Baroness Nicholson on Regent Street flags

Quite.

The alignment with LGB was a deliberate tactic. See the Denton report. Stealth and misrepresentation was acknowledged as completely necessary in order to gain public acceptance.

Homosexuality is real, verifiable, identifiable, etc. Transgenderism relies on the opposite, completely denying reality, and enforcing public compliance in that denial.

Force teaming with LGB was the goal. Anyone who observes the howls of outrage over non compliance like Get the L Out, sees that immediately.

Again with the forced teaming and the false equivalence. Trans rights have nothing to do with trans rights. It just proves the point that without the LGB the T is nothing. Gay people did not demand another group give up their rights, change language, force their way into spaces and groups that were not for them, issue rape, death and bomb threats to people who did not agree with them, and they definitely did not encourage children to make lifelong, irrevocable changes to their bodies.

But you said this in an earlier post:
*Pride is an event for LGBT people and if you don't support the rights of one of the letters the yep, you're not welcome.

No homophobia, biphobia or transphobia should be tolerated.*

So if there were gender critical people in the LGB they are hardly going to declare themselves.

this is an interesting point, I often think about the precise nature of the similarities and differences between societal objections to LGB people in the past and to trans people today.

There is obviously the very significant difference, in relation to children and young people particularly, that accepting or declaring one’s same sex attraction, or acting on it, does not involve drugs or surgery. However, there is a degree of parallel with the way it was suggested in the past that a young person who ‘chose to pursue a gay lifestyle’ (possibly as a result of untoward, predatory influences) would catch AIDS or other diseases, or would be doomed to a life of loneliness, childlessness, and exclusion from normal society.

There is also no obvious similarity on same sex spaces, although I think it’s worth bearing in mind the way that gay people in the past were viewed as a potential threat in places like changing rooms where their (our) unnatural desires might pose a threat, or our presence might make others feel uncomfortable.

@Helleofabore
because it doesn’t fit their wish to make such broad negative generalisations about others who disagree with them

the words ‘pot’, ‘kettle’ and ‘black’ spring to mind

You're right that most LGB people support trans people. This is also because we are more likely to know them and thus are actually far more educated on the issues than most straight/cisgender people.

I always find posts such as this very enlightening. It really goes to show how little some posters actually understand ‘trans’ people today.

To suggest this is ludicrous. Considering the huge increase in one particular demographic of trans people, that of children and young people. Particularly that of young females. ie. Our children.

Yet, here we have a poster who is very keen on trying to deny that and the fact that many posters on this board have loved ones they have daily contact with who are trans.

because it doesn’t fit their wish to make such broad negative generalisations about others who disagree with them.

Would you be happy with the labrys flag flying? I would. Wonder why that one is never flown anymore?

Can assure you I am in favour of the both the wonderful Pride flag flying and the majestic Union Jack flying. 🇬🇧 🏳️‍🌈

The same police who are so into LGB rights? It’s almost like they haven’t got the faintest clue about the LGB community, but I bet they can name all 170 genders and their respective pronouns

Or the recent serial killer of gay men - it took the police a while to join the dots that there were actual murders after going ‘oh well, young gay men out in the early hours… gotta be suicide or misadventure innit?’

I bet if it had been stickers then the police would have been there in 2 mins. It’s funny the police have all this time to deal with ‘misgendering’ and stickers but none for actual homophobic crime. I hope the couple are ok. I’ve lost all faith in the police to be able to do their jobs.

I always find it gulling that the attack on a lesbian couple on a bus resulted in Mayor Khan shrugging his shoulders, and yesterday going on about how great he was for gay rights.

My police force (Essex) go on about attending Pride and putting rainbows over their cars. But a gay couple were heavily assaulted, they called the police (to help stop the continuation of the attack as they were chased), and the police eventually turned up two days later.

I think so. They say AI is getting more advanced and can read our minds…. Maybe my phone is saying what I really think?

@Conflictedunicorn wait...I think autocorrupt might be onto something!

My work twitter is full of charity corporate comms teams posting their photos from Pride. I know most of them personally, the vast majority are straight & see this as on the same level of going round the party conferences but with more glitter & rainbows

What do you call an organisation who tries to bully lesbians into sleeping with males? What is the difference between stonewall and those men down the pub saying ‘you just haven’t found the right dick yet, you’ll like it if you try it’.?

pride is no longer a protest, it’s a corporate sponsored party. The original reason for pride is long forgotten, and now it is meaningless to most people. Like the new flag. I think the telling thing is, a lot of the corporations changing their logos and flying the flags are not doing this in countries where it would damage their business. BMW for example did not chance it’s Facebook logo in for the Middle East branches. It means nothing to them, just a cheap way to get woke points. If they really believed in LGB rights, they either would not do business in those countries or cchande their logos. They are hypocrites.
It’s like David Beckham saying he is a feminist, supports LGB rights and is anti slavery, but helped Qatar win the bid to host the World Cup. And got millions of pounds for doing so.

the design is forced teaming encapsulated in a single rectangle

I'm very interested in the views of people of colour regarding finding themselves being represented driving a wedge into the rainbow flag

And a major corporation really going to town with flying it really brings home the commodification of pride by people who couldn't give two hoots about homophobia. have regent's street been particularly active in the sphere of lesbian and gay rights?

Yes, the sane people praising this installation are the same ones complaining about the union Jack’s over jubilee weekend. Why is one flag ok to fly and not another? I have seen the progress flag described as ‘a group of heterosexuals hiding behind POC bulldozing the LGB and dragging the intersex community with them’. And now I can’t unsee it. The design is very unfortunate.

If 1 million people attended (when estimates before claimed 1.5m would attend) the likelihood is the majority would be heterosexual, no doubt many heavily encouraged by their employers to voluntarily attend.

The couple of troll accounts on here seem unable to detail gay rights from five years ago. Many of the founders of Stonewall are against what Stonewall has become, many don't believe in Pride any more and are against the filmsly rainbow washing going on by corporations.

Pride for most people is a party, no doubt many who attend are probably casually homophobic in their personal lives and not at all interested in gay issues. It's a day for heterosexual virtue signalling.

yes, I mean the flag is awful, and the black and brown stripes.....

<headdesk>

But even if they'd flown the original pride flag, as they'd been given permission to do, I don't think I'd have liked that either, even though that flag doesn't feel threatening to me in the way the progress plus one does.

would I have felt uncomfortable when they were flying union jacks? what about if they'd papered the place with the Saltire? flags say 'this is my team, i like the people in it'. and can be interpreted as 'I don't like the people not in it'.

Regent Street is definitely in the UK, so somehow flying the Union Jack feels acceptable I think. They are not as an organisation homosexual, trans, intersex or any of the other groups on that flag. therefore do they have any place flying it?

I think seeing the pride flag outside a 'gay pub' is one thing. papered over regent's street is quite another

So everyone wasn’t there supporting trans rights then? So you were wrong. Awesome. Now moving on, why do you support a homophobic organisation? I’m asking this of everyone who says they support stonewall so I can work out the level of homophobia in the UK.

i think it is the forced teaming and tha fact the original flag actually meant something. Each colour had a separate meaning. Now it appears that the flag is for everyone. Why the black and brown strips to include POC? Are they claiming all POC are LGBT? And now the addition of the ‘intersex’ symbol. An outdated term and offensive to those with DSD, but was used anyway. People with DSD have repeatedly asked not to be used in this way. Even stonewall have agreed, but they got co-opted anyway.

Stonewall is Britain's largest LGBT charity, that is why it got such a big cheer at Pride: twitter.com/robbieds/status/1543241446710452224