The guy who voted for a dead guy in the 2020 election is putting on a performance is all. Typical Larry will never given concrete information and tell them he will share more details later.
For those who did not know Larry Hogan did not make clear his stance on issues as governor, especially in his first term. For example, he did not make clear his position on weed. Like how the fuck can we vote for someone when they avoid a stance and worse changing their stance because it helps with the election.
Hogan is a great politician. Not in the fact that he gets things done or helps anyone just in the fact that he gets elected and says just enough to keep his job.
He's a champion level bullshitter. Has been his whole career. Sign on when the majority likes something stay quiet when things aren't so cut and dry and take credit for popular things whenever possible regardless of actual involvement.
My favorite was when he took credit for increasing education funding while actively raising several million dollars specifically to try to defeat legislation to increase education funding.
Game. Set. Match.
This is why Hogan gets zero points on any progressive topic he professes to support, because he's just cynically manipulating optics to try and get elected and will throw us under the bus after the fact.
Fuck this dude, Alsobrooks all the way.
Reading between the lines and paraphrasing...
"I'm here to support the community."
"So if elected will you actually do anything to materially support the community?"
"LOL, no."
I think that’s an oversimplification. She asked a question that *no* person could answer honestly as a “gotcha”… what type of representative should *ever* answer “yes” to a question phrased as, “if elected you will blindly support this very broad issue and also support anything that comes from a specific demographic?”
What kind of person running for office could possibly say “yes” to that type of question? Did Alsobrooks also have that question posed to her? Did she answer it in absolutes?
*Edit: A lot of replies to my comment and none of them address the fact that asking anyone to support any cause with a blank check will never be answered in the affirmative. This was just someone trying to have a “gotcha” moment where no one learned anything new and was a wasted opportunity to discuss actual issues. Asking “gotcha” questions is nothing more than self gratifying virtue signaling… what a waste.
It’s also a strawman to say that “all gender affirming healthcare” is nefarious in any matter. Gender affirming health care means it comes from doctors, licensed medical professionals. It’s not some back alley prescriptions for a black market drug. Arguing so is disingenuous.
Who is arguing that? If it’s prescribed and is a medical treatment, who gives a shit? The issue I have is that no politician, even Alsobrooks, would ever say they will back everything that comes from one particular community. It’s absurd. If she just asked about prescribed gender affirming healthcare, Hogan might’ve given a different answer. Once she adds will he back everything that comes from the LGBTQ+ community (which she absolutely did ask), there’s no way he could even have a discussion. It’s a gotcha question and it’s a waste of time. At the way it’s spreading in this thread, it may as well just be considered propaganda for a political party.
A "very broad issue" for a "very specific demographic" is a contradiction in ideas. The very nature of the issue being specific to my demographic renders it an inherently specific issue, one that is self-solving if uneducated people without any stake stop entitling themselves into any degree of control.
The type of person who could say "yes" is the type of person who understands that. He could also actually make a more quantified statement instead of an open-ended "yes", but he chose to remain ambiguous because he knows his actual opinions will be unwelcome.
Thank you. "Gender affirming healthcare" and "any and all policies that support the LGBTQ+ community" are *incredibly* vague terms. No wonder he didn't want to engage with this person!
If he'd said yes the Hogan haters would probably spin it as "Larry Hogan supports transgender surgery for 12-year olds" or some such nonsense.
No we wouldn't, we would trumpet his support to make it difficult for him to go back on it. The whole point is to force him to take a stand by cementing it to his career prospects. He knows this, and because he does not actually support our needs he's choosing to be evasive.
So like I said above, it's a cynical play for optics.
Again, what does gender affirming healthcare even mean? Why would any sane individual make a public pledge to support something so vague, especially if it's likely to include controversial treatments that haven't been shown to be safe or effective?
"Gender affirming healthcare" is a well-defined term. Stop engaging with this subject until you know what you're talking about.
https://www.wpath.org/media/cms/Documents/SOC%20v7/SOC%20V7_English.pdf
>what does gender affirming healthcare even mean?
>it's likely to include controversial treatments that haven't been shown to be safe or effective
I wish I could be so confident in my own ignorance to draw conclusions like this
It means whatever the patients and their care team need it to. Like, what on earth makes you believe you need to know what my medical needs even are, let alone that you are entitled to a say in the degree to which I am allowed to have them met?
This is literally the same broad topic as abortion: government is not equipped to make decisions on individual healthcare needs and the public has no compelling interest. It's bodily autonomy.
Why did he even show up if he didn't have some curated LGBTQ policy responses. He's only there for campaigning and he can't even reaffirm his political stance.
Hogan vetoed expansions to women’s reproductive healthcare when he was governor.
This is a fact. We have the receipts.
Don’t believe the hype, Hogan is as MAGA as Trump.
>Hogan vetoed expansions to women’s reproductive healthcare when he was governor.
i would love for him to try to justify this bullshit now with his supposed new and improved "pro choice" views. Meanwhile, a woman in baltimore miscarried twins alone on a city bus, and wait times for ob/gyn care have become insane.
I'm not even voting for Hogan but the utterly unhinged hatred for him on this subreddit is tempting me to, just to piss off the idiots who post on here.
Larry Hogan is a master of polling and sticking to a script. He has pollsters who probably determined that attending the Annapolis Pride Parade would gain him votes in his eventual run for president in 2028, so he went. It's as simple as that. He has no interest in or legislative history of supporting this community, but that doesn't matter. The polls said to go, so he went.
Once you observe him through that lens, every move he makes is obvious.
He’s a joke after everything that’s happened in the last few years he should know we don’t want or trust people like him. Fake words and truly doesn’t like or care for his neighbors just their votes and money. If you go to an event celebrating a group and then don’t wanna say you support that group gtfo and go back to your hole. Hopefully he doesn’t win this November I certainly won’t be voting for a wishy washy guy.
It's a progression. Those of us who watched Black and Brown people struggle for the progress they've made for their rights to life, liberty and happiness; watched our Gay friends struggle to be out as who they are -- we're now called upon to render aid as our Trans friends want to live.
It's sad that, in 2024, the default GOP planks are to attack Trans people, deprive Gay people of their rights to exist, and try to erase Black and Brown America.
Fwiw, I regard Hogan at Pride somewhat as hypocritical pandering, and somewhat as baby steps towards removing the reactionary right wing gender ideology and right wing identity politics from the political battlefield.
I don't think that Annapolis Pride was the place for those baby steps, and I don't think that Hogan's presence at AP was about anything more than gaining Dem and youth votes. Any Republicans that oppose the bigotry of the GOP should be spending their free time addressing the GOP directly, not showing up on a space that should be reserved for those who actively support LGBTQ+ rights and people. Hogan should try wearing the rainbow at GOP events instead.
The bar is so low. Like yes, I guess a republican who half-heartedly pretends to support social causes is better than one who outright declares war on them.
But fuck both of them
I feel like claiming to "support the LGBT community" is worse if he doesn't actually intend to put that into practice as part of the duties for the position he wants to get elected for.
No partial credit for hypocrisy.
Eh. I think the hypocrite is better than someone who actively incites hatred.
Both are awful, but at least the hypocrite knows his feelings are disliked, and not accepted by the public. Something to be hidden.
The other guy is open about it, and advocates for hate. He makes other people think it's ok to be like that.
I like to phrase it that it's not *better*, it's just *less bad*, for this reason.
Particularly here in Maryland, if his lying about LGBT support gets him elected, where he then flips the Senate and votes for harmful legislation, that's actually probably way worse than just being a powerless bigot.
Yes, this is extremely concerning. Last thing we need is Trump with the Senate. Even if Dems have the house and legislation is gridlocked, the senate and the executive alone could do insane shit.
Plug for anyone not familiar with The Heritage Foundation's plan for Trump's presidency, Project 2025, read about it on [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025) which is an accurate summary of it in the GOP's own words [here.](https://www.project2025.org/)
This article, [How Far Trump Would Go](https://time.com/6972021/donald-trump-2024-election-interview/) is a must-read for anyone of voting age in this country.
then again, at the end of the day, the reality is hogan is likely to vote lockstep with the rest of the gop when it comes to anti lgbtq legislation. Which is frankly even more insidious than just being an outward hateful asshole. One spews hate, the other empowers that hate through legislation.
Nope - it's not binary. Pun intended.
https://preview.redd.it/hdb45ultpm4d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=36ab7ff36ba8c1fef95ca68cba76a166a747316f
We're not deciding between Hogan and MTG, we're deciding between Hogan and Alsobrooks. And, most notably, the anti-Trans works for MTG's electorate, but not for Hogan which is why he shouldn't be allowed to pretend he's supportive if he's not actually.
Of course not - like I said - again - he is not getting my vote - but people do pay attention to him and if one moderate Republican sees the pride symbol on his shirt and decides to not go and try to ban books, or shout down parents at school board hearings, it's a good thing.
Is it not a bad thing though? It just comes across like all the other organizations that talk about pride once a month then don’t care the other 11. I’m not a member of the community, but it just seems so unfair to you all that a majority only support you for one month then go right back to normal once it’s over. I guess when it becomes second nature to tell people how brave they are, like thanking a solder for their service, then maybe I’ll think it’s not all just pandering.
Oh you are right. I guess this is just the same at this Republican. Like I said - he won't get my vote - but I can appreciate the gesture. Purity tests are bad for everyone
https://preview.redd.it/teuqn0ocpm4d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad131f2e4c97ca1c0a34248da6380ebde2b427bc
Yea I mean I get people just don't want a republican senator in MD but it's pretty damn toxic to say people can't march in a parade to show support if they don't agree with every single piece of TQI+ culture war stuff... you gotta meet people where they are, not tell them fuck off because you haven't yet changed their mind on every single issue you'd like to
His TV ADs almost had me believing that he would stray from the right agenda, but I know better after seeing how he is in person and looking more into what happened during his time as Governor. To be a new senator, he will have to vote party lines or he will not be able to advance his career, which we know he has eyes for the Presidency.
We can’t vote for him this fall, if we want to keep our seat democratic (regardless of how much I want to believe him). Another vote for Angela Alsobrooks!
Hogan is just a liar looking to rake in votes. He went to an event for longshoremen and posed for one pic. The next day there were headlines saying the longshoremen support him. Total bullshit. He's got other losers supporting him like Ric Metzgar. Just secret racists who only try to actually please old racist white people with too much money.
While I totally support Alsobrooks over this guy and see the clear pandering he is doing to try to win over votes, I think it's important to appreciate people who pivot on their LGBT views.
Let's not forget the majority of the country, including Obama and Biden did not support LGBT rights until later in their lives. It's great when people can evolve their views based on their experiences and outreach. But Alsobrooks all the way.
But you look at his record and there's no evidence of concrete steps he took as governor to benefit the LGBT+ community other than letting bills become law without his signature. He didn't actually *do* anything. That's why some people had a problem with him being at these events.
Totally get that, and any politician should have a much higher expectation on real action before anyone credits them with evolving on their positions. But seeing a GOP candidate wearing a pride flag isn't necessarily a bad thing, log as you don't let it be a free pass to your vote, which I would think most left leaning people would do.
Hogan is a loser that is becoming less likable by the day.
My democrat friends call him a liar, my republican friends call him a liar, and I want nothing to do with him
They’re not surprised they’re trying to underscore to the people who parrot or otherwise fall for his bullshit that he’s absolutely the fuck not any of this maverick country over party do what’s right for Maryland and Americans type dude he professes to be. He’s another fucking republican
I'm not voting for Hogan, but this exchange feels like a bad faith effort to corner him and call him out. He's a Republican.
It's a wholly unnecessary "gotcha" moment that doesn't really "get" us any info we didn't already know.
The thing is, it's only a "gotcha" moment because he's a hypocrite. If he actually supported anything like this, it wouldn't have been a gotcha moment.
Exactly! If this person ambushed him at the airport, that would be a different story. He was at a Pride event; he shouldn’t be surprised if people ask him about the extent of his support for the alphabet mafia.
How is it a bad faith effort to corner someone when you ask someone, at an event FOR a thing, if they support the thing they're at an event for?
Like if someone was at an NRA convention, it wouldn't be a bad faith effort to corner them and call them out to ask them if they support open carry and concealed carry laws. It's extremely relevant to the venue that they *chose* to come to.
It was wholly foolish of him to go to Pride. Unless he really needs the votes of the 3 Log Cabin Republicans that are usually present.
But we know who Larry is. We know his history. If you think you're going to get an honest answer or a commitment from him, you're either delusional or just asking so you can ding him later on it, for which only people who already agree with you will actually care.
I agree. Prior to Trump, I spent a ton of time looking into and following candidates before the general election. I also voted 3rd Party much of the time because I can't stand the 2 major parties. But since Trump, my vote is about defending the country against fascism. I'd love to be more picky.
> this exchange feels like a bad faith effort to corner him and call him out.
That's exactly what it is.
"Will you make an open-ended commitment to support some vague progressive terms? No? Obviously you're a MAGA bigot."
It doesn't matter if he's not a MAGA bigot.
I mean, he ain't an ally. And if he weren't running for office, he wouldn't necessarily be an enemy either.
But he sits at the table with the enemy so... Sorry Larry boy.
But asking him to make those same vague promises to a group of people that are generally not a constituency is about as useful as him being at Pride in the first place.
Do you honestly believe that Alsobrooks would answer "yes" immediately to the statement: "I take it this means if elected, you will support gender affirming healthcare and ANY and ALL policies that support the LGBTQ+ community."
99% of politicians would never agree to such an open-ended and all-encompassing generalization.
Gender affirming care is absolutely disgusting and vile. Shame on you. Hogan is a groveling, two-faced politician, but good on him for not supporting this horse shit.
>This is an informal interview conducted with Larry Hogan at Annapolis Pride on 01 July 2024.
Damn, you're from the future? What were the lotto numbers that night?
Fuck hogan. Someone should have ripped that rainbow badge off his chest. Motherfucker doesn’t care about the lgbtq community, only how it makes him look. Fuck right off.
He won't support you and have 0 attention. Politicians are only showing like they care because they can secure your vote. Why cant people see they are being used ?!?!
This was a gotcha moment as soon as they added “and any other lgbtq+ policies” to the question. They literally asked him if he was just going to agree with any-and-everything rainbow related. No rational human being would say yes to that, though a kind person might say yes to the policies after individually considering them and evaluating them on their merits.
Wow. Just wow. Everyone is so excited to that they didn’t actually read all of what I wrote as per usual. Not evaluating each policy individually is silly. People get tricked into voting for things that aren’t good for them like that all the time. Because politicians know that after they say certain buzz words, people will make their decision about an issue and not look into the policy. Like if a reparations bill came out that repealed civil rights protections I would not just automatically vote for it because there could be poison in the pie.
"I consider policies based on their individual merit, with compassion and concern towards the people they're affecting.
In particular to LGBTQ+ affirming policies, if they have merit in ensuring our friends, family and neighbors have full and equal access to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I would probably be an advocate."
Note -- I don't have staff to write answers or coach me.
Just stating that it was a bad faith question based on the phrasing. It’s not a huge leap to think they were looking for a passive aggressive conflict there. It’s a popular argument style nowadays honestly.
Don’t insult the person who asked the question. They look smart, so I’m sure they knew exactly what they said and what those words mean when you string them together. They asked what they meant, and they meant what they asked. The only reason you’re denying it is because it challenges your world view to think your friend could be rude. That question isn’t poorly phrased, it’s just poor. It was specifically phrased in a way that didn’t allow him to agree with them. Probably to guarantee the answer they wanted. You must be a “lebron over mj” type.
They’ve not been attacked (I meant the part about them being smart, running and founding a non-profit is not EASY work), you simply refuse to address any point I’ve made objectively. You refuse to interpret the denotation of what I’ve said to you and argue about perceived individual character. If you weren’t coming into the exchange on such a high horse, you’d realize that you’re actually the one making attacks albeit passive aggressively. Did you ask them if that’s what they meant to ask? Or are you just saying that they didn’t mean what they said because it weakens my argument? If you were wrong would you admit it? Or would you be arguing just to argue? It’s obvious that the question wasn’t asked that way on accident, that’s the question they wanted an answer to. Did they say “darn, I didn’t mean to ask it like that”? Or was their response more “I can’t believe that’s the answer he gave”? Because if it was the latter, one could reasonably assume that they didn’t see his response as appropriate to the question asked as opposed to the question being improperly asked. You’d know better than me since you’re buds, any insight? Or are we gonna continue to passive aggressively call me a jerk and sidestep the actual argument?
Wouldn’t a better approach be to say,”while you’re here, can I tell you about how access to gender affirming healthcare has affected my life”. Interrogating him isn’t going to change his mind. Educating him might.
Do you think it’s a lack of education that prevents him from supporting gender affirming healthcare? He went to try and trick people into thinking he supports them. This is the appropriate response, publicly calling him out for his hypocrisy.
You shouldn’t be at a PRIDE event if you don’t support them. This is simply a member of the group he is “trying” to support asking for his support.
Thank you! I don't understand why so many people in this thread don't get this. I hope a majority of Marylanders aren't this fucking stupid. I know the rich moderate Democrats voted him in as governor twice, but surely they see that a GOP Senate would be catastrophic.
He's a politician. He's pandering. Trump did the same thing.
I recently had a disagreement with a coworker who said that straight people who didn’t go to pride events couldn’t call themselves allies because they weren’t doing anything to show it.
I don’t know anything about Hogan’s beliefs or actions on the matter, I only bring up this argument because I’m still mad about it.
It is weird that Hogan wasn’t willing to say more in the moment
Pride events certainly aren't the only way to show allyship, and not showing up doesn't mean that someone isn't an ally. Being an "ally" can be as lazy as wearing a T-shirt or button. It's weird to require Pride attendance.
I like the term "accomplice" for those who do truly effective activism work. I wasn't comfortable with that word at first, but it can grow on you when you're actually putting yourself (job, friendships, security) on the line for a cause, rather than just participating in the occasional march or whatever.
Being an ally means being an ally. Getting a copy of the silly "Ally" flag is very close to doing nothing.
Anyone can wear a pin. Doesn't make them an ally. To put it clearly, Hogan DID go to a Pride event and maybe even wore a pin. But he's no ally.
Hogan's political record shows that he's not an ally. But Joe Shmo who has no record of action could consider himself (and others could consider him) an ally for the smallest things that are easy and make little difference. That's why I prefer accomplice - because "ally" means so little. It never really grew from the "I support gay marriage" decades ago. At least now we roll our eyes at "I have a gay friend" having anything to do with being an ally.
I recognize that everyone has to start somewhere, and maybe that somewhere is a march or a festival. But they can't say that LGBTQ+ rights is a priority for them if they don't go beyond that. Being an ally should mean putting in actual work.
Conflating the two very separate concepts of gay rights and taxpayer-paid gender reassignment surgery is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve ever heard. I’m not surprised he didn’t talk to you.
So, OP, are you saying you can't attend pride events without agreeing, lock step, with every agenda of the LGBTQ community?
Let's be honest, you weren't voting for Hogan anyway. This seems like a dishonest discussion from the start.
I think if you march in a Pride parade, you should be expected to be supporting queer people in general, yes.
This isn't a splitting hairs thing, where Hogan is actually super progressive and people bicker about what kind of progressive he should be.
He got asked at a Pride event, with the assumption that people being there actively support the LGBTQ+ community, what he did and will do as an elected official. It isn’t a stretch to assume him not being to point to anything of substance is an indicator of future behavior.
It isn’t so much expecting “lock-step” agreement but getting Larry to at least take a leadership position on something rather than wait for others to do the work.
Which gave Hogan an opening to speak to _any_ policy he would support, or action he intends to take as an elected official. If he didn't want to sign up for an entire agenda, he had ample opportunity to tell us a concrete thing he actually did support.
It seems he went to a Pride event and had no Pride related policy or talking point prepped. Is it so far out on a limb to interpret that to mean that there is in fact no concrete LGBTQ+ inclusion policies he supports?
And a subsequent statement/question also points out he hasn’t shown any since the Annapolis Pride event started. Larry claimed COVID prevented his “support”/participation but COVID began in 2020 - a year after when the event was founded.
Regardless of what constitutes “full support” - my issue is that Larry arguably hasn’t shown *any* until he decided he wanted to run for U.S. Senate.
He’s a hopeful public servant. Questions about his stance on LGBTQ+ related policy at a pride event should have been expected, and he should have been ready to answer them.
It’s great that he’s there to support the community - but at the end of the day his presence there is just optics. As a senate candidate, the people should be able to ask him questions at an event directly related to the cause and clarify if he will or will not support that cause through action if elected.
Was Alsobrooks there? If not, does her presence signify non-support of the community?
Likewise, if Alsobrooks was there and Hogan wasn't, would that lack of attendance point to lack of support?
I don’t believe she was. But Alsobrooks has made it clear through her campaign that she will support LGBTQ+ affirming policies ([here](https://www.angelaalsobrooks.com/priority/equality)) it’s listed clearly in the priorities section of her campaign website.
I have seen no such thing from Hogan, but if you have - feel free to share it. The clear statement of her plans related to LGBTQ+ policy from her goes a lot further than Hogan showing up to a pride parade and refusing to answer questions related to LGBTQ related policies IMHO.
You shouldn't sign up to participate in the Annapolis Pride parade or festival if you don't agree with the values and mission of the Annapolis Pride organization. Lying about supporting those values in order to gain votes is despicable. There is no allyship on Hogan's part.
… show me where that’s happening. Please, cite an example.
Because a year of psych care with a single specialist is required.
You can also say “minor” instead of non-adult, unless you mean something different.
That what it seems like. For the gay people I know you don't have to agree to the ever-changing requirements to be an "ally", but apparently Reddit disagrees.
Ally literally means don't be a shit person. It isn't hard. Most people go about and do it everyday.
There will always been a few shitheads though. Case in point.
Homophobic and transphobic comments are not allowed here. If you see somebody using that kind of language, please use the report function.
The guy who voted for a dead guy in the 2020 election is putting on a performance is all. Typical Larry will never given concrete information and tell them he will share more details later. For those who did not know Larry Hogan did not make clear his stance on issues as governor, especially in his first term. For example, he did not make clear his position on weed. Like how the fuck can we vote for someone when they avoid a stance and worse changing their stance because it helps with the election.
👏
He’s full of shit.
Hogan is a great politician. Not in the fact that he gets things done or helps anyone just in the fact that he gets elected and says just enough to keep his job. He's a champion level bullshitter. Has been his whole career. Sign on when the majority likes something stay quiet when things aren't so cut and dry and take credit for popular things whenever possible regardless of actual involvement.
Veto's legislation. Gets overriden. Goes on to championship that legislation like it was his idea all along.
My favorite was when he took credit for increasing education funding while actively raising several million dollars specifically to try to defeat legislation to increase education funding.
Always has been!
That’s not entirely true. For a bit he was also full of cancer.
😂🫣
This is why I come to reddit..... 
Ooof 😅
Game. Set. Match. This is why Hogan gets zero points on any progressive topic he professes to support, because he's just cynically manipulating optics to try and get elected and will throw us under the bus after the fact. Fuck this dude, Alsobrooks all the way.
Reading between the lines and paraphrasing... "I'm here to support the community." "So if elected will you actually do anything to materially support the community?" "LOL, no."
“Well, they didn’t have it when I was first campaigning” really says it all.
I almost credit him with being that straightforward about it lol
Transparently duplicitous.
I think that’s an oversimplification. She asked a question that *no* person could answer honestly as a “gotcha”… what type of representative should *ever* answer “yes” to a question phrased as, “if elected you will blindly support this very broad issue and also support anything that comes from a specific demographic?” What kind of person running for office could possibly say “yes” to that type of question? Did Alsobrooks also have that question posed to her? Did she answer it in absolutes? *Edit: A lot of replies to my comment and none of them address the fact that asking anyone to support any cause with a blank check will never be answered in the affirmative. This was just someone trying to have a “gotcha” moment where no one learned anything new and was a wasted opportunity to discuss actual issues. Asking “gotcha” questions is nothing more than self gratifying virtue signaling… what a waste.
Conservatives are extremely quick to say they will oppose all gun control. Same concept.
It’s also a strawman to say that “all gender affirming healthcare” is nefarious in any matter. Gender affirming health care means it comes from doctors, licensed medical professionals. It’s not some back alley prescriptions for a black market drug. Arguing so is disingenuous.
Who is arguing that? If it’s prescribed and is a medical treatment, who gives a shit? The issue I have is that no politician, even Alsobrooks, would ever say they will back everything that comes from one particular community. It’s absurd. If she just asked about prescribed gender affirming healthcare, Hogan might’ve given a different answer. Once she adds will he back everything that comes from the LGBTQ+ community (which she absolutely did ask), there’s no way he could even have a discussion. It’s a gotcha question and it’s a waste of time. At the way it’s spreading in this thread, it may as well just be considered propaganda for a political party.
I love your passion.
A "very broad issue" for a "very specific demographic" is a contradiction in ideas. The very nature of the issue being specific to my demographic renders it an inherently specific issue, one that is self-solving if uneducated people without any stake stop entitling themselves into any degree of control. The type of person who could say "yes" is the type of person who understands that. He could also actually make a more quantified statement instead of an open-ended "yes", but he chose to remain ambiguous because he knows his actual opinions will be unwelcome.
>people without any stake stop entitling themselves into any degree of control. This so much! What is *wrong* with people?
[удалено]
Your comment was removed because it violates the civility rule. Please always keep discussions friendly and civil.
Thank you. "Gender affirming healthcare" and "any and all policies that support the LGBTQ+ community" are *incredibly* vague terms. No wonder he didn't want to engage with this person! If he'd said yes the Hogan haters would probably spin it as "Larry Hogan supports transgender surgery for 12-year olds" or some such nonsense.
No we wouldn't, we would trumpet his support to make it difficult for him to go back on it. The whole point is to force him to take a stand by cementing it to his career prospects. He knows this, and because he does not actually support our needs he's choosing to be evasive. So like I said above, it's a cynical play for optics.
Again, what does gender affirming healthcare even mean? Why would any sane individual make a public pledge to support something so vague, especially if it's likely to include controversial treatments that haven't been shown to be safe or effective?
"Gender affirming healthcare" is a well-defined term. Stop engaging with this subject until you know what you're talking about. https://www.wpath.org/media/cms/Documents/SOC%20v7/SOC%20V7_English.pdf
>what does gender affirming healthcare even mean? >it's likely to include controversial treatments that haven't been shown to be safe or effective I wish I could be so confident in my own ignorance to draw conclusions like this
Someone running for governor should know what gender affirming care is, genius. Even if you don’t lol
It means whatever the patients and their care team need it to. Like, what on earth makes you believe you need to know what my medical needs even are, let alone that you are entitled to a say in the degree to which I am allowed to have them met? This is literally the same broad topic as abortion: government is not equipped to make decisions on individual healthcare needs and the public has no compelling interest. It's bodily autonomy.
Again: No.
https://preview.redd.it/mbq6rl7qsm4d1.jpeg?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad52e7997db02af1676335d35fbbb63599e47f86
Why did he even show up if he didn't have some curated LGBTQ policy responses. He's only there for campaigning and he can't even reaffirm his political stance.
Hogan vetoed expansions to women’s reproductive healthcare when he was governor. This is a fact. We have the receipts. Don’t believe the hype, Hogan is as MAGA as Trump.
MAGA and the old guard GOP have always mostly believed in the same things. They just have a difference in style and delivery.
Tell me you don’t understand politics without telling me you don’t understand politics.
📠📠📠
>Hogan vetoed expansions to women’s reproductive healthcare when he was governor. i would love for him to try to justify this bullshit now with his supposed new and improved "pro choice" views. Meanwhile, a woman in baltimore miscarried twins alone on a city bus, and wait times for ob/gyn care have become insane.
Hogan is MAGA?! LMAO thats a funny one
Yeah. I’m voting for Alsobrooks, but Hogan is the same as Trump or even like that mouth with legs, JD Vance.
All republicans are MAGA.
I'm not even voting for Hogan but the utterly unhinged hatred for him on this subreddit is tempting me to, just to piss off the idiots who post on here.
Vote for Hogan... To own the libs, you say? Who does that sound like.
That's a mighty fine position to have if you're lucky enough to have enough privilege that the outcome won't affect you either way.
Pandering liar. Alsobrooks supports the queer community. Hogan will just become part of Project 2025 to make our very existence illegal.
Larry Hogan is a master of polling and sticking to a script. He has pollsters who probably determined that attending the Annapolis Pride Parade would gain him votes in his eventual run for president in 2028, so he went. It's as simple as that. He has no interest in or legislative history of supporting this community, but that doesn't matter. The polls said to go, so he went. Once you observe him through that lens, every move he makes is obvious.
He’s a joke after everything that’s happened in the last few years he should know we don’t want or trust people like him. Fake words and truly doesn’t like or care for his neighbors just their votes and money. If you go to an event celebrating a group and then don’t wanna say you support that group gtfo and go back to your hole. Hopefully he doesn’t win this November I certainly won’t be voting for a wishy washy guy.
Same ol Larry. Wherever the wind blows.
We can’t afford any more Republicans in the Senate.
He’s a fucking hypocrite for sure. I’m sure he’d vote lock step with republicans on everything lgbtq+ related.
It's a progression. Those of us who watched Black and Brown people struggle for the progress they've made for their rights to life, liberty and happiness; watched our Gay friends struggle to be out as who they are -- we're now called upon to render aid as our Trans friends want to live. It's sad that, in 2024, the default GOP planks are to attack Trans people, deprive Gay people of their rights to exist, and try to erase Black and Brown America. Fwiw, I regard Hogan at Pride somewhat as hypocritical pandering, and somewhat as baby steps towards removing the reactionary right wing gender ideology and right wing identity politics from the political battlefield.
I don't think that Annapolis Pride was the place for those baby steps, and I don't think that Hogan's presence at AP was about anything more than gaining Dem and youth votes. Any Republicans that oppose the bigotry of the GOP should be spending their free time addressing the GOP directly, not showing up on a space that should be reserved for those who actively support LGBTQ+ rights and people. Hogan should try wearing the rainbow at GOP events instead.
I don't disagree.
He didn't come to these events having done or proposed concrete things to help the LGBT+ community.
good on the original oop for calling him out on his nonsense tbh.
He will never get my vote - but any Republican wearing rainbow colors at all is not a bad thing.
The bar is so low. Like yes, I guess a republican who half-heartedly pretends to support social causes is better than one who outright declares war on them. But fuck both of them
I feel like claiming to "support the LGBT community" is worse if he doesn't actually intend to put that into practice as part of the duties for the position he wants to get elected for. No partial credit for hypocrisy.
Eh. I think the hypocrite is better than someone who actively incites hatred. Both are awful, but at least the hypocrite knows his feelings are disliked, and not accepted by the public. Something to be hidden. The other guy is open about it, and advocates for hate. He makes other people think it's ok to be like that.
I like to phrase it that it's not *better*, it's just *less bad*, for this reason. Particularly here in Maryland, if his lying about LGBT support gets him elected, where he then flips the Senate and votes for harmful legislation, that's actually probably way worse than just being a powerless bigot.
Yeah this is valid.
Yes, this is extremely concerning. Last thing we need is Trump with the Senate. Even if Dems have the house and legislation is gridlocked, the senate and the executive alone could do insane shit. Plug for anyone not familiar with The Heritage Foundation's plan for Trump's presidency, Project 2025, read about it on [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025) which is an accurate summary of it in the GOP's own words [here.](https://www.project2025.org/) This article, [How Far Trump Would Go](https://time.com/6972021/donald-trump-2024-election-interview/) is a must-read for anyone of voting age in this country.
then again, at the end of the day, the reality is hogan is likely to vote lockstep with the rest of the gop when it comes to anti lgbtq legislation. Which is frankly even more insidious than just being an outward hateful asshole. One spews hate, the other empowers that hate through legislation.
Yup. It doesn’t matter how moderate Hogan may or may not be. He’ll vote with the rest of
It's not necessary to rank them. They're both shitty and harmful, just from different angles.
Nope - it's not binary. Pun intended. https://preview.redd.it/hdb45ultpm4d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=36ab7ff36ba8c1fef95ca68cba76a166a747316f
The hypocrite is more dangerous. See also: Tricia Cotham in NC.
You rather have this ? https://preview.redd.it/w3jeheappm4d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=94cf2621036239ea2061444a3a2146d7f341b184
We're not deciding between Hogan and MTG, we're deciding between Hogan and Alsobrooks. And, most notably, the anti-Trans works for MTG's electorate, but not for Hogan which is why he shouldn't be allowed to pretend he's supportive if he's not actually.
Exactly! My comment was that he WONT get my vote , but I still appreciate the gesture
Would you still appreciate the gesture if he gets to the Senate and that gives Republicans the power to roll back legal protections?
Of course not - like I said - again - he is not getting my vote - but people do pay attention to him and if one moderate Republican sees the pride symbol on his shirt and decides to not go and try to ban books, or shout down parents at school board hearings, it's a good thing.
Indeed, how good or bad it is depends on the consequences. Ideally it pushes people to be more tolerant, without handing the election over.
I feel like it isn’t better because at least you know the stance of the other.
Trump held a pride flag once. It didn't mean ANYTHING in the end. Actions are louder than words. Words are air. Pick your idiom. They're true.
Is it not a bad thing though? It just comes across like all the other organizations that talk about pride once a month then don’t care the other 11. I’m not a member of the community, but it just seems so unfair to you all that a majority only support you for one month then go right back to normal once it’s over. I guess when it becomes second nature to tell people how brave they are, like thanking a solder for their service, then maybe I’ll think it’s not all just pandering.
Oh you are right. I guess this is just the same at this Republican. Like I said - he won't get my vote - but I can appreciate the gesture. Purity tests are bad for everyone https://preview.redd.it/teuqn0ocpm4d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad131f2e4c97ca1c0a34248da6380ebde2b427bc
Oh god, that nut job needs to go lol.
Yea I mean I get people just don't want a republican senator in MD but it's pretty damn toxic to say people can't march in a parade to show support if they don't agree with every single piece of TQI+ culture war stuff... you gotta meet people where they are, not tell them fuck off because you haven't yet changed their mind on every single issue you'd like to
Right to live normally isn’t a culture war.
“Pretty damn toxic” ok buddy lol
Exactly!
Alito and Thomas "could" leave the court during the next term. A bite for Hogan will prevent sanity from being back on the bench.
Fuck Hogan.
Get that man a red sweater vest, he's trying to pull a Youngkin
His TV ADs almost had me believing that he would stray from the right agenda, but I know better after seeing how he is in person and looking more into what happened during his time as Governor. To be a new senator, he will have to vote party lines or he will not be able to advance his career, which we know he has eyes for the Presidency. We can’t vote for him this fall, if we want to keep our seat democratic (regardless of how much I want to believe him). Another vote for Angela Alsobrooks!
Fuck that guy In the figurative sense. Do NOT have sex with him.
https://preview.redd.it/kywdoqk33n4d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7b2334d007f3a23dc6202a9f94265df35fc66325 (Hogan, not you).
Hogan is just a liar looking to rake in votes. He went to an event for longshoremen and posed for one pic. The next day there were headlines saying the longshoremen support him. Total bullshit. He's got other losers supporting him like Ric Metzgar. Just secret racists who only try to actually please old racist white people with too much money.
Hogan, hypocritical? Forsooth!!
While I totally support Alsobrooks over this guy and see the clear pandering he is doing to try to win over votes, I think it's important to appreciate people who pivot on their LGBT views. Let's not forget the majority of the country, including Obama and Biden did not support LGBT rights until later in their lives. It's great when people can evolve their views based on their experiences and outreach. But Alsobrooks all the way.
But you look at his record and there's no evidence of concrete steps he took as governor to benefit the LGBT+ community other than letting bills become law without his signature. He didn't actually *do* anything. That's why some people had a problem with him being at these events.
Totally get that, and any politician should have a much higher expectation on real action before anyone credits them with evolving on their positions. But seeing a GOP candidate wearing a pride flag isn't necessarily a bad thing, log as you don't let it be a free pass to your vote, which I would think most left leaning people would do.
Hogan -- let's make the Senate as dysfunctional as the house.. no thanks
Well
Good, get his ass.
He’s full of shit! Alsobrooks 2024!!!!!
Fuck Larry Hogan.
The trans community supported his fight against cancer but he won't support their fight for gender affirming care. The guy is trash.
Smiley Gladhands.
Hogan is a loser that is becoming less likable by the day. My democrat friends call him a liar, my republican friends call him a liar, and I want nothing to do with him
Sounds about right. Forget that guy
why is everyone acting so surprised
They’re not surprised they’re trying to underscore to the people who parrot or otherwise fall for his bullshit that he’s absolutely the fuck not any of this maverick country over party do what’s right for Maryland and Americans type dude he professes to be. He’s another fucking republican
I'm not voting for Hogan, but this exchange feels like a bad faith effort to corner him and call him out. He's a Republican. It's a wholly unnecessary "gotcha" moment that doesn't really "get" us any info we didn't already know.
The thing is, it's only a "gotcha" moment because he's a hypocrite. If he actually supported anything like this, it wouldn't have been a gotcha moment.
Exactly! If this person ambushed him at the airport, that would be a different story. He was at a Pride event; he shouldn’t be surprised if people ask him about the extent of his support for the alphabet mafia.
How is it a bad faith effort to corner someone when you ask someone, at an event FOR a thing, if they support the thing they're at an event for? Like if someone was at an NRA convention, it wouldn't be a bad faith effort to corner them and call them out to ask them if they support open carry and concealed carry laws. It's extremely relevant to the venue that they *chose* to come to.
It was wholly foolish of him to go to Pride. Unless he really needs the votes of the 3 Log Cabin Republicans that are usually present. But we know who Larry is. We know his history. If you think you're going to get an honest answer or a commitment from him, you're either delusional or just asking so you can ding him later on it, for which only people who already agree with you will actually care.
Aren't we supposed to challenge candidates in their positions and histories?
We are, but people seem to forget that applies to our own team too. Edit: Pretty telling this is so far downvoted. People hate looking inward.
I agree. Prior to Trump, I spent a ton of time looking into and following candidates before the general election. I also voted 3rd Party much of the time because I can't stand the 2 major parties. But since Trump, my vote is about defending the country against fascism. I'd love to be more picky.
"You can hold your nose and vote for Biden, or you can never vote again. Your choice."
Unfortunately, yes.
Cant remember I the last time I didnt have to hold my nose to vote. No wonder young people just don't show up to the polls.
He should have been prepared for questions like this when he went to Annapolis Pride.
If someone wants to represent us, they should support human rights. Hogan does not support human rights. Therefore, he doesn't represent us.
> this exchange feels like a bad faith effort to corner him and call him out. That's exactly what it is. "Will you make an open-ended commitment to support some vague progressive terms? No? Obviously you're a MAGA bigot."
It doesn't matter if he's not a MAGA bigot. I mean, he ain't an ally. And if he weren't running for office, he wouldn't necessarily be an enemy either. But he sits at the table with the enemy so... Sorry Larry boy. But asking him to make those same vague promises to a group of people that are generally not a constituency is about as useful as him being at Pride in the first place.
Supporting a community != supporting any and all policies that help that community. Such a short sighted view.
I support you, but I don't support policies that will make it easy for you to obtain healthcare or not face bigotry.
"any and all" are the key words here.
Well, we're specifically talking about this post, and gender affirming healthcare was one of the policies that were brought up.
[удалено]
Do you honestly believe that Alsobrooks would answer "yes" immediately to the statement: "I take it this means if elected, you will support gender affirming healthcare and ANY and ALL policies that support the LGBTQ+ community." 99% of politicians would never agree to such an open-ended and all-encompassing generalization.
Gender affirming care is absolutely disgusting and vile. Shame on you. Hogan is a groveling, two-faced politician, but good on him for not supporting this horse shit.
Yes! Make breast reconstruction surgery illegal again! /s
You’re right, viagra should be banned immediately.
Way to go confronting him with these questions and pointing out his hypocrisy!
Wow politician being a politician. Truly amaze.
Once a thumb, always a thumb.
>This is an informal interview conducted with Larry Hogan at Annapolis Pride on 01 July 2024. Damn, you're from the future? What were the lotto numbers that night?
Vote blue across the board!!!! Don’t let these Nazis ruin Maryland!!!
Fuck hogan. Someone should have ripped that rainbow badge off his chest. Motherfucker doesn’t care about the lgbtq community, only how it makes him look. Fuck right off.
He won't support you and have 0 attention. Politicians are only showing like they care because they can secure your vote. Why cant people see they are being used ?!?!
[удалено]
Your comment was removed because it violates the civility rule. Please always keep discussions friendly and civil.
This was a gotcha moment as soon as they added “and any other lgbtq+ policies” to the question. They literally asked him if he was just going to agree with any-and-everything rainbow related. No rational human being would say yes to that, though a kind person might say yes to the policies after individually considering them and evaluating them on their merits.
If you are a politician and you come to a Pride event, shouldn’t you be ready to articulate your opinions on issues facing the community?
Wow. Just wow. Everyone is so excited to that they didn’t actually read all of what I wrote as per usual. Not evaluating each policy individually is silly. People get tricked into voting for things that aren’t good for them like that all the time. Because politicians know that after they say certain buzz words, people will make their decision about an issue and not look into the policy. Like if a reparations bill came out that repealed civil rights protections I would not just automatically vote for it because there could be poison in the pie.
"I consider policies based on their individual merit, with compassion and concern towards the people they're affecting. In particular to LGBTQ+ affirming policies, if they have merit in ensuring our friends, family and neighbors have full and equal access to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I would probably be an advocate." Note -- I don't have staff to write answers or coach me.
Just stating that it was a bad faith question based on the phrasing. It’s not a huge leap to think they were looking for a passive aggressive conflict there. It’s a popular argument style nowadays honestly.
I know the person who asked it. Poorly phrased, spur of the moment, perhaps -- but bad faith is a load of crap.
Don’t insult the person who asked the question. They look smart, so I’m sure they knew exactly what they said and what those words mean when you string them together. They asked what they meant, and they meant what they asked. The only reason you’re denying it is because it challenges your world view to think your friend could be rude. That question isn’t poorly phrased, it’s just poor. It was specifically phrased in a way that didn’t allow him to agree with them. Probably to guarantee the answer they wanted. You must be a “lebron over mj” type.
I did nothing of the sort. As you've also decided to resort to ad hominim attacks, having nothing else to go on -- take the L and have a prideful day
They’ve not been attacked (I meant the part about them being smart, running and founding a non-profit is not EASY work), you simply refuse to address any point I’ve made objectively. You refuse to interpret the denotation of what I’ve said to you and argue about perceived individual character. If you weren’t coming into the exchange on such a high horse, you’d realize that you’re actually the one making attacks albeit passive aggressively. Did you ask them if that’s what they meant to ask? Or are you just saying that they didn’t mean what they said because it weakens my argument? If you were wrong would you admit it? Or would you be arguing just to argue? It’s obvious that the question wasn’t asked that way on accident, that’s the question they wanted an answer to. Did they say “darn, I didn’t mean to ask it like that”? Or was their response more “I can’t believe that’s the answer he gave”? Because if it was the latter, one could reasonably assume that they didn’t see his response as appropriate to the question asked as opposed to the question being improperly asked. You’d know better than me since you’re buds, any insight? Or are we gonna continue to passive aggressively call me a jerk and sidestep the actual argument?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Wouldn’t a better approach be to say,”while you’re here, can I tell you about how access to gender affirming healthcare has affected my life”. Interrogating him isn’t going to change his mind. Educating him might.
Do you think it’s a lack of education that prevents him from supporting gender affirming healthcare? He went to try and trick people into thinking he supports them. This is the appropriate response, publicly calling him out for his hypocrisy. You shouldn’t be at a PRIDE event if you don’t support them. This is simply a member of the group he is “trying” to support asking for his support.
Thank you! I don't understand why so many people in this thread don't get this. I hope a majority of Marylanders aren't this fucking stupid. I know the rich moderate Democrats voted him in as governor twice, but surely they see that a GOP Senate would be catastrophic. He's a politician. He's pandering. Trump did the same thing.
There are objective reasons to dislike Hogan, but this silly “gotcha” interview is not one of them.
Hogan is a boob.
June 1, presumably. And this is awesome. 😃
My guess is that most people are glad to talk to anyone but "you."
I recently had a disagreement with a coworker who said that straight people who didn’t go to pride events couldn’t call themselves allies because they weren’t doing anything to show it. I don’t know anything about Hogan’s beliefs or actions on the matter, I only bring up this argument because I’m still mad about it. It is weird that Hogan wasn’t willing to say more in the moment
Pride events certainly aren't the only way to show allyship, and not showing up doesn't mean that someone isn't an ally. Being an "ally" can be as lazy as wearing a T-shirt or button. It's weird to require Pride attendance. I like the term "accomplice" for those who do truly effective activism work. I wasn't comfortable with that word at first, but it can grow on you when you're actually putting yourself (job, friendships, security) on the line for a cause, rather than just participating in the occasional march or whatever.
Being an ally means being an ally. Getting a copy of the silly "Ally" flag is very close to doing nothing. Anyone can wear a pin. Doesn't make them an ally. To put it clearly, Hogan DID go to a Pride event and maybe even wore a pin. But he's no ally.
Hogan's political record shows that he's not an ally. But Joe Shmo who has no record of action could consider himself (and others could consider him) an ally for the smallest things that are easy and make little difference. That's why I prefer accomplice - because "ally" means so little. It never really grew from the "I support gay marriage" decades ago. At least now we roll our eyes at "I have a gay friend" having anything to do with being an ally. I recognize that everyone has to start somewhere, and maybe that somewhere is a march or a festival. But they can't say that LGBTQ+ rights is a priority for them if they don't go beyond that. Being an ally should mean putting in actual work.
Good job not letting him run away. You're doing wonderful work!
Conflating the two very separate concepts of gay rights and taxpayer-paid gender reassignment surgery is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve ever heard. I’m not surprised he didn’t talk to you.
I don't see anything about taxpayer money at all
That's...hardly what the question is actually about.
So, OP, are you saying you can't attend pride events without agreeing, lock step, with every agenda of the LGBTQ community? Let's be honest, you weren't voting for Hogan anyway. This seems like a dishonest discussion from the start.
I think if you march in a Pride parade, you should be expected to be supporting queer people in general, yes. This isn't a splitting hairs thing, where Hogan is actually super progressive and people bicker about what kind of progressive he should be.
And what, praytell, is our agenda?
He got asked at a Pride event, with the assumption that people being there actively support the LGBTQ+ community, what he did and will do as an elected official. It isn’t a stretch to assume him not being to point to anything of substance is an indicator of future behavior. It isn’t so much expecting “lock-step” agreement but getting Larry to at least take a leadership position on something rather than wait for others to do the work.
And by "wait for others to do the work" we mean "wait for the Heritage Foundation to give him his voting orders."
The very first comment by the OP points to this idea that you must agree with everything that the community may deem beneficial.
Which gave Hogan an opening to speak to _any_ policy he would support, or action he intends to take as an elected official. If he didn't want to sign up for an entire agenda, he had ample opportunity to tell us a concrete thing he actually did support. It seems he went to a Pride event and had no Pride related policy or talking point prepped. Is it so far out on a limb to interpret that to mean that there is in fact no concrete LGBTQ+ inclusion policies he supports?
And a subsequent statement/question also points out he hasn’t shown any since the Annapolis Pride event started. Larry claimed COVID prevented his “support”/participation but COVID began in 2020 - a year after when the event was founded. Regardless of what constitutes “full support” - my issue is that Larry arguably hasn’t shown *any* until he decided he wanted to run for U.S. Senate.
He’s a hopeful public servant. Questions about his stance on LGBTQ+ related policy at a pride event should have been expected, and he should have been ready to answer them. It’s great that he’s there to support the community - but at the end of the day his presence there is just optics. As a senate candidate, the people should be able to ask him questions at an event directly related to the cause and clarify if he will or will not support that cause through action if elected.
Was Alsobrooks there? If not, does her presence signify non-support of the community? Likewise, if Alsobrooks was there and Hogan wasn't, would that lack of attendance point to lack of support?
I don’t believe she was. But Alsobrooks has made it clear through her campaign that she will support LGBTQ+ affirming policies ([here](https://www.angelaalsobrooks.com/priority/equality)) it’s listed clearly in the priorities section of her campaign website. I have seen no such thing from Hogan, but if you have - feel free to share it. The clear statement of her plans related to LGBTQ+ policy from her goes a lot further than Hogan showing up to a pride parade and refusing to answer questions related to LGBTQ related policies IMHO.
[удалено]
You shouldn't sign up to participate in the Annapolis Pride parade or festival if you don't agree with the values and mission of the Annapolis Pride organization. Lying about supporting those values in order to gain votes is despicable. There is no allyship on Hogan's part.
Yeah. Because everyone on the spectrum, every part, deserves to live normally and with dignity. Except yankees fans /s
[удалено]
Who? On the spectrum. Let’s get the bigotry out in the open.
[удалено]
… show me where that’s happening. Please, cite an example. Because a year of psych care with a single specialist is required. You can also say “minor” instead of non-adult, unless you mean something different.
That what it seems like. For the gay people I know you don't have to agree to the ever-changing requirements to be an "ally", but apparently Reddit disagrees.
Ally literally means don't be a shit person. It isn't hard. Most people go about and do it everyday. There will always been a few shitheads though. Case in point.
Lol.
Support any policy that falls under the +?! No thank you.
This “me” person sounds insufferable.
I would love to hear more about kindness grows here!!!
Blind support of all gender affirming care is irresponsible
How about support of the evidence-based standards of care?