LBQ+ women and girls included by UK Government in Violence against women strategy

It was indeed useful but its use has been very much degraded by the trans lobby. I'd suggest in the situations that your referring to that gender pay gap not only works for family responsibilities but is accurate too as it would affect a stay at home father the same way.. But the glass ceiling barrier would be more accurately described as sex-based.

Of course we have to use one then to cover it all but the discussion is interesting, to me at least.

it’s not just that jobs are gendered, there’s also the impact of career breaks for maternity leave, and sexism still creating ‘glass ceilings’. The factors combine to make a differential between the sexes but we can’t call it the ‘sex pay gap’ - it’s that linguistic issue that the word gender in its old (and tbh in the real world still normal) meaning as a euphemism for biological sex was useful and I think still can be.

The gender pay gap is different. It refers not to equal pay between men and women but to equal pay between the type of job normally done by women and the type of job normally done by men. It is the jobs that are gendered, the perks who do them are men and women. The fact that there are male care workers and female bricklayers did not remove the gender pay gap in those jobs.

One assumes they meant androgynous - afaik being asexual is completely unrelated to clothing.

Asexual clothing choices? What?

Well, not quite - you need an appropriate word to make a compact phrase. Same thing with ‘gender pay gap’ - unless anyone can think of a better way to express the differential remuneration of men and women due to sex discrimination (partially solved) and structural sexism (effects due to childbearing etc which are harder to deal with). ‘Gender’ was always absolutely appropriate before people started pretending it didn’t mean cultural norms, stereotypes and physical realities etc etc that were causally linked to sex.

Excellent. Misogyny affects all women, just manifests in different ways.

LGBTQIA+ women experience misogyny differently to cishet women. Asexual women are threatened with corrective rape, subjected to medical misogyny and attacked for their clothing choices, for example. Bi women are stereotyped as hypersexual and liable to cheat. Gay and trans women have their sexual preferences policed and are frequently labelled men in order to justify attacking them.

It's a tiny step in the right direction. Anything that fights misogyny is progress.

I sort of agree but we wouldn't need to use gender if only people would accept that the words women and girls meant born female by biology.

So in Spain a man has been included on the list of women killed by Men. Outrageous.

I'm not a fan of Q+ but it definitely depends on who exactly is covered by this strategy and what they intend to use it for. I have also never seen this LBQ+ acronym before, so, of course, one to watch.

What I am encouraged by is the fact that we have noticed (thanks, OP). There is nothing they can do anymore without women noticing. We watch and we see and we are suspicious, and that's a good thing. We will be ready, and anyone who doesn't realize this is in for a big wake-up call!

I have always been skeptical, even cynical, but I was never a suspicious person until men started demanding that women give up all our rights, and our governments started colluding with them to make that happen.

Suspicion is good. Gordon Gekko eat your heart out!

(and good morning, all you lovely, suspicious wims!)

There are lots of groups who are disproportionately subjected to violence. Focussing attention on any one specific group could be framed as ‘off’ if positioned as ‘focussing on violence against X, despite the high levels of violence also Y are subjected to’. This, however, is whataboutery.

Arguably, different campaigns/ strategies are needed to tackle VAWG and violence against transwomen. If/where a transwomen passes and is stealth, the violence is happening because they are thought to be female - so their trans status is irrelevant.

We are left with 2 options: 1) the inclusion is virtue signalling. They are approaching the policy/strategy focusing on male violence against women and girls 2) they are not focusing on male violence against WAGs but male violence against 2 groups WAGs and transwomen. In this case, gay men and homeless men seem to be unfairly left out.

Yes, if by 'trans' the government mean trans identified females. But it looks lie they want to sneak in trans identified men under the guise of calling them transwomen. They are weasels, the lot of them.

I think it's noteworthy they're using LBQ+ without a T in there.

They mention trans when referring to the report they're responding to (because no doubt that report will have been all about the T) but they appear to carefully separate out 'lesbian, bisexual and queer women and girls [COMMA] and trans and gender-diverse people'

Then everything else they say is about women and girls.

I'd be interested to see the report - I bet it doesn't use LBQ+ without a T. There's a lot to criticise in there with queer this and gender that but I don't think we'd have seen this small shift in language before FWS.

Or that the Government is just made up of shysters.

Just that. As are most other conceivable administrations after a GE. Which doesn't offer a lot of choice.

Sure, but I think those who seeks to pervert the English language, quite deliberately, by inserting 'gender' rather than 'sex' know exactly what they are doing.

Absolute prats. No surprise, though.

I see what you're saying, and its a good point, but I still object to gender. Maybe biological sex based violence would cover it without it just meaning sexual crimes.

It shouldn't include men just because they have decided their gender is female.

tbh I think this may be one of the times where it’s not unreasonable to use ‘gender’ (which really is still often simply meant as a euphemism for sex) because ‘sex based violence’ may be taken to specifically mean sexual violence.

It's a shibboleth really, isn't it? As soon as you see, 'sex' replaced with 'gender'.

I'd also rather they used sex based than gender based, but I know I'm asking for the moon on a stick there.

The UK is steadfast in its commitment to ending gender-based violence against women and girls in all their diversity

Sorry but that bit made me not want to bother reading the whole piece. 'Diversity' is such a magic word, isn't it?