If a trans woman (a person who was born male but now identifies as a woman) was elected president in 2024, would you consider them to be 'the first woman President'? And if no other woman were ever elected president, would you still say 'well we have had one woman President'?
The first woman president was Isabel Peron. How a trans woman president was considered would very much depend on the context you're talking about. The concept of a first woman [something] is generally because women were historically prohibited and/or discriminated against in the route to the role, and so breaking that barrier can be something of a symbolic achievement. In modern American politics (as with most other places I expect), being trans would be a much greater barrier than being female, so if a trans female candidate had only recently transitioned, they would have spent most of their political career with the benefit of identifying as a man but if they'd transitioned a long time ago, they would have spent most of their political career with the disadvantage of being trans. Either way, their identification as a woman wouldn't be the significant factor of their getting elected anyway.
Fair point, I should've specified 'President of the US' since some other countries have already broken that barrier. It sounds like you're saying, in your opinion a biological man could 'break the barrier' of women not becoming president depending on how long ago the biological man transitioned to being a woman. Is that what you're saying? Would it matter to you whether or not their transition included surgery?
Why are you worried about this? First you have to actually vote anyone wearing a skirt into office of the president nd the way the right behaves it would happily exclude anyone wearing a kilt as well!
Nah. You havn't seen me in my snow camo tactikilt. If I wanted to POTUS, that would be my ticket in I'm not worried about whether or not a trans is potus. Gimme a trans that supports the 2A and I'll proudly vote in drag. I'm more concerned with what can be done to a society when it's invested in oppression hierarchies. Tho I'm a bit less concerned now, seeing that 100% of poll responders (thus far) don't believe that men can pretend to be women enough that a man claiming to be a woman would break the woman potus barrier. It still appears to just be a pretend, at the end of the day. I'm fine with pretend btw (I'm a paladin!)... but I've never demanded that other people recognize my personal identity. And if you were wondering, this is a tactikilt. They're awesome and definitely presidential.
Not exactly, I'm saying the question of breaking that barrier isn't necessarily a simple one. For example, Isabel Peron only became President of Argentina because of her husband and the general corruption in that period. She officially remains the first female president in the world but she's hardly going to celebrated as force for women's equality. Clearly a transgender president (male or female) would be an amazing first regardless of the specifics, but those specifics would determine exactly why it would be significant. And that is why a trans woman president would be talked about more in the context of being the first transgender rather than the first female. It would be similar to if the first (cis) female US president was also atheist. She would be the first (openly) atheist US president but her being the first female would likely get much more coverage (in the mainstream at least).
I accept that there are transgender people, but I don’t want one to be president. I view transgender as a form of mental illness. Believing you are in the wrong body is fundamentally abnormal. I don’t want a president with a lot of psychological baggage.
If you say so, but you've got a bit of a problem then, because nobody in their right mind would run for the presidency these days.
A point that is well made, especially if you are a Republican. The Democrats are out to ruin you, no matter how qualified you are. They have kangaroo courts though out the United States presided over by woke woke Democrat judges. Yes, the judiciary is risking its reputation when it is politically biased. That of a judge in New York City who handed down the $350 million decision against Trump did great damage to his profession.
No. I'd say they're the first trans president. Neither fully male nor fully female. Elected in 2024? Na. Maybe 2048.
I think it's a form of mental illness, but plenty of good and brilliant people have had mental illness. I don't think it's a relevant mental illness to disqualify them from the job in itself. Somebody really struggling with it, or depression, or anxiety, or ADHD, and who is not well-adjusted with it, then it could be a problem. Trump's narcissism and tendency to believe or promote silly conspiracy theories is a bigger deal. Struggles controlling anger or actual delusions would be relevant as well.
The courts aren't politically biased. Fox is politically biased and pretends the courts are biased to promote the republican agenda.
