[flangola7]

> This might be a good example, but I admit that the insurance situation in the US is so bizarre that I have no intuitions on this, re: insurance covering gender transition. Is insurance no longer covering it or something? If so, is this a legislated restriction?

"Insurance is arbitrarily evil" can be used to explain many phenomenona in the US, but it is increasingly legislative, yes.

> It is true that states are banning this kind of care for minors, but consent around minors is pretty tricky, and some people like to ignore the nuances for simple soundbites.

There's not any nuance to it, they're straight up taking consent away from kids. The kid knows and consents to it, there's doctors and therapists and medical staff willing to help, and parents (though they shouldn't matter either way) are often glad to sign off on it too. The only entity not "consenting" is the state, and it's none of its business in the first place. Taking away someone's right to say "yes" is just as bad as taking away their "no." I have friends who would have made it to 18 if they couldn't transition.

>I think the massive leftward push on these issues over the past 10 years, coupled with an alarming lack of caution on these demographic shifts, has led to a corresponding rightward pushback because of numerous preventable failures.

Can you give some examples of this? I am humbly unaware of what you are specifically referencing.