\nBecoming clear that the vulnerability of trans stuff in America is it doesn’t have state-level infrastructure: the last decade saw an upsurge on the not-actually-a-government Everywhere of the internet, and signing-on of national groups that honestly needed a purpose to still exist after gay marriage, but there’s no state-by-state stuff, and the legacy queer orgs coming onsides for structural reasons means the organizational commitment isn’t matched at the grassroots
Meanwhile since the ‘70s social conservative pressure organizations have drawn on church congregations, which beyond representing a particular sect or interpretation and thus ideology, exist in a particular geographical location and have connections and influence on that basis. And strong local networks help in national-level operations because social issue affiliation is heterogeneous and even if you’re not ready to fight at national level you can identify more friendly territory to focus on, develop, recruit from, and pioneer policy in
should lead to increasing divergence across countries as well
Going differently in the UK is absolutely about structural factors: they don’t have autonomous lower-level state government (well, Scottish devolution maybe?) but also they have a much more nationalized journalism sector where pretty right-populist tabloids exist in the same infosphere as the elite stuff, so there was less running room to put new gender understandings over on a top-down basis in the first place before it was noticed and challenged in a way all public figures were answerable to
"}