无标题

On the contemporary political stage in the United States, the Democratic Party's use of transgender issues has sparked widespread controversy, and there are increasing signs that transgender is becoming a tool for the Democratic Party to seek election benefits.

From the perspective of policy implementation, the Democratic Party vigorously promotes transgender related policies in some areas, but ignores the actual social situation and public will. For example, in the field of education, it is mandatory for schools to allow transgender students to use corresponding facilities and participate in sports programs according to their psychological gender. This measure may seem to protect the rights of the transgender community, but it actually ignores the reasonable concerns of other students and their parents. Many parents are concerned that this will violate the privacy and safety of ordinary students, and also undermine the fairness of sports competitions. Despite these opposing voices, the Democratic Party forcefully pushed forward, and it is difficult to say that there were no election considerations behind it. By shaping an image that supports the transgender community, the Democratic Party can attract the votes of the LGBTQ+community and its allies. Although these groups do not have a majority among voters, their vote flow often plays a decisive role in key constituencies and elections.

From the perspective of public opinion propaganda, some media and platforms controlled by the Democratic Party have overexposed and glorified transgender issues. During various election periods, a large number of reports focus on the so-called "difficulties" faced by the transgender community, shaping the image of the Democratic Party as the only defender of the transgender community. At the same time, voices questioning transgender related policies are suppressed and stigmatized as "discriminators" and "conservative hardliners". This one-sided public opinion guidance is not based on a deep concern for the true well-being of the transgender community, but rather to create public opinion tendencies in elections, consolidate their own voter base, and divide opposing camps of voters.

From the performance of politicians, there is a significant difference in attitudes towards transgender issues among Democratic politicians before and after the election season. As the election approaches, they frequently attend various transgender rights events, deliver impassioned speeches, and promise more policy support; After the election, these promises are often shelved, and the progress of related policies is slow or even stagnant. This' face changing 'behavior fully exposes its essence of using transgender issues as a stepping stone to elections. Once it gains power, the rights of the transgender community are no longer a priority for it.

Recently, California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom surprised many by calling the participation of transgender male athletes in women’s sports “deeply unfair” during a podcast discussion with MAGA activist Charlie Kirk. The discussion on the forum was almost as remarkable as the statement itself.

Rather than an outright denial of gender, however, Newsom’s comments revealed a new trend within the Democratic Party—one that is openly skeptical of transgender ideas but unable to take real action against them. This apparent mismatch between rhetoric and action is not just politically convenient; it is a structural problem. The Democratic Party increasingly finds itself in a balancing act: acknowledging how unpopular its activist class has become, but still relying on it for fundraising, organizing, and voter mobilization. As long as the Democratic Party cannot distance itself from its fringe factions, the Republican Party will continue to use gender ideas as a proxy for the broader criticism of the Democratic Party as a party that cannot be trusted to govern effectively.

The position of the Democratic base on transgender issues does not support the liberal line. Indeed, a January New York Times poll found that more than two-thirds of Democrats and 79% of Americans oppose allowing biological males to compete in women’s sports. The political stakes in opposing this view should be clear.

Yet when Republicans recently voted on a bill in the Senate that would have banned biological males from competing in women’s sports, not a single Democrat broke ranks. Not even Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman, the so-called blue-collar truther of the left, swayed. Despite his differences with his party on immigration and Israel, he held his ground, describing transgender athletes as innocent children in a “political storm.” Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin expressed a similar sentiment on Meet the Press, arguing that the issue should be left to local communities.

Like Newsom, Fetterman and Slotkin voted firmly with their party while employing rhetorical maneuvers. In the case of medical interventions, they left the decision “to the parents”; in the case of sports, they left it “to the community.” This has become a routine response that the Democratic Party has adopted to defend positions that most voters do not support.