Lesbians not welcome at Gay Pride

I always add a silent 'yet' in my head because there is still the chance that new evidence or better arguments will turn up. It has been quite some time, though ....

@pattihews , that's a great insight - thanks!

This BBC Radio 4 interview was a complete revelation to me. It's The Spark with Helen Lewis.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001219p

The interviewee, Julia Galef, is a psychologist who's developed the idea of the scout mindset. Scout not being a lad in shorts and a woggle, but a scout who is sent out to map unknown terrain, explore and return with information on which decisions are based. The scout makes notes in pencil because there's always more to be learned and a change of perspective/ direction may lead to a change in understanding and opinion. In Scout mind, if someone comes up with a better argument than you, you listen and learn and recalibrate your position.

JG mentions her fiancé, whom she got to know when he was criticised on SM for saying something that some women felt was misogynistic. Instead of doubling down he listened, thought about it and explained why he didn't think what he'd said was misogynistic. Then someone came up with a better argument, he listened and then publicly announced that the better argument had prevailed and that his statement was misogynistic and he was sorry and had learned something.

I suspect that quite a few of us on here have a Scout mindset. I see lots of women like Laughing Priest asking what they're missing, expecting a cogent response from TRAs and their allies and stunned that there isn't one.

I find it helpful to understand that many (possibly most) people don't think like Laughing Priest and me. Don't know if you saw the programme presented by Dr Hannah Fry with seven anti-vaxxers, none of whom were open to rational debate:

www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/jul/20/unvaccinated-review-the-most-infuriating-tv-show-of-the-year-so-far

It's a demonstration of a how a fixed mindset that is largely closed to rational discussion and statistical/ scientific data works. Some of the behaviour exhibited is classic TRA behaviour: shouting and attacks when presented with rational material before fleeing in a highly emotional state. This is what we're up against. People who've taken a position often on a purely emotional level, and who can't/ won't consider any evidence that might undermine that position. Not because they're being difficult but because that's the way they think.

I actually can't quite remember when it dawned on me that this is all there is. There's no missing piece that makes it all make sense.

Helen Joyce reported the same feeling/realisation when she was researching her book.

Genuinely, when I started looking into this I believed I was missing something or people were misinterpreting things. My first posts are probably floating around somewhere (many namechanges ago! ) asking for evidence, data, etc.

I actually can't quite remember when it dawned on me that this is all there is. There's no missing piece that makes it all make sense. People are just very much wedded to sexism and are staggeringly unwilling to even look at this, let alone question it, to tease out anything they sense might be problematic and see if they sit somewhere not on the extreme end of the spectrum.

Perhaps brainwashing renders someone impervious to dizziness, regardless of the extent of pivoting, reaching, or backtracking….

Well, that and the deletions!

All that pivoting must have made Hearach dizzy!

Just coming back to this as I was on my phone at the time.

This type of post really is very typical of the twisting I have come to expect.

A poll where most respondents are straight is not representative of the views of the LGBT community.

So the fuck what? My post was in regards to the clearly false claim of:

'you should know at this point that to be GC is to be a very small minority in the community'

Hearache has pivoted from telling us that those holding the beliefs that sex is immutable and that the rights and needs of female's should be prioritised over another group in instances where it is important to recognise sex over gender are 'very small minority' after the statistics of the opinions of the general UK population show that in fact, it is the MAJORITY.

So pivoted from

'you should know at this point that to be GC is to be a very small minority in the community'

to

'A poll where most respondents are straight is not representative of the views of the LGBT community.'

Not even remotely relevant to the post.

Just for once, own your dishonest posts Hearache.

There is simply no coherency in most of your posts lately and you are now getting regularly deleted.

What is clear, is that you cannot accept in your world that people believe that sex cannot be changed and that the rights of females should be prioritised over another group in instances where it is important to recognise sex over gender are the majority.

I really wish we'd get posters with a better standard of argument. Been asking for that for years; nobody's ever yet turned up to offer sensible responses to women's questions/points.

Posters like Hearach help with this, as if these are the best arguments against my position I have nothing to be concerned about.

There really is a sense of disconnection that I find with posters who deliberately misrepresent quotes and statements. However, in this sense you are correct. If all they can do is twist and deflect without evidence or often even coherence, it is just a great example of how poor the arguments they present are.

I find that it is often cathartic to simply keep on analysing the posts so the dissonance isn't screaming in my own head.

Agree with the above.

I constantly reflect upon what I believe, in an attempt to make sure I haven't missed something or misunderstood a situation. Posters like Hearach help with this, as if these are the best arguments against my position I have nothing to be concerned about.
Cheers Hearach.

Agreed. I used to think that posters like Herach were annoying because they just derail and deliberately misrepresent and generally don't make sense. But actually, for any onlookers, it just shows up the ridiculous 'arguments' they are claiming for their cause. It is evidence of the lack of critical thinking embedded in gender ideology. More sunlight I guess.

@Hearach15

Is the LGBT community the same group as L, B, G and T people ? If not, what's the difference and to what degree do you consider it acceptable for the former to speak for the latter?

If it's valid that women as a statistical group may have different opinions, social needs and political positions to men as a statistical group, is it valid that people AFAB as group may have different opinions, social needs and political positions to people AMAB as a group? If not, why not?

'Transvestite' according to Christine Burns whose book you were plugging.

Heterosexual transvestite = good, homosexual transsexual = bad, according to Burns.

Oh, oh...I think I know this one! Is it Takeover?

Too late

and too little

much, much, much too little 😟

Coming back to this now that I am on my PC.

Yes, quite familiar with sample biases and how to deal with them.

Again though, I did not say this was an LGBT specific poll. And I did have access to the data, (it was Centre for political studies) but they have removed access to it now. I would assume since Dr Luntz is a consultant, his data handling would be scrutinised since the poll was sponsored by a political party and they used it to make decisions on their future policies.

But you don't have to hold that view for sure.

Either way, again, I ask the question.

And yet, why would you think that LGBT people will be any more or less tolerant?

What evidence do you have to support that? Your anecdotes?

And sorry, your bizarre trip into populations and 'distinctness' actually was not helpful at all.... rather like you don't actually understand the nature of people's opinions other than your own....

By the way, a tad hard to 'weight' for the 'T' wouldn't you say? Considering how many we know lied in the census.....

Making weighting for LGBT like a finger in the air and pick a number type exercise.

LGBT people are a distinct community within the general population with distinct opinions

Why do you think polls are weighted by age, gender, region and voting record? Because those are distinct demographics with distinct views.

Poll 1,000 people aged 18-24 and they'll have different views to those aged over 65.

Poll 1,000 LGBT people and they'll have different views to 1,000 straight people.

1,000 women will have different views to 1,000 men and as we saw in the EU referendum people in Scotland have different views to those in England and Wales on Brexit.

No. This Because those are distinct demographics with distinct views is a whole load of crap.

If you honestly believe that LGBT all think the same, you are indeed so far deeply entrenched that you cannot see any reality at all. There is absolutely no evidence in the UK that LGBT people all hold 'distinct' opinions.

They may have a propensity to hold certain beliefs more than others, but they will overlap with the general population. They also make up the general population and don't exist in a bubble. So, how do you plan to prevent a leaking between these 'discrete' populations?

Poll 1,000 people aged 18-24 and they'll have different views to those aged over 65.

No. They may have a skew towards the strength they might hold a certain view, but I doubt they will be a discrete data set. In my years of quantitive research analysis, I have not seen this event you are stating happens. All ages will share certain views, the degree to which they feel strongly either way needs to also be considered.

Poll 1,000 LGBT people and they'll have different views to 1,000 straight people.

You have to seriously unable to recognise that there are trans people who are 'straight' plus unable to recognise that not all LGBT people think alike to write this.

Hope that helps! always happy to teach you about politics as well as LGBT issues.

Consider me a 'student' and explain to me exactly what you mean by weighted by age, gender, region and voting record?

Now, don't disappoint me here. Remember you are telling everyone that I am no expert at anything, please.... explain what you mean here like I am your 'student'?

This is priceless today!!!

Yep! Hilarious.

Oh dear!

Hearache does it again.

How not very discreet it is to point out typos that are in fact, exactly the word cloglady meant.

And someone telling us all about their expertise in statistical analysis on discrete data sets supposedly too…

I await Mark Drakeford and Jane Hutt's statement of solidarity with the lesbians who were told to leave Pride by the Police.

I agree with all of this. The only people standing up for what Pride actually means (or used to) were kicked out by the Police at the bequest of angry party people.