Here are 6 reasons why we need a truly queer environmental movement

LOJ picked the Doomers over the *roomers in the JSO v Pride stand off

sexuality operates at the individual level, not at the group level. This places the battle at every single persons level.

So lesbians cannot say NO to sex with men as a whole. There are no boundaries in place that society/law/people respect or try to respect, try to uphold etc.
It is is down to every single lesbian to fight each fucking creep one by one or report to the police (we know how well that goes) - and there is nobody on her side.

There's just Nancy Kelly telling lesbians to examine their prejudices as they are sexual racists. And this is Stonewall - not some far-right organisation.

Seriously, how do these people sleep at night. (NK et all)

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Nancy+Kelley+sexual+racists&view=detail&mid=D38FE5E81AB21AC940E0D38FE5E81AB21AC940E0&FORM=VIRE&PC=LCTS

So Nancy here is contradicting suggestions please. She's quite accepting of different views in here apparently in one short video.

It's rather undermined by the stupid Stonewall Champions League farce that expects gender identity to be included in every policy thereby forcing an identity based position on lesbians and gay people as a matter of course. And on every one else with their anti woman and mother measures in their policy advice for bonus points.

It's this utter bias from the top that is so contradictory.

And then everyone who can see these contradictions is smeared as gullible far right fools for understanding same sex attraction and single sex sports and facilities.

PP is right, this is making stonewall et al look ridiculous as they are completely two faced about it.

Yes, the community have different views and we accept that says Nancy but look at what we are doing for L (including men) G (including women) and B.

This is a contradictory mess which deliberately favours heterosexuals more than anyone in practice.

Anyone calling people that can see this plainly as being influenced by the far right misses the point that we can see it staring us in the face just by working in a Stonewall Champions organisation.

Otherwise it's all a bit "there's no such thing as society

Indeed. Oh dear, are they aligned with Margaret Thatcher and the far right?

Exactly.

Sure humans experience themselves operating at an individual level much of the time, including relationships.

But to fight for/ protect rights in a society we necessarily talk about group level, classes of human. In order for a class to protect its rights it needs to be able to name itself and organise with itself.

Otherwise it's all a bit "there's no such thing as society, only the individual" which tends to favour those humans who are naturally strongest both physically and structurally.

sexuality operates at the individual level, not at the group level.

If that were true, then homosexuality (and indeed heterosexuality) don't exist. It's entirely this kind of thinking that makes gender identity ideology - and its insistence on replacing "same-sex attraction" with "same-gender attraction" - a totally homophobic movement.

"Disabled LGBTQIA+ people face additional barriers due to limited accessible services, and a study found they’re being “systemically ignored” *. For example, during Hurricane Katrina, many wheelchair users were stranded as they weren’t included in evacuation, and they were unable to use non-accessible vehicles."

Yes, I'm sure the fact they were gay made all the difference to whether wheelchair-users were physically stranded. If only they had been cishet, then their wheelchairs would have fit in the rescue trucks.

He/they has simply added LGBTQIA+ to that sentence to repurpose a life-threatening and very serious issue for disabled people to make it fit his Pride Month brief - even the report he links to was a study of disabled people, with no mention of sexual orientation or gender identity.

It's so misleading and disingenuous to refer to "disabled LGBTQIA+ people" when you actually mean disabled people.

Obviously disabled people who are LBG or trans might encounter actual additional issues, but the example and study he/they uses in the context of disaster relief simply serve to illustrate that this is a brazen attempt to appropriate disabled people's serious issues to make it seem like an LGBTQIA+ inclusion issue when it's not.

And you know who loses out by pretending that people who don't believe in gender ideology are bigots who hate disabled people too? Disabled people.

I googled 'sexual apartheid' by mistake (not NK) & travelled back in time to Alison Bailey's tribunal & the lovely Ben Cooper swaying as he talked... mmm... I can still see him.

Can’t comment right now, eyes are stuck in back of head.

I am not playing word games with you that 'lesbian' is a mixed sex group.

https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=163&q=Nancy+Kelley+sexual+racists&cvid=093522c6893243d0951e6cbf7c8d387c&aqs=edge..69i57.4339j0j1&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=LCTS

2 second search on 'Nancy Kelley Sexual Racists' which include video clips.

Can you get the full quotes from Nancy Kelley to back up what you're saying - I can't find them myself although I do recall there were statements that people took issue with.

If you've been chased out of an LGBT group for refusing to have sex with someone I would strongly suggest you report that to the police.

By your last paragraphs, I'm not 100% on what you're saying. As far as I am concerned every individual has the right to define their own personal sexual choices. These can fluctuate over time and circumstance and people can find themselves surprised by new attractions that they did not hold before (You may be well aware of the many women that very happily enter into lesbian relationships in mid life that they never anticipated would feature in their lives when they were younger. They have experienced 'overtures' as you put it, from lesbians and are quite happy with choices they have made after these overtures.) I am not going to beat anyone up for their own sexual choices, or police anyone's sexuality, or tell them because I, as a lesbian, am not attracted to someone, that they have no right to be.

It's because they are so fragile that they melt in the rain.

everyone understands that attraction and sexuality operates at the individual level

And just to be specific, because again there it is:

What you and I both know you mean by that is:

You may, as a female homosexual, in theory, reject anyone you are not attracted to. But you MAY NOT state a group exclusion from your body and sexuality, such as biological males. Which means you may not have a sexual orientation, based on sex, or group and meet according to that female only grouping, because exclusionary and distressing to male people who wish to be part of it.

And, let's face it, are not happy to stop at being part of it, I have read the articles by Transwomen themselves, explaining how difficult it is when lesbian women (the female kind) are very nice and friendly but then will not provide sex, because that is the basic goal. Hence the whole cotton ceiling problem. Which is about how male people break through the knickers of resisting female people who do not want to have sex with them, and are thereby seen as a problem.

I think you are misrepresenting the situation as a whole.... and, of course, there are individuals in groups that on occasion say things that are not in alignment with the prevailing attitudes of those groups.

.....Nancy Kelley, head of Stonewall, said things not in alignment with LGBT+ attitudes?

I don't know of anyone in the community myself who does not have the full, basic understanding, that each individual is entitled to their own sexual preferences and choices.

Really? Please, where is this homosexual friendly paradise?! Because I've been chased out of all my local ones for being a homosexual not prepared to do straight sex with male people.

And these are incredibly individual and personal of course. I'm a lesbian and I'm not attracted to and don't want to sleep with 95% of other lesbians out there - this doesn't make me homophobic.

Yes. Absolutely.

And I don't need to march in a parade with a banner saying "I am lesbian but I'm not attracted to 95% of other lesbians out there" because everyone understands that attraction and sexuality operates at the individual level, not at the group level. I can also appreciate that some people might find it a bit weird if I did march carrying that sign.

..... and there it is.

You mean male people don't you. You mean homosexual women wanting it clearly understood that by homosexual they mean sex and they will not be accepting or welcoming overtures from any biological males regardless of the male person's identity choices and self definition is 'a bit weird'.

Just own it. Face it and own it, or admit where it has totally lost its way, because you're showing you know the bits that are unacceptable and that you're uncomfortable with them.

😂

This queer ecology nonsense isn't new: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_ecology

I absolutely agree with this, and your other post above. This idea that the “Far Right” (which seems to be defined as “Anything even slightly right of centre”) being not only a terrifying bogeyman but an existential threat, however nebulous, is truly bizarre.

Not only does it create a situation where any step into the wrong part of the Venn diagram marks you out as a Nazi (because obviously there is no middle ground; it’s Nice People and Nazis, nowt else) and the backlash that entails, but it speaks to a complete lack of understanding of nuance or that things are rarely black or white which is itself an indicator of lack of ability to think critically. I’m always reminded of a friend who divides the world in to “Narcs” and “Non-Narcs”, ie people who are bad and people who are safe. She’s suffered terrible abuse but can’t seem to find a way to deal with it, so the narc/non-narc divide is how she tries to feel safe. However, anyone who so much as associates with a “Narc” or expresses a “wrong view” is also labelled a “Narc” and therefore someone she has to keep away from.

And obviously that’s before we get to how unbelievably fucking offensive it is to compare actual Nazism, as in the historical events, to “Hearing an opinion I don’t like” or being told you can’t compete in a cycling event as a woman.

If anyone is attempting to divide and conquer, it’s those who peddle the “Everything bad is Far Right and IT’S COMING TO GET YOU” nonsense.

Well, of course it is true, we have evidence of these machinations amongst far right organisations.

I think you are misrepresenting the situation as a whole, and, of course, individuals twist sound-bites and take them out of context, and attempt to portray them as if they reflect the feelings and attitudes of entire groups. And, of course, there are individuals in groups that on occasion say things that are not in alignment with the prevailing attitudes of those groups.

This creates an easy stigma which appeals to people and is used as a stick to beat the entire group with.

I don't know of anyone in the community myself who does not have the full, basic understanding, that each individual is entitled to their own sexual preferences and choices. And these are incredibly individual and personal of course. I'm a lesbian and I'm not attracted to and don't want to sleep with 95% of other lesbians out there - this doesn't make me homophobic. And I don't need to march in a parade with a banner saying "I am lesbian but I'm not attracted to 95% of other lesbians out there" because everyone understands that attraction and sexuality operates at the individual level, not at the group level. I can also appreciate that some people might find it a bit weird if I did march carrying that sign.

The ‘far right’ plays the same sort of role in TRA rhetoric as monsters do in many folk and fairy tales.

.

I'm still shaking my head at Stonewall being Far Right.

Who knew?

Stop trying to reject any other perspective by (spurious) association.

The US Christian right also believe that water is wet. Many of them also like cake.

Just because other people also think water is wet and cake tastes nice, it does mean they’re ‘in thrall to the far right’ or whatever.

But this is plain not true, isn't it?

Unless Nancy Kelley and Stonewall and Veronica Ivy (formerly Rachel McKinnon) and well known footballer Riley Dennis are all far right, they have all publicly explained via media that homosexuality is genital fetishism and transphobia, and that a good homosexual will learn to cope with sex with someone not of their orientation rather than invalidate someone's gender identity.

And there are plenty of threads on this board where activists have explained to homosexual MNetters that they are not welcome in the community or at Pride because they will not place a male person's chosen identity above their sexual orientation and will not surrender having a sex based orientation.

I'm pretty sure those activists were not far right either. Nor the members of Pride who expel lesbians and gay men for stating their wish to be accepted as homosexuals and to be able to be out and proud as homosexuals alongside the other members of the LGBT+ with their various orientations.

It's a helpful narrative to disown these unhelpful bits of reality, rather like disowning the bits of reality about sex and impact on women in public spaces etc, but it just isn't true. That Emperor is in the all together.

It also makes it a bit grim that the rejected, bullied, conversion therapised (learn to cope with penis, overcome your genital prejudices) homosexual members of the LGBT+ (many of whom now won't go to Pride because they're not welcomed by the TQ+) are suddenly all accepted and loved and used when they are helpful to push narratives such as 'LGBTAQ+ people are some of the most at risk' in third world countries. And this would be because the TQAI Furry NB population in those places are minescule because people living in those places do not have the time and resources to indulge in luxury beliefs and performance art. That just leaves gay people who suddenly are useful to the T again.

This movement really does just break everyone else down for parts to suit it.

I suggest you get yourself along to some pride marches this year to witness in person the high levels of support that the LGB have for the T and vice versa.

If that's not possible maybe read some of the studies and surveys attesting to this.

You are repeating the false mantras and parroting the ideas that far right orgs have developed to split the community.

Their are traceable origins to these machinations that the LGBT community are very well aware of;

Eg. https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/23/christian-right-tips-fight-transgender-rights-separate-t-lgb

https://newrepublic.com/article/165403/groups-pushing-anti-trans-laws-want-divide-lgbtq-movement

But well done for letting them do a number on you.

It’s a threat. If you don’t give in to our demands by this deadline, we might take action.

they should clearly be treated as a terrorist group.