So to go back to the structure of the sentence for a minute, "people’s insistence" meaning who? All pro-trans people?
Personally I think that most people don't have much background on the topic, so questions is fine — and there's a bunch of resources available debunking the most common myths because pro-trans people aren't actually a mob of shouty hysterics. Some of them were listed on the Freedom statement.
However, I also think that this is a limited-time thing. If you've been reading/participating for a while and you're still pretending you're just "questioning" or "opening a debate" by standing outside a stadium to hand out leaflets for example that's just disingenuous rubbish. The lefletters have a position demanding the blocking of Self ID and they're seeking to convert people to it. Which, if you see Self ID as a needed step forward for trans rights, is quite logically going to be criticised as transphobic behaviour.
It's not a phrase I (edit: tend to — just realised I did above) use myself because it's clunky and often derails conversations unnecessarily. I think it depends on how the phrase is parsed however as to whether it's ultimately unreasonable or not. Opposing self ID certainly does deny trans people recognition and rights in some very important arenas, and the campaign to do so has repeatedly reinforced tropes and bigotries which can and do lead to violent death. It's very easy to be sanguine when it's not me who has to pay for such things by getting my head kicked in.
It’s inaccurate and dishonest (as was the labelling of ‘TERFs’ as ‘fascists’ which is probably a clearer example of language being used to justify actions usually reserved for actual fascists).
Perhaps used in accordance with the definition of fascists as people the user of the word dislikesIt’s inaccurate and dishonest (as was the labelling of ‘TERFs’ as ‘fascists’ which is probably a clearer example of language being used to distort definitions in order to justify actions usually reserved for actual fascists).
Perhaps used in accordance with the definition of fascists as people the user of the word dislikes
I'm sort of wondering why you bothered quoting me given you appear to be mostly ignoring what I said and going on refute a comment I've not made.
Anyhoo it all seems kind of one-sided, this attribution of motivations you're offering here. I get that you think people are being inaccurate, what evidence do you have that they (all/most/some/a minority/someone/none) are being dishonest? I've seen a couple of people talk about terfs and fascists in the same breath, my take was that they were being a bit silly thinking of the worst word they could use, which is something we've all seen happen about a thousand times in contexts from shouting at members of the plod who are carrying out an arrest to Animal Rights activists outside an abattoir. Frankly if anything I'd see marking the phenomenon of badly-conceived insults out as somehow being specially tied to pro-trans activists while ignoring the poisonous behaviour of their opponents (evidenced in the very post you were quoting), as far more "dishonest" behaviour.
Do you think slagging people off as tacitly pro-rape for wearing a They/Them badge is honest decent debate? What about getting someone arrested after a scuffle, waiting until they were in the dock testifying and then bray-laughing at their speech impediment to try and put them off to the point that the judge has to intervene? How about, as I've seen recently, putting it about that the entire trans rights movement is a stooge for "big pharma" - should that be treated as a fair and reasonable bit of questioning behaviour?
there’s seasoned activists supporting this useage.
is there any examples of ‘TERFs’ physically attacking trans people here in the U.K.? It was that which got my goat tbh and the only reason why I’m bringing up the language
Bookfair leafleter was suspended from the Green Party for transphobia this weekend: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/05/...date-after-transphobic-heckling-on-channel-4/
it's hard to see how any of this will go anywhere if it still plays out as ID pols. Privilege theory and intersectionality don't provide a way through this, don't allow for common struggles
Bookfair leafleter was suspended from the Green Party for transphobia this weekend: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/05/...date-after-transphobic-heckling-on-channel-4/
Because the trans perplexed thread got locked and there's still a lot to talk aboutAm I the only one who is struggling to see why the 'temporary suspension in order to prevent possible harm to the Party’s reputation’ (not expulsion, and not explicitly for transphobia) of a member of the Green Party is being discussed on the Anarchist Bookfair thread? Apart from smokedout's dishonest and disingenuous attempt to shoehorn it in here, of course.
It would make more sense to include in the "Why the Green Party is shit" thread, TBH
Because the trans perplexed thread got locked and there's still a lot to talk about
The temporary suspension of a member of the Green Party following their behaviour in a TV studio has nothing to do with the Bookfair
She was one of the leafletters at the bookfair.
I mean, I dunno what interaction you had with the fallout, but a good chunk of the argument about the Bookfair involved critics saying people were overreacting to "questioning" leaflets and that it was outrageous people trying to open a debate were being treated in the same way as if racists showed up.
That one of the two leafletters has since shown up on a national telly programme shouting "penis" at trans panellists and been suspended from the fluffy wuffy Greens surely goes a fair way to showing that the leaflets were not in fact motivated by opening a debate at all, and the people who confronted them were spot on in identifying her as a bigot.
(we don't need her to be suspended by the GP to help us decide that FFS)
There are also outstanding complaints from the Bookfair incident.I know that, but the fact the Green Party have now suspended one of their members while they investigate a complaint arising from something she did last week isn't of any significance to the Anarchist Bookfair, unless you (or more appropriately perhaps as they brought it up smokedout) would like to explain what relevance it has to the Bookfair in particular or Anarchism in general
There are also outstanding complaints from the Bookfair incident.
I agree with you on this, fwiw.Yes there are, but I can't see that those being resolved will make any significant difference to issues around the Bookfair.
It's as if some here imagine that if the Green Party decide to permanently expel this person for transphobic actions, anyone who currently doubts or denies that she should have been prevented from leafleting the Bookfair will immediately become convinced, and that all the actions of the protestors who attacked her and others on the day and those who used the incident as an excuse to attack the organisers will be proved correct, and then, what exactly?
Will this help in any way to resolve the trans/TERF split or make it more likely that future Bookfairs can happen without this hostility raising its head again?
Or is that unimportant compared to the feeling of being able to say 'I told you they were a bigot and now even the Green Party agree, so if you don't agree, you must be a bigot too'? Because that's all this will achieve.
It's as if some here imagine that if the Green Party decide to permanently expel this person for transphobic actions, anyone who currently doubts or denies that she should have been prevented from leafleting the Bookfair will immediately become convinced, and that all the actions of the protestors who attacked her and others on the day and those who used the incident as an excuse to attack the organisers will be proved correct, and then, what exactly?
Will this help in any way to resolve the trans/TERF split or make it more likely that future Bookfairs can happen without this hostility raising its head again?