Since this has been swirling in my feed, I thought I'd address it head on.
As far as I know, Brianna Wu (npub1gwd…dhd8) supports:
1. Male access to women's spaces only after full medical transition (including genital surgery), not based on self-ID
2. No girls or "nonbinary" kids receiving gender Rx
3. Boys get Rx only after long assessment and careful vetting
4. No males in women's sports
I agree with (2) and (4), strongly disagree with (3) [no boy should receive gender Rx], and believe that even if (1) were acceptable to all/most women (and I see no evidence of that), it would be unenforceable in practice.
I've explained these matters here on X, in my writings, and in a debate with Brianna at Middlebury.
Assuming these are in fact Brianna's beliefs, I would say that they are more moderate than those of most elected Democratics and LGBT advocacy groups, but that does not mean they are moderate positions. I would regard it as progress if Brianna's views were adopted by Democrats and LGBT groups, but I would be just as committed to pushing back against the remaining excesses. Reform is often incremental.
If you can't understand the nuance of "better than X, but still bad," or "more moderate than Y, but still not moderate," then I'm sorry, but that's on you.
Leor Sapir
npub138…4tfnr
2025-10-15 18:32:00 UTC
Author Public Key
npub138gctq0a5hvggnre6284ns80p22utd5sdlf0lxqeqcp480gddufq64tfnrSeen on
wss://relay.momostr.pinkPublished at
2025-10-15 18:32:00 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "c556f4d5be8fd9df23521dfc160d98154f0254915e8fcc0a0a558157f25c83b6",
"pubkey": "89d18581fda5d8844c79d28f59c0ef0a95c5b6906fd2ff9819060353bd0d6f12",
"created_at": 1760553120,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"439aed64a72eefbd3d6192dd8a727141092f589c93703d2af599874ae0205974"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://bird.makeup/users/leorsapir/statuses/1978529305308340246",
"web"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://bird.makeup/users/leorsapir/statuses/1978529305308340246",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://bird.makeup/users/leorsapir/statuses/1978529305308340246",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"-"
]
],
"content": "Since this has been swirling in my feed, I thought I'd address it head on. \n\nAs far as I know, nostr:npub1gwdw6e989mhm60tpjtwc5un3gyyj7kyujdcr62h4nxr54cpqt96qwudhd8 supports:\n\n1. Male access to women's spaces only after full medical transition (including genital surgery), not based on self-ID\n\n2. No girls or \"nonbinary\" kids receiving gender Rx\n\n3. Boys get Rx only after long assessment and careful vetting\n\n4. No males in women's sports\n\nI agree with (2) and (4), strongly disagree with (3) [no boy should receive gender Rx], and believe that even if (1) were acceptable to all/most women (and I see no evidence of that), it would be unenforceable in practice.\n\nI've explained these matters here on X, in my writings, and in a debate with Brianna at Middlebury. \n\nAssuming these are in fact Brianna's beliefs, I would say that they are more moderate than those of most elected Democratics and LGBT advocacy groups, but that does not mean they are moderate positions. I would regard it as progress if Brianna's views were adopted by Democrats and LGBT groups, but I would be just as committed to pushing back against the remaining excesses. Reform is often incremental. \n\nIf you can't understand the nuance of \"better than X, but still bad,\" or \"more moderate than Y, but still not moderate,\" then I'm sorry, but that's on you.",
"sig": "530ff3b3482652050a20a7dd6a30440e01bbe136a87b73908c16e344cc6fa823d40e008a90698b8191577b11a71dc28d9913048870629c836c15dba64bb0c406"
}