thing though: that’s not drag.
So is you point that pointing out hypocrisy isn't enough?
I would disagree in part, but that would make way more sense if that's what you've been trying to say.
I think the hypocrisy isn’t what matters so much as all the other stuff I’ve explained. People are missing what makes this distinct and why it matters. I’ve explained my stance pretty thoroughly at this point.