Responses to Nancy Kelly really staring to show the cracks in support of gender ideology tactis.

Stonewall is in a dreadful state, the LGB Alliance increasingly seen as being representative of gay men and lesbian women; an out-and-out, in-depth anti-trans opposition has formed and no amount of squealing 'Nazi!' or 'bigot!' is touching it.

Gay men and women want an organisation that represents gay men and women! And calling them Nazis isn't even stopping them!

Poor Nancy Kelley. No matter what you do (up to and including throwing gay men and lesbians under the bus whilst head of an ostensibly gay rights charity) you can never, never be enough of an ally.

I'm not sure people of liberal political leanings would agree that liberal now means 'totalitarian' or 'hates women and wants to subordinate them in law' and 'remove child safeguarding and any other boundaries that get in the way of the sexual freedoms of men with Issues'.

Its rather like many of those who are of actual left political beliefs and values looking at the parties who identify as being politically left and going....wtaf?

Instead of saying 'attitudes are getting more liberal across the board except on this issue' I think we have to at least entertain the idea that they are also getting more liberal here, but the framing is back to front.

I agree.

The problem for The Right Side of History is that they have a Bundle Of Good Beliefs which Good People Must Fully Subscribe To.

If you don't embrace the whole bundle, you are a Fallen Bad-Wrong-Side-of-History Person, and furthermore you must by definition be guilty of Fully Subscribing to the Bundle Of Bad Beliefs. (See scoldings about far right wing /religious fundamentalist funded /Trump-supporting /closet-Tory /reading wrong media/ etc).

as more sunlight pours in (and will continue to do) most people being told they are bigots for knowing that you cannot change sex will just say "oh, do fuck off" . And there is fuck all the koolaid gang can do about that. What a shame.

Instead of saying 'attitudes are getting more liberal across the board except on this issue' I think we have to at least entertain the idea that they are also getting more liberal here, but the framing is back to front.

Are people realizing that the TRA position is illiberal? That it curtails women's rights? Involves compelled speech and thought? Is based in some very regressive ideas about women and femininity? Has an incel-like focus on blaming feminists for male unhappiness?

If an increasingly liberal population increasingly doesn't like it, maybe that isn't the population suddenly failing to understand one issue.

their direction and timing suggest that they have been largely triggered by the intense political debate and media discussion on both sides of the border regarding the easing of the circumstances in which someone can be diagnosed as transgender

I think it's more likely to suggest that they have been largely triggered just by the easing of the circumstances in which someone can be diagnosed as transgender.

It's not the reporting. It's the expectation that however obvious the bloke, we should pretend we can't tell.

But is that the case when people are reporting themselves as prejudiced?

I think if JKR, with her mainstream views, is a bigot, most people are bigots and we are therefore almost all prejudiced. Maybe the messages about rightthink have got through.

Or maybe it’s just people’s awareness that so many of the high profile media stories about trans people are about rapists and having sex criminal as a first association is prejudiced.

But if Stonewall and others hadn’t pushed for males to be in women’s prisons, this wouldn’t have been a media issue or an association at all. Ditto changing rooms, rape crisis services etc.

I’m sad to say that my first thought, at least re tws, would be suspicion: why do you want access to women’s spaces? Before all the TRA stuff, my thoughts would have been largely sympathetic.

Clearly NK’s work has not helped
the cause of T people in the slightest.

It's always going to be the problem of one person's 'you're getting more prejudiced' is another person's 'I now have more insight and am less willing to unconditionally support because of increasing evidence of harm to women/children/equalities/ and behaviours that frankly no one should be unconditionally supporting'.

It is less an increase in prejudice than a decrease in naivety.

Pulling together threads where this research was previously mentioned.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4639169-british-social-attitudes-survey-finds-drop-in-support-for-changing-sex-on-birth-certificate

Where @PriOn1 highlights this quote:
’Sir John Curtice, senior research fellow at the National Centre for Social Research, which published the report, told The Times: “This is the one instance where, for the moment, attitudes have not moved in a more liberal direction.”’
Hm. Like losing almost half the previous support over a couple of years (master of under statement). But if you think about it it underlines that the people answering are not bigots, but on this one issue they are changing their mind and even willing to answer affirmatively questions that ask about prejudice.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4901907-telegraph-growing-prejudice-against-transpeople

Not much discussion of the report. Just on the reporting. But that report is readable and (for all the imperfections of any research) gives us the best idea of social attitudes of the public that we have.

Quoting myself to say I hold similar if not identical prejudice about people with anorexia, a group very similar in many ways to transmen and younger transwomen.

@lechiffre55 Noticed that you had not read the article.

The article is IMO not as interesting as the selective use of the research it references. I would have thought that Stonewall would have wanted to jump up and down about the numbers now switching opinion on pro-trans law changes. (Or perhaps there is very good reason not to draw attention to what the public actually want when researched properly during run up to an election year?)

Hoping there were interesting questions in the 2023 survey and that there will be reporting before the election this year (and coverage of this).

'Prejudiced' seems to be being used by some people here to mean 'inclined to be against' rather than 'having a pre-formed opinion on'. It is perfectly possible to be prejudiced in favour of a group of people. Many TRAs appear to be prejudiced in favour of trans people.

All the poll results show is that two-thirds of people don't have an opinion on trans people one way or another.

The question asked re prejudice is gives this definition of transgender:

"People who are transgender have gone through all or part of
a process (including thoughts or actions) to change the sex
they were described as at birth to the gender they identify
with, or intended to. This might include by changing their name,
wearing different clothes, taking hormones or having gender
reassignment surgery"

I think that this is an interesting definition. It reminds those answering that this might include changing name or wearing different clothes OR having gender reassignment surgery. Would people who object to pronouns and name changes call themselves prejudiced? 'Including thoughts or actions' was also interesting. Not asking only about 'Hayleigh Cropper' and I would assume prejudice recording would have been lower had they not used such an encompassing definition. (Which is actually quite a good and accurate one IMO). Wonder whether this question is in for 2023?

Could you explain Who the replies come from, I don't recognise them

I thought that those were VERY interesting. Thank you for preserving them. As I am new to this whole area (only been following for last few months) I am trying to make the point in looking at the wider table that Nancy Kelley did not address that more shocking statistic at all. But perhaps this was all talked about ad nauseum before I started getting hooked on this board. I would be interested in her results (from a randomised survey at scale) about how people had switched from 'getting there' (nearly 60%) agreeing that sex on birth certificate should be changeable, to 30% and falling. The comments pick up on the squandering of goodwill by Stonewall tactics. These are not working.

I can’t really see who they come from as the link in your OP is to Twitter and I can no longer directly see the responses. I know you recreated three of them, but the only thing I can see is that some are from lesbians who don’t support transactivism, which is no surprise to me. I suspect many older lesbians have had their eyes wide open for quite a long time.

Can you say a bit more about what it is specifically you find interesting and why? Maybe then, you will get more thoughts on that aspect.

In the same research exercise (which can draw on figures back to the 1980s) they have stats about attitudes to gay rights too. The answers (from the same set of respondents) do not reflect the anti-trans feeling. There is a high acceptance of same sex relationships (67% said these were not wrong at all, down 5% since 2021 up same as 2020). (Note that not all questions are asked every year so there are some gaps in the trans stats but this one has stats annually since).

For so long we have been told that pretty much EVERYTHING is transphobic.

It's ridiculous- even thoughts & dogs are transphobic. Calling someone their name or the "wrong pronoun" is transphobic act of hate.

The numbers in the survey is a direct response to the ridiculous & relentless claims, attacks & demands of TRAs. I can only imagine the next survey will "sadden" Nancy further.

Trans rights = more rights than everyone else & anyone who disagrees is a TERF/ transphobic bigot & must be attacked & silenced.

Surprisingly this tactic is starting to fall apart. Early TRA gains were incredible- following the Denton's advice worked really well & mostly by stealth they made huge gains. The way so many govt institutions, the police, NHS, schools, were all so easily captured by this ludicrous ideology was frightening & shocking and it's a massive lesson/wake up call for the entire "western world".

When we all realised what was going on, or paid attention to those shouting 🔥🔥🔥 unheard for years, questions were asked, we demanded debate. The silencing & intimidation tactics worked for a while. But you can't gaslight & intimidate the entire population into the false & unsubstantiated beliefs of a cult for too long.

Women organised, women & men fought back. We asked questions!!! (Questions of course are transphobic. Like debate - transphobic).

We now all know the emperor has no clothes. We are all the child pointing & laughing now.

TRA tactics are likely to get desperate now as their ship is sinking. The house of TWAW, built by Nancy & Co are clearly seen as the fraudulent lies & manipulation they are.

Imagine if they had just gone down the TWAM route & campaigned for acceptance within their own sex, & not tried to make everyone believe a load of rubbish that is the gender bollocks?

The responsibility for this "rise in transphobia" lies directly with Stonewall, Nancy,Pink News, Mermaids & all the other TRAs thinking they can silence & intimidate the world into submission to their ludicrous demands.

THANK YOU @lechiffre55 Following the link to the https://natcen.ac.uk/publications/bsa-40-liberalisation-attitudes and from that to the PDF of the report rewards you with this. https://natcen.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-09/BSA%2040%20Moral%20issues.pdf and you get to see that in all other stats (e.g, attitudes to gay people, abortion etc.) we appear to remain more liberal over time (some wobbles but not huge). But Table 4 re attitudes to trans shows markedly less liberal and also strange number drop off to answer the second question shown in Table 4. This shows a remarkable 44% downward swing re. anti trans rights in this second table (from 2019 to 2022) compared to 22% in the prejudice question over the same time.

This second part of the table was not referred to in Nancy Kelley's article. Perhaps because the stats were already down in 2021 (to 32% and continuing to drop in 2022 to 30%). Its one of the headlines in the summary at the start of the report that. Just 30% think someone should be able to have the sex on their birth certificate altered if they want, down from 53% in 2019 (Difficult to miss, shocking statistic from credible research). If you look at the table there is also (unless a typo?) a curiously huge decline in people answering this second question. From 3112 to 2202 (i.e. from 2021 figure, so only the year before). No such reluctance to answer the prejudice question (3389 answered that - similar to previous years). If this is not a typo then why are 1/3 less people answering this question? (I can only think - not an expert in this field - that there would be reluctance from those who do not want to venture an opinion or are embarrassed by their opinion).

Worth noting that in 2020 the survey went online and in this report its posited that this may have made it more likely that people would answer more honestly re questions such as that about prejudice. So this may not be a new thing, just under-reported when interviewing face to face.

As an aside I love the way this report refers to the consultation on attitudes to trans rights (a comment by people who do proper randomised research for a living):
The results of the public consultation, published in September
2020, seemingly suggesting wide support for all aspects of
reform, including 64% in favour of removing the requirement for
a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and 80% in favour of removing
the requirement for a medical report (UK Government, 2020) –
although it should be noted that these results may not necessarily
accurately reflect the balance of public opinion.

Am I prejudiced? Yes, at this stage I judge people who have adopted a trans identity to be self-absorbed, mentally unwell, and possibly at risk. I judge transwomen to be at best deeply disrespectful of women, and transmen to be disrespectful of their own younger selves.

trans is misogyny

This. I imagine if you asked in the deep south of America during the Jim Crow era you wouldn't get 40% of people saying they were prejudiced.

If this data is accurate then it simply shows the result of a decade of telling people disagreement = bigotry and doesn't really measure actual prejudice.