Iran and Trans

[Anonymous]

Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

[Anonymous]

Op: and anyone other Than Jeff, please feel free to comment and help me understand z what I’m not seeing. I think my thoughts are reasonable, but I would always appreciate different perspectives and have no issue changing my mind. I just tend to follow what I believe is the evidence. But I could most certainly be wrong!

[Anonymous]

This is regarding the Political Forum post Jeff made about the trans identifying male involved in J6 and being sent to a men’s prison.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

I have been thinking about this. It's fascinating, and seems highly progressive. Then it occurred to me, there's no mention of women who want to transition into men. So the people transitioning are men, men who already are overwhelmingly favored by this society, including when they want to transition into women.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

I have been thinking about this. It's fascinating, and seems highly progressive. Then it occurred to me, there's no mention of women who want to transition into men. So the people transitioning are men, men who already are overwhelmingly favored by this society, including when they want to transition into women.

That is more of a short-coming of the Wikipedia article than anything. Female to male transition is also available in Iran. See this article:

https://kayhanlife.com/news/kayhan/more-and-more-iranian-women-undergo-sex-reassignment-surgery-official-says/

Note, this publication is considered to be opposed to the Iranian government but seems to give fairly objective treatment to this issue.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

I guess if you believe that you cannot discuss trans issues in isolation you are correct. But the entire discussion in which I brought this up was about trans people, not gay individuals. Generally when discussing one issue it is not required to also discuss additional issues. Should we also evaluate their attitudes towards taxation and teaching about Black history in schools?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

I guess if you believe that you cannot discuss trans issues in isolation you are correct. But the entire discussion in which I brought this up was about trans people, not gay individuals. Generally when discussing one issue it is not required to also discuss additional issues. Should we also evaluate their attitudes towards taxation and teaching about Black history in schools?

Come on, Jeff.

In Iran, there is government support for limited trans rights precisely because of extreme homophobia. Transition is offered as an option to men — women being largely irrelevant — as an alternative to execution. That is a foundational fact that has to be mentioned in literally any favorable (!) discussion of the Ayatollah’s policy on transgender people. It’s genuinely shocking to me that you think it’s an irrelevant fact not worth mentioning, or at least not any different than any other political stance. I honestly do not understand where you are coming from.

https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/02/22/iran-gay-forced-gender-reassignment-surgery-the-sun/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

I guess if you believe that you cannot discuss trans issues in isolation you are correct. But the entire discussion in which I brought this up was about trans people, not gay individuals. Generally when discussing one issue it is not required to also discuss additional issues. Should we also evaluate their attitudes towards taxation and teaching about Black history in schools?

Come on, Jeff.

In Iran, there is government support for limited trans rights precisely because of extreme homophobia. Transition is offered as an option to men — women being largely irrelevant — as an alternative to execution. That is a foundational fact that has to be mentioned in literally any favorable (!) discussion of the Ayatollah’s policy on transgender people. It’s genuinely shocking to me that you think it’s an irrelevant fact not worth mentioning, or at least not any different than any other political stance. I honestly do not understand where you are coming from.

https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/02/22/iran-gay-forced-gender-reassignment-surgery-the-sun/

+1. And the T’s are always force-teamed with the LGB so this is nothing new.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

I guess if you believe that you cannot discuss trans issues in isolation you are correct. But the entire discussion in which I brought this up was about trans people, not gay individuals. Generally when discussing one issue it is not required to also discuss additional issues. Should we also evaluate their attitudes towards taxation and teaching about Black history in schools?

Come on, Jeff.

In Iran, there is government support for limited trans rights precisely because of extreme homophobia. Transition is offered as an option to men — women being largely irrelevant — as an alternative to execution. That is a foundational fact that has to be mentioned in literally any favorable (!) discussion of the Ayatollah’s policy on transgender people. It’s genuinely shocking to me that you think it’s an irrelevant fact not worth mentioning, or at least not any different than any other political stance. I honestly do not understand where you are coming from.

https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/02/22/iran-gay-forced-gender-reassignment-surgery-the-sun/

You are clearly unfamiliar with the history of Iran's tolerance of transgender individuals. Those policies were developed completely independently of policies regarding homosexuals. You are arguing for the existence of a linkage that has no basis in history. As the expression goes, two things can be true. The Ayatollah Khomeini can be more progressive regarding trans rights than the current governor of Florida and Iran can be absolutely terrible when it comes to gay rights. I've been discussing the first of these. The second had not really been relevant in either of the discussions in which I've been involved.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

I guess if you believe that you cannot discuss trans issues in isolation you are correct. But the entire discussion in which I brought this up was about trans people, not gay individuals. Generally when discussing one issue it is not required to also discuss additional issues. Should we also evaluate their attitudes towards taxation and teaching about Black history in schools?

Come on, Jeff.

In Iran, there is government support for limited trans rights precisely because of extreme homophobia. Transition is offered as an option to men — women being largely irrelevant — as an alternative to execution. That is a foundational fact that has to be mentioned in literally any favorable (!) discussion of the Ayatollah’s policy on transgender people. It’s genuinely shocking to me that you think it’s an irrelevant fact not worth mentioning, or at least not any different than any other political stance. I honestly do not understand where you are coming from.

https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/02/22/iran-gay-forced-gender-reassignment-surgery-the-sun/

You are clearly unfamiliar with the history of Iran's tolerance of transgender individuals. Those policies were developed completely independently of policies regarding homosexuals. You are arguing for the existence of a linkage that has no basis in history. As the expression goes, two things can be true. The Ayatollah Khomeini can be more progressive regarding trans rights than the current governor of Florida and Iran can be absolutely terrible when it comes to gay rights. I've been discussing the first of these. The second had not really been relevant in either of the discussions in which I've been involved.

Here’s a good explanation, Jeff. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9745420/ Nothing happens in a vacuum and this is a very weird hill to die on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

I guess if you believe that you cannot discuss trans issues in isolation you are correct. But the entire discussion in which I brought this up was about trans people, not gay individuals. Generally when discussing one issue it is not required to also discuss additional issues. Should we also evaluate their attitudes towards taxation and teaching about Black history in schools?

Come on, Jeff.

In Iran, there is government support for limited trans rights precisely because of extreme homophobia. Transition is offered as an option to men — women being largely irrelevant — as an alternative to execution. That is a foundational fact that has to be mentioned in literally any favorable (!) discussion of the Ayatollah’s policy on transgender people. It’s genuinely shocking to me that you think it’s an irrelevant fact not worth mentioning, or at least not any different than any other political stance. I honestly do not understand where you are coming from.

https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/02/22/iran-gay-forced-gender-reassignment-surgery-the-sun/

+1. And the T’s are always force-teamed with the LGB so this is nothing new.

I’m the PP and I don’t agree with the comment about force-teaming. But I also think it’s deeply misleading to refer favorably to the Ayatollah’s transgender policy without mentioning that the policy exists as part of a plan to eradicate gay people from Iran.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey Jeff, sorry to bother and delete this is it’s inappropriate or anything.
I was wondering whether you were serious when you expressed your belief that Iran is “more progressive than many Republicans leaders” regarding LBGTQ+ community?
Surely you don’t believe that ALL gay people are trans, right? So forcing them to get surgery and live as the opposite sex in order to love who they love is an even more extreme ‘treatment’ which causes many physical health problems than Conversion Therapy.
If I’m misreading you, my bad! But if I’m not, you might want to examine your knee-jerk reaction which led you to praise Iran of all places for their civil rights.

I didn't say that Iran is more progressive regarding the LBGTQ+ community, but regarding transgender people specifically. Obviously, Iran has very backward policies regarding gay people. But, on the specific issue of transgender individuals, Iranian leaders have been much more supportive than most people would realize. As the Wikipedia article to which I link says, "Surgery for intersex conditions have been practiced in Iran since the 1930s." In 1963, Ayatollah Khomeini supported such surgery. In 1987, Khomeini issued a fatwa and, as a result, "transgender women in Iran have been able to live as women until they can afford surgery, have surgical reassignment, have their birth certificates and all official documents issued to them in their new gender, and marry men". I don't think that it is too much of a stretch to say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was more tolerant of trans people than is the current governor of Florida.

NP. I don’t know, Jeff. If the Ayatollah is more tolerant of trans people because he executes gay people, that seems like at least leaving off major facts when comparing the Ayatollah to the current governor of Florida.

I guess if you believe that you cannot discuss trans issues in isolation you are correct. But the entire discussion in which I brought this up was about trans people, not gay individuals. Generally when discussing one issue it is not required to also discuss additional issues. Should we also evaluate their attitudes towards taxation and teaching about Black history in schools?

Come on, Jeff.

In Iran, there is government support for limited trans rights precisely because of extreme homophobia. Transition is offered as an option to men — women being largely irrelevant — as an alternative to execution. That is a foundational fact that has to be mentioned in literally any favorable (!) discussion of the Ayatollah’s policy on transgender people. It’s genuinely shocking to me that you think it’s an irrelevant fact not worth mentioning, or at least not any different than any other political stance. I honestly do not understand where you are coming from.

https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/02/22/iran-gay-forced-gender-reassignment-surgery-the-sun/

+1. And the T’s are always force-teamed with the LGB so this is nothing new.

I’m the PP and I don’t agree with the comment about force-teaming. But I also think it’s deeply misleading to refer favorably to the Ayatollah’s transgender policy without mentioning that the policy exists as part of a plan to eradicate gay people from Iran.

The bolded is simply not true. You are ignoring the entire history of how the Ayatollah Khomeini came to accept trans rights. It is an interesting story which I will try to find a link for you to read.

[Anonymous]

This is 3 years old but still relevant. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10998169/iran-gay-people-gender-reassignment-surgery/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebaramp