Have we stepped through the looking glass?

It’s the main reason why I can’t vote for them. I like Kier, but I just can’t get past this

Interestingly Andrew Doyle and Andrew Sullivan have done a podcast this evening for his Free Speech Nation show delving into gay rights history amongst other things.

AS talks quite a bit about how much pushback there was to his pro marriage position from the gay community in the 90s. It made him quite unpopular because it was viewed by many as heteronormative and a patriarchal institution.

He also talks extensively about how hearts and minds were won by debate and reason. MN fave Peter Tatchell gets a name check as one of his big opponents.

Well worth watching if you enjoy longer form conversations.

I remember people saying the same thing about two men getting married

Jane Clare Jones goes into considerable detail as to why that is an inappropriate comparison.

Gay rights and trans rights: a compare and contrast:

janeclarejones.com/2018/09/09/gay-rights-and-trans-rights-a-compare-and-contrast/

twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1401655134929756164

gender ideology was invented by the Russians in order to destabilise the west and they're winning
Are other countries in Europe getting into a tangle on this sort of thing?
I know the USA is adding to their established weirdos.

Yay, snide attempts to shame women into dropping their boundaries. Why is there never a coherent argument? Perhaps some people are just uncomfortable with women talking and seek to provide a chaperone.

My cervix needs screening for the very disease that killed my mum. In a world where women are any sex, how do I ask for a female-sexed-as-in-cervix-owner-or-ex-cervix-owner HCP to do my smear test? Yes I need one. Yes it's irrelevant that some women are privileged enough not to mind. No I wouldn't turn down emergency medicine from a male HCP and if you can't see the difference between the 2 scenarios I suggest you need to think beyond your own very narrow frame of reference, learn about trauma and speak to more women.

BTW if we were all actually right wing, how would insinuating that we were be an insult?! Or is this that negative attention seeking thing my toddler does?

This poster who is trying to make out we are against gay marriage is probably too young to realise that most of us rad fems (or CG types generally) were allies to LGB people if not LGB ourselves and in particular fought against section 28.

Not to mention the people like Simon Callow and Simon Fanshawe speaking up. Kinda hard to dismiss them as 'the same as the homophobes that opposed gay marriage' (although there have been some attempts, bless. I believe one poster here on this board, a transactivist, said Simon Fanshawe, one of the founders of Stonewall, needed to 'educate himself' on gay history 😂)

I'll add that it's particularly distasteful as it is busy leveraging that same sex marriage was a Good Thing in the End, while ignoring the strong homophobia issues within the politics that are being presented as so wonderfully positive.

This poster who is trying to make out we are against gay marriage is probably too young to realise that most of us rad fems (or CG types generally) were allies to LGB people if not LGB ourselves and in particular fought against section 28.
Some of us even questioned why, once civil partnerships were a thing, you would want the trappings of a patriarchal heteronormative institution like marriage, but I wouldn't want to make their brain explode.

Gay people never demanded that others ignore biological reality, never demanded access to spaces they didn't belong. they wanted to be free from discrimination in the workplace and by service providers, and free to marry who they choose. All things that trans people are also covered by in the Equality Act.

What the extreme activists are also demanding goes far beyond human rights, into the territory of ridiculousness. Let's have a look shall we -

Demanding that men can become women just because they say so, and gain full access to women's spaces, including prisons and rape crisis centres.
Telling lesbians that if they don't accept male people as sexual partners they are hateful and bigoted.
Demanding that children be given puberty blockers and surgery before the age of consent.
Demanding that women have no place left to meet without men present, or even to be able to discuss our bodies and biology without censoring it for the feelings of fragile men.

Not the same thing at all. How insulting.

Do you mean people with penises?

Velvet might mean bodies with vaginas. Or even one body with a vagina and one with a penis.

It's so hard to tell these days. What do you mean by 'men' velvet?

I remember people saying the same thing about two men getting married

Gay men didn't demand that everyone deny reality, they asked that people acknowledged reality, that men can fall in love with men. Gay men didn't dehumanise, abuse and shit all over women to win the right to marry their partners.

What's happening right now is the complete opposite. Demanding we all play along with reality deniers, the leader of the labour party telling women we mustn't speak the truth, mangling the language we use for ourselves, locking women up with convicted rapists because of an ideology.

Nothing like the fight for same sex marriage at all, and saying it is is a pathetic attempt at shaming women into shutting up. Not going to work.

Keir Starmer this morning could have said 'of course it's not transphobic to say that only women have a cervix'. Instead he chose to squirm and try to avoid answering the question altogether because he knows that he's supporting an irrational belief system. It just made him look ridiculous.

They know it's irrational. They don't believe, but they still go along with it. Why?

Amnesty

I can't link for some reason but can never vote for them after they opposed allowing rape victims to choose an examiner of their own sex.

I don't think that the conspiracy theories are that useful because they don't explain the thing that needs explaining.

The thing that blows my mind is how many normally sane people and organisations are going along with mad things. The Russians didn't make them do it - they don't control Amnesty, and all the other ngos, and the corporations, and the Labour Party, and half my friends. They might well have seeded the Internet with bollocks, but that doesn't explain why people fell for it, which is the bit that needs explaining.

"But progressives could still have a home in the Green Party. It just depends on the results of the leadership election."

Unfortunately I'm in Scotland and will never vote for Patrick Harvie.

I had the thought that it might be a long game from countries on the other side of the world where they definitely do not allow this sort of thing to happen to their own children. Rates of this happening are rapidly rising all the time, especially in the last few years, and we’re finding out that children being pumped full of hormones or drugs, even if they change their mind and stop, are finding themselves, both male and female, unable to have any children, not to also mention the psychological damage it causes. And I wondered whether it was all part of a long game.

I know it sounds far fetched and stupid but if people believe other countries can influence politics for their own gain, why wouldn’t they be open to funding this type of thing also to decrease a generation of children in their rivals countries? I don’t know, it’s probably just me, but from the amount of stuff that has come out I wouldn’t be surprised if it was true.

It's true though, except even more people were outraged, this time it's just a few.

Opposing marriage between 2 consenting adults which impinges on no-one else, is not remotely the same as objecting to the erosion of women's rights