Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Labour has a homophobia and transphobia problem

Ok. I regretted the post as soon as I wrote it. She still calls herself a trans person, but i haven’t been ‘following’ her for about two years & I don’t know what all she’s been endorsing.

Fair enough, I don't think a lot of people are aware of where this stuff has gone, although it's started to surface in Scottish politics.

Re the op, there is a problem here. There's a growing number of people, some like Heyton members of Labour, who see themselves as left/ex left anti-woke, who are openly hostile to anyone who doesn't identify as being strictly heterosexual or female or male homosexuals who are only attracted to (non trans) other males or females and and who are opposed to anything kinky or non-traditional. They particularly object to anyone who describes themselves as Queer, believing they aren't true homosexuals or bisexuals but straight people posing. They equally obviously oppose anyone trans (except old school transsexuals who know their place), or anyone who calls themselves pan, or any other of the names the young folk are using to describe their sexuality. They oppose any expression of kink, any harm reduction measures in sex education - young people should be taught watching porn is dangerous, illegal and exploitative and nothing else - as I recently saw one of them say in response to Childline youtube video, They object to LGBT clubs in schools, support conversion therapy for trans people, are fairly relaxed about if for LGB people, believe fetishes are all linked to paedophilia, and think that LGBT organisations are involved in some kind of plot to lower the age of consent and undermine children's bounderies. The more old school feminist amongst them are also very opposed to any form of sex work or porn, with some feminist justification but they will attack any organisation that provides any form of support for sex workers - or even sex workers themselves. And they are all more than prepared to work with the religious and alt right to push their message. It's essentially a puritan coalition, that accepts LGB people within a very conservative framework made up of older LGBT people furious that the scene isn't like it was in the 80's and angry with young people who call theselves queer, Gender Critical activists, dickhead opportunist men like Glinner and Wings over Scotland, a few Tory and Labour peers, rad fem veterans of the lesbian sex wars of the 80s and the religious right - with soft support from the Tory press.

At this point being anti-trans is just a shield that can be employed if anyone challenges this stuff. They simply claim they are being attacked for believing sex in real, or that human's can't change sex to deflect from the other stuff they are putting out. In this context Heyton's piece reads like a warning shot - challenge us and we will tear the party apart. But it is worrying, the fact is a lot of young LGBT people do think of themselves as queer, pan or whatever, and the constant attempt to try and link any expression of that to paedophila clearly is dangerous. There are constant attacks now on LGBT groups which deliver or support LGBT inclusive education, including attempts to get them defunded, Glinner is fucking outing trans and Queer people to tens of thousands of people because they dared to have profiles on a Queer/non binary/trans inclusive lesbian datings app, people are comparing the rainbow flag to the Swastika in some cases, and almost all these attacks are coming from the centre left - many of them Labour or disgruntled ex Labour. I don't know what Labour should do about that really, I don't even care much about Labour, but they have the potential to cause damage as they have done in Scotland. More worrying is that they get subsumed into a broader anti-LGBT movement spearheaded by the conservative right that starts to gain ground outside of the social media bubbles it currently largely operates in.
 
I remember how grim it was to have to deal idiots citing JVL and the like in defence of transparent antisemitism, so I can imagine it’s similarly grim for smokedout to deal with transphobia dressed up as ‘dissident transsexuals’.
 
It’s primarily class. That is my argument.
It's a truism that, in whatever country, under whatever government, that you don't even need a passport if you're rich and powerful enough - and black, white, brown, GRT is rarely an issue. But that's not what's happening here. Patel is deliberately and directly targeting GRT people (policing bill) and mostly brown people from North Africa and the Middle East (immigration bill). She is therefore a massive fucking racist - but yes, she hates all people with no money as well.
 
Last edited:
And of course, for the ‘it’s class not race’ crowd we have around the government atm, the solution to poverty and economic inequality is to is to er attack the welfare state, trade union rights and single mums.
 
It's a truism that, in whatever country, under whatever government, that you don't even need a passport if you're rich and powerful enough - and black, white, brown, GRT is rarely an issue. But that's not what's happening here. Patel is deliberately and directly targeting GRT people (policing bill) and mostly brown people from North Africa and the Middle East (immigration bill). She is therefore a massive fucking racist - but yes, she hates all people with no money as well.

We could just simplify things to “full spectrum scumbag”.
 
Fair enough, I don't think a lot of people are aware of where this stuff has gone, although it's started to surface in Scottish politics.

Re the op, there is a problem here. There's a growing number of people, some like Heyton members of Labour, who see themselves as left/ex left anti-woke, who are openly hostile to anyone who doesn't identify as being strictly heterosexual or female or male homosexuals who are only attracted to (non trans) other males or females and and who are opposed to anything kinky or non-traditional. They particularly object to anyone who describes themselves as Queer, believing they aren't true homosexuals or bisexuals but straight people posing. They equally obviously oppose anyone trans (except old school transsexuals who know their place), or anyone who calls themselves pan, or any other of the names the young folk are using to describe their sexuality. They oppose any expression of kink, any harm reduction measures in sex education - young people should be taught watching porn is dangerous, illegal and exploitative and nothing else - as I recently saw one of them say in response to Childline youtube video, They object to LGBT clubs in schools, support conversion therapy for trans people, are fairly relaxed about if for LGB people, believe fetishes are all linked to paedophilia, and think that LGBT organisations are involved in some kind of plot to lower the age of consent and undermine children's bounderies. The more old school feminist amongst them are also very opposed to any form of sex work or porn, with some feminist justification but they will attack any organisation that provides any form of support for sex workers - or even sex workers themselves. And they are all more than prepared to work with the religious and alt right to push their message. It's essentially a puritan coalition, that accepts LGB people within a very conservative framework made up of older LGBT people furious that the scene isn't like it was in the 80's and angry with young people who call theselves queer, Gender Critical activists, dickhead opportunist men like Glinner and Wings over Scotland, a few Tory and Labour peers, rad fem veterans of the lesbian sex wars of the 80s and the religious right - with soft support from the Tory press.

At this point being anti-trans is just a shield that can be employed if anyone challenges this stuff. They simply claim they are being attacked for believing sex in real, or that human's can't change sex to deflect from the other stuff they are putting out. In this context Heyton's piece reads like a warning shot - challenge us and we will tear the party apart. But it is worrying, the fact is a lot of young LGBT people do think of themselves as queer, pan or whatever, and the constant attempt to try and link any expression of that to paedophila clearly is dangerous. There are constant attacks now on LGBT groups which deliver or support LGBT inclusive education, including attempts to get them defunded, Glinner is fucking outing trans and Queer people to tens of thousands of people because they dared to have profiles on a Queer/non binary/trans inclusive lesbian datings app, people are comparing the rainbow flag to the Swastika in some cases, and almost all these attacks are coming from the centre left - many of them Labour or disgruntled ex Labour. I don't know what Labour should do about that really, I don't even care much about Labour, but they have the potential to cause damage as they have done in Scotland. More worrying is that they get subsumed into a broader anti-LGBT movement spearheaded by the conservative right that starts to gain ground outside of the social media bubbles it currently largely operates in.
Yeah that's pretty much how I see it as someone with no skin in the game beyond being close to people who are affected by this stuff.

And you are correct that the issue in Labour has the potential to negatively affect the broader picture which is why, possibly, we should be concerned about it.
 
Fair enough, I don't think a lot of people are aware of where this stuff has gone, although it's started to surface in Scottish politics.

Re the op, there is a problem here. There's a growing number of people, some like Heyton members of Labour, who see themselves as left/ex left anti-woke, who are openly hostile to anyone who doesn't identify as being strictly heterosexual or female or male homosexuals who are only attracted to (non trans) other males or females and and who are opposed to anything kinky or non-traditional. They particularly object to anyone who describes themselves as Queer, believing they aren't true homosexuals or bisexuals but straight people posing. They equally obviously oppose anyone trans (except old school transsexuals who know their place), or anyone who calls themselves pan, or any other of the names the young folk are using to describe their sexuality. They oppose any expression of kink, any harm reduction measures in sex education - young people should be taught watching porn is dangerous, illegal and exploitative and nothing else - as I recently saw one of them say in response to Childline youtube video, They object to LGBT clubs in schools, support conversion therapy for trans people, are fairly relaxed about if for LGB people, believe fetishes are all linked to paedophilia, and think that LGBT organisations are involved in some kind of plot to lower the age of consent and undermine children's bounderies. The more old school feminist amongst them are also very opposed to any form of sex work or porn, with some feminist justification but they will attack any organisation that provides any form of support for sex workers - or even sex workers themselves. And they are all more than prepared to work with the religious and alt right to push their message. It's essentially a puritan coalition, that accepts LGB people within a very conservative framework made up of older LGBT people furious that the scene isn't like it was in the 80's and angry with young people who call theselves queer, Gender Critical activists, dickhead opportunist men like Glinner and Wings over Scotland, a few Tory and Labour peers, rad fem veterans of the lesbian sex wars of the 80s and the religious right - with soft support from the Tory press.

At this point being anti-trans is just a shield that can be employed if anyone challenges this stuff. They simply claim they are being attacked for believing sex in real, or that human's can't change sex to deflect from the other stuff they are putting out. In this context Heyton's piece reads like a warning shot - challenge us and we will tear the party apart. But it is worrying, the fact is a lot of young LGBT people do think of themselves as queer, pan or whatever, and the constant attempt to try and link any expression of that to paedophila clearly is dangerous. There are constant attacks now on LGBT groups which deliver or support LGBT inclusive education, including attempts to get them defunded, Glinner is fucking outing trans and Queer people to tens of thousands of people because they dared to have profiles on a Queer/non binary/trans inclusive lesbian datings app, people are comparing the rainbow flag to the Swastika in some cases, and almost all these attacks are coming from the centre left - many of them Labour or disgruntled ex Labour. I don't know what Labour should do about that really, I don't even care much about Labour, but they have the potential to cause damage as they have done in Scotland. More worrying is that they get subsumed into a broader anti-LGBT movement spearheaded by the conservative right that starts to gain ground outside of the social media bubbles it currently largely operates in.

Yes the wrong sort of transpeople are a problem. As are detransitioners. Both groups pretty fundamentally undermine the TRA narrative. And TRAs like Stonewall don't do themselves any favours by misrepresenting the law and refusing to have any kind of dialogue with women who are worried by the outcomes of gender identity theory.

There's undoubtedly a big backlash under way - the recent decision by the EHRC to disaffiliate from Stonewall's Diversity Champions programme and the Essex University report Review of two events involving external speakers | University of Essex are pretty clear signs of whats happening.

Utterly predictable, utterly self-inflicted.
 
Back
Top Bottom