Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

LGBT in schools vs religious parents

This unfortunately. And it's not just the legislative attacks, or threats of attacks but the relentlessness of it which is beginning to have a real impact of people's mental health and sense of safety in the world - and a lot of people weren't having that great a time of it before all this started. A barely known trans influencer in the US does an Instagram tie in with a beer company and it causes a near insurrection. Dr Who hires a trans actor for a minor part and half the internet goes into meltdown and bombards the BBC with complaints. A train station displays a rainbow flag and is hit by protests and outraged articles from the commentariat about the Trans Taliban, or Queer ISIS or whatever the slur of choice happens to be at the moment.

It's not just the media noise that does the damage but the way it starts to get repeated, by friends, families, and people who are often in positions of power, not least including employers. It's not like you can just log out of twitter and not buy the Daily Mail and pretend it's not happening, it's everywhere including our own front rooms, workplaces and social circles in a lot of cases.

And should trans people ever respond, with despair, anger or frustration, then that is only used to further justify the persecution - which is how it always happens I guess, like when kids at school bullied someone until the point they had a meltdown and lost their shit and that reaction was used to justify,and intensify the bullying. It's always the victim's fault and anything the victim does to fight back will be used as evidence of this.

There was a video that caused outrage in gender critical circles a couple of years ago of a black trans protester outside the LGB Alliance conference. There is no doubt they were behaving abusively, shouting misogynist slurs about people's appearance and they were far from coherent. As well as being angry however they also seemed desperate and heart broken (and possibly quite drunk). But where does the power lie in this situation? With the black trans woman yelling in the street or inside one of the most prestigious venues in the world where a group largely consisting of journalists, lawyers and academics were holding a conference that she wasn't welcome at about what to do about people like her?

So yeah trans activism isn't perfect. Movements of marginalised people never are because a lot of people are already traumatised and damaged to begin with. Trans people, benefit claimants, refugees or other self organised groups will never achieve the slickness of middle class dominated and well funded campaigns that can afford to spit their venom with faux politeness and respectability. Trans people will never have access to the media and corridors of power in the way those opposed to their existence do. And the liberal groups and individuals which deign to speak for the marginalised will frequently sell them out as soon as things get too rocky. Sometimes shouting in the streets is all there is left and that's a sign of desperation not power.
This is all true and a well-made point. It is certainly understandable that traumatised people might react with fear and aggression towards what they perceive as a repeat threat. It is certainly excusable that such behaviour can occur

Unfortunately, however, no matter how sympathetic I might be to that premise, it also remains true that the outcome is self-defeating. It doesn’t matter what the excuse or reason is; the result of battering down people who seem to disagree with you is not that the disagreement goes away, it is that it merely moves to a place that you can’t see it. And the result of it moving out of your sight is that the bubble chamber now amplifies the thing you disagree with without you having a chance to intervene. And the result of that is that this happens, because the chamber of amplification might not contain you any more, but it sure as hell contains the levers of power:

Tbh I think the proof is in the pudding when it comes to how the trans panic has shaken out over the last decade or so. The government has not only not extended rights for trans people since the mid 00s, it's reversed several and even blocked progress in other countries (eg. Scotland). Yet rather than defuse further worries about trans people in the public sphere, the narrative has simply been shifted so now we have classic "think of the children" stuff going after topics that didn't used to be controversial.

The gender critical set is not on the defensive against a powerful trans lobby, it's winning quite handily and indeed expanding its position.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, however, no matter how sympathetic I might be to that premise, it also remains true that the outcome is self-defeating. It doesn’t matter what the excuse or reason is; the response of battering down people who seem to disagree with you is not that the disagreement goes away, it is that it merely moves to a place that you can’t see it. And the result of it moving out of your sight is that the bubble chamber amplifies the thing you disagree with without you having a chance to intervene.

Which is precisely what's happened here. People's views haven't changed, they're just sticking trans threads on ignore.
 
This is all true and a well-made point. It is certainly understandable it is that traumatised people might react with fear and aggression towards what they perceive as a repeat threat. It is certainly excusable that such behaviour can occur

Unfortunately, however, no matter how sympathetic I might be to that premise, it also remains true that the outcome is self-defeating. It doesn’t matter what the excuse or reason is; the response of battering down people who seem to disagree with you is not that the disagreement goes away, it is that it merely moves to a place that you can’t see it. And the result of it moving out of your sight is that the bubble chamber amplifies the thing you disagree with without you having a chance to intervene. And the result of that is that this happens, because the chamber of amplification might not contain you any more, but it sure as hell contains the levers of power:

So what do you suggest? More "reasonable debate"? I've spent hours of my life doing that on here only to be accused of being a disgusting bully. The conversation is stacked against trans people. There is no access to the media platforms which have swamped this debate with misinformation and bigotry. And our enemies are far from fucking reasonable, just look at some of the gender critical responses to Brianna Ghey's murder or some of the rhetoric that has come out of the US.

These are people who want to eliminate trans people from existence, whether via good old fashioned murder in the case of the far/alt right or by making living as a trans person in society impossible in the case of many gender criticals. And you're calling for civility? When has that ever prevented persecution? This isn't a philosophical debate for trans people, it's increasingly turning into a battle for survival in many parts of the world and the UK is at the forefront of providing the ideological ammunition for those intent on elimination.
 
So what do you suggest? More "reasonable debate"? I've spent hours of my life doing that on here only to be accused of being a disgusting bully. The conversation is stacked against trans people. There is no access to the media platforms which have swamped this debate with misinformation and bigotry. And our enemies are far from fucking reasonable, just look at some of the gender critical responses to Brianna Ghey's murder or some of the rhetoric that has come out of the US.

These are people who want to eliminate trans people from existence, whether via good old fashioned murder in the case of the far/alt right or by making living as a trans person in society impossible in the case of many gender criticals. And you're calling for civility? When has that ever prevented persecution? This isn't a philosophical debate for trans people, it's increasingly turning into a battle for survival in many parts of the world and the UK is at the forefront of providing the ideological ammunition for those intent on elimination.

I’m not sure that kabbes was suggesting that the panacea was civility with people who want you dead.
 
Indeed, the best way to fight people who want you dead is surely to make allies of those who want you to live.

And I’m not calling for anything. I’m not even suggesting anything. In truth, it’s not up to me to suggest something in an arena where I have no skin in the game. I’m merely pointing out that the approach of furiously attacking anyone that shows the slightest hint of less than 100% enthusiastic support for every element of everything you say is, apparently, not working. Whether or not I or anyone else on urban have sympathy for it as a reaction is really neither here nor there, is it, given this apparent failure?

I can give you a more in-depth perspective on how social policy is not based on abstract “values” but rather on the objectification of normative relations into conflicting good/bad group stereotypes, and the reaction to those stereotypes. And how this, sadly, puts members of marginalised groups into the unfair position of individually representing not just the group, but the whole way in which lay representations of moral values will come to be played out in policy terms. But, to be honest, I think it makes more sense to just concentrate on building bridges with those who present bridge-building opportunities, while fighting against those who don’t and, crucially, learning to tell the difference between them.
 
So you must be of the opinion that those Metropolitan Police WhatsApp groups where policemen spewed racist and misogynistic stuff really have no importance then?
we got warned about that in prison service training and still some people thought sharing "hilarious" memes etc was fine on whatsapp that included women :facepalm: .
 
Trouble is being civil doesn't always work particularly well either. As we know with pretty much every minority vs majority position, the side with power and status quo on their side can always poison the well, for example by making outrageous claims, blanket describing the minority as aggressive/unreasonable over and over again, using specious arguments which have already been debunked etc and simply wait for someone to lose their temper. Which of course people will because constantly maintaining civility in the face of deeply unfair characterisation is extremely hard.

Ultimately every campaign which has ever won anything has had both civil and uncivil elements - women's rights, black liberation, LGBT rights etc. Civility has its place but it's not blanket, can't be. And as a board of majority cis het guys we can ask for it all we like, but our place in responding has to have an element of trying to understand that it's much easier for us.
 
Last edited:
In what way?

By saying that trans folk should be afforded respect and protection?

No, by claiming people like David Bell and Keira Bell are worthy of support and worth listening to.

Posie Parker (Keira's inspiration and who's also strongly supported by JKR who has been defended on here) is currently calling for parents of trans children to be prosecuted and yesterday called Brianna Ghey's mum evil. Keira herself attempted to eliminate trans healthcare for young people and was threatening to bring a case against adult treatment providers although she seems to have gone quiet on it. There is currently a schism in the gender critical movement about whether they should be calling for crossdressing to be made a crime or call for social hostility to prevent it (and older trans people are well aware what that looks like, it means the closet or violence, exclusion and relentless abuse).

David Bell is involved with an organisation that calls for 100% desistance and appears to support some form of trans conversion therapy. The founder of this organisation has also expressed warm support for Posie Parker. Genspect work closely with ultra conservative religious groups and have supported anti-trans bills in the states. These are people who very clearly want to eliminate trans people from society, not by mass murder in most cases perhaps, but by prosecutions, conversion therapy, stigmatisation and the removal of any recognition of trans people in law, education or any other branch of civil society.

So yes, there are people on here acting as apologists for those who either want to eliminate trans people from society or are happy to associate with and praise those who do. It's happened on this thread.
 
No, by claiming people like David Bell and Keira Bell are worthy of support and worth listening to.

Posie Parker (Keira's inspiration and who's also strongly supported by JKR who has been defended on here) is currently calling for parents of trans children to be prosecuted and yesterday called Brianna Ghey's mum evil. Keira herself attempted to eliminate trans healthcare for young people and was threatening to bring a case against adult treatment providers although she seems to have gone quiet on it. There is currently a schism in the gender critical movement about whether they should be calling for crossdressing to be made a crime or call for social hostility to prevent it (and older trans people are well aware what that looks like, it means the closet or violence, exclusion and relentless abuse).

David Bell is involved with an organisation that calls for 100% desistance and appears to support some form of trans conversion therapy. The founder of this organisation has also expressed warm support for Posie Parker. Genspect work closely with ultra conservative religious groups and have supported anti-trans bills in the states. These are people who very clearly want to eliminate trans people from society, not by mass murder in most cases perhaps, but by prosecutions, conversion therapy, stigmatisation and the removal of any recognition of trans people in law, education or any other branch of civil society.

So yes, there are people on here acting as apologists for those who either want to eliminate trans people from society or are happy to associate with and praise those who do. It's happened on this thread.

This just sounds bonkers. Out there in the real world, gender criticality seems to be focused quite tightly on adolescent gender dysphoria and on safety in women-only environments. You are talking as if trans people risk genocide at the hands of middle-of-the-road commentators.
 
Did it irritate you when Queer As Folk was first broadcast in 1999 or when Queer Eye become a global sensation in 2003?
I was in my 40s when “Queer As Folk” was broadcast, and I did not watch it, but as far as I was aware it was not advocating the use of “queer” as an acceptable term for gay people.

I have never watched a full episode of “Queer Eye”, but have seen a number of trailers for it, and in my opinion it reinforced reactionary stereotypes of homosexual men.
 
It’s very easy to believe that Queer Eye was deeply annoying for lots of gay men with little interest in clothes, though.
 
This just sounds bonkers. Out there in the real world, gender criticality seems to be focused quite tightly on adolescent gender dysphoria and on safety in women-only environments. You are talking as if trans people risk genocide.

You're just wrong I'm afraid. Anti-trans rad fems have been openly calling for the elimination of transgenderism since the early 80s. Posie Parker is by far the most influential anti-trans activist in the UK and she has a huge amount of support. And just look at what's happening in some states in the US - much of which is happening with the support and in some cases active involvement of gender criticals on both sides of the Atlantic.

Yes there are people who are more moderate, or at least more moderate in spaces where their true opinions would be unacceptable. And the movement has split over the more extreme views - and every time the more extreme views have won out and the moderates peeled away and fallen silent or changed sides and got behind the extremists.
 
This just sounds bonkers. Out there in the real world, gender criticality seems to be focused quite tightly on adolescent gender dysphoria and on safety in women-only environments. You are talking as if trans people risk genocide at the hands of middle-of-the-road commentators.
'safety in women only environments' for the Gender Criticals means that a transgender woman will be cared for in a male hospital ward, jailed in male jail ( even if they have had GCS), made to change in the men;s changing room,. use the male toilets and would be banned from working in ANY regulated role that requires a DBS disclosure at all ( primarily from their fantasy ( planted by MRAs) that transgender women in health and social care work theere to get access to cisgender women to assault them - at least when the MRAs spout this they can be offered a practical demonstration on the impact of Gender Affirming hormonal treatment - but like Dr Will Powers nad the face cream they'd tap out after couple of days )
 
I was in my 40s when “Queer As Folk” was broadcast, and I did not watch it, but as far as I was aware it was not advocating the use of “queer” as an acceptable term for gay people.

I have never watched a full episode of “Queer Eye”, but have seen a number of trailers for it, and in my opinion it reinforced reactionary stereotypes of homosexual men.
Queer eye is based in stereotypes

one can argue that anything Gok Wan does involving clothesd is in the same stereotypes
 
This just sounds bonkers. Out there in the real world, gender criticality seems to be focused quite tightly on adolescent gender dysphoria and on safety in women-only environments. You are talking as if trans people risk genocide at the hands of middle-of-the-road commentators.
The repressive atmosphere that has developed regarding trans people hasn't come from nowhere, it's in largest part driven by the activism and priorities of the loons, with talking points being picked up by mainstream commentators. Pick up a few issues of The Times or The Telegraph, they regularly host comment from people who really aren't a million miles away from Parker. The campaigns to tarnish Mermaids and Stonewall, to take two manifestations, were absolutely bonkers. At one point they were accusing the lesbian head of Stonewall of hating lesbians.
 
I have seen a claim that there are in fact 72 genders.
What do people think of this claim?
What do we mean by gender?
 
I have never watched a full episode of “Queer Eye”, but have seen a number of trailers for it, and in my opinion it reinforced reactionary stereotypes of homosexual men.

I didn't ask you that, I asked if the use of the word queer irritated you at the time. Because it seems to me that Queer was reclaimed in the 80s, used widely within the lesbian and gay struggle for rights throughout that time and became faily mainstream in popular culture in the 90s and early 2000s with barely any outrage that I recall. In fact it's only now, that it has become inclusive of trans people, that it is suddenly back to being the most offensive slur ever and most of the people claming that by a strange coincidence also seem to be virulently gender critical (and more often then not straight).
 
All this revisionism regarding use of the word Queer. The letter below is from 1934. Queer is a word that is considered ‘derogatory from the outside, not from within’ as per dictionary definitions.

1706988836986.png

1706988989684.png

Badge from 1990.

source
 
All this revisionism regarding use of the word Queer. The letter below is from 1934. Queer is a word that is considered ‘derogatory from the outside, not from within’ as per dictionary definitions.

View attachment 410772

View attachment 410773

Badge from 1990.

source

I have a gay friend who hates the word due to the venom with which it was spat at him on many occasions, and I recall reading an article where someone described it as “.. often the last word we heard as we were being beaten unconscious”, so I think this maybe isn’t a simple case of someone being right and someone being wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PTK
Disagree tbh.
If a member or supporter of a group like Britain First, BNP, C18 etc. is seen on one of their demonstrations or is leafleting for them (in their own time) I would be for sacking them if they worked in a school.

With those views it would be impossible for them to treat all the kids and their families fairly or equally and I would not trust them near my kids if they were at the same school
Well, there's your 'harmful actions' rather than just opinions.
 
I have a gay friend who hates the word due to the venom with which it was spat at him on many occasions, and I recall reading an article where someone described it as “.. often the last word we heard as we were being beaten unconscious”, so I think this maybe isn’t a simple case of someone being right and someone being wrong.
But the fact that it has been in use within the LGBT+ community since way back is undeniable. The idea that its been introduced recently by uppity trans people to bring down gay people is utter bollocks.

And I've see it pointed out by many that the last word they heard before being beaten up was "gay". Certainly "gay" was the pejorative used by my bullies back in my school days along with 'bender', 'puffter', and others. I've never heard 'queer' used except as a positive reclaimed word. It's use as a pejorative goes back to Oscar Wilde days.

I've heard very few gay people complain about the use of queer, and not at all until the last ten years or so. I've usually only ever heard straight people assigning it to a gay friend or claiming the gay community have a problem with it, when clearly they don't as a whole. When i hear this claim it almost always goes along with anti trans opinions by the claimant.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom