To think that releasing crickets at a gay rights conference, specifically to shut them down, should be considered a homophobic hate crime? Somehow these people are crowdfunding to do it AGAIN

[Zahariel]

The optics of having to fumigate a hall after gay people used it to speak about their rights being eroded should not be lost on anyone.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13950839/Trans-activists-release-bags-insects-LGB-Alliance-conference.html

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/suspected-trans-rights-activists-disrupt-lgba-conference-with-live-crickets/ar-AA1s9JHH

This is CLERLY A HATE CRIME - yet it's being reported as trans rights activists, not anti gay hate mongers, I can't really understand why not

Ah perfect. Thank you. You posted this while I was writing.
I would like every single observer on this thread to read PiggleToes post above and see exactly what is being called transphobic.
This is exactly why the LGBA is so necessary. Gay rights are not transphobic.
However, calling gay rights transphobic is fundamentally homophobic on the most basic human rights level. Disgraceful.

I’ve repeatedly shown it and explained it, you just continue to insist that black is white.

I am losing this argument on mumsnet - The gender critical perspective is very popular and influential here, (and currently very influential in terms of public policy ) despite its widespread rejection in academic and scientific circles . In the wider world, however, ultimately this harmful ideology (“gender critical feminism”) will fall, as do all ideologies that fail to account for the reality of actual human lives and experience. Trans people are here to stay, no matter how much you fear and hate them, they are part of human diversity in the real world, and sooner or later you will just have to accept that.

They are excluding trans people and I think it is pretty clear that is why they were attacked.

To be precise I believe they exclude the belief that trans identity alone is not the basis of the definition of homosexuality, rather than excluding trans people.

I have a friend and colleague who is lesbian, has been her whole life. She is now in a relationship (married) to a trans man. They define it as a sex based lesbian relationship. They do not expect homosexuality to be defined in terms of gender, they do not yell ‘transphobe’ at anyone who is sexually attracted to sex not gender. I don’t think they would be excluded from the LGB Alliance on the basis of one of them being trans.

The Cotton Ceiling debacle endures. Coercion is a real issue for women. The current social shame of being labelled ‘transphobe’ (flung about with vicious, not gay abandon) is coercion.

And you find this transphobic?

Because it states that they believe that homosexual and bisexual sexual orientations should remain defined by the sex category of a person rather than their gender identity?

Yet you cannot see that they find this redefinition to be homophobic? Why do you get to redefine the sexual orientation definitions of others?

You have not done it repeatedly to me.

Also you have failed to say WHY or HOW the quote is transphobic, under YOUR definition of transphobia

Under my definition of transphobia - there is nothing wrong with the quoted statement.

It is categorically true that Trans Rights organisations including Stonewall have tried very very hard to erase the definition of LGB as Same Sex Attracted - and they have done it specifically to force LGB people and organisations to include trans people as a different sex. Specifically so that a gay man for example CAN be called transphobic if he does not feel attracted to a trans identified woman.

That - is homophobic - nothing here is transphbic. Nothing.

Well said. Forbidding lesbians and gays from discussing the idea that same sex attraction no longer exists is the epitome of homophobia.
Our laws are very clear - sexual orientation is a legal protected characteristic and the arrogance and intolerance of piggle demanding the roll back of hard fought for rights for lesbians and gay men is quite breathtaking - and bloody dangerous.

I don’t “find it transphobic” it is transphobic,

This statement presents recognition of trans experience as a harmful ideology / belief that is threatening the rights of gay people.

You only think this is acceptable because you agree with it.

Under my definition of transphobia - there is nothing wrong with the quoted statement

Quite.

I can’t believe I am wasting my day playing the gender critical “nothing is transphobic” game. 🙈.

Time to move on.

It’s a really stupid thing to do. It’s cruel to the insects. I don’t support it. But it’s not homophobic and it’s not a hate crime. LGBT alliance are an anti-trans hate group.

This:

I am losing this argument on mumsnet - The gender critical perspective is very popular and influential here, (and currently very influential in terms of public policy ) despite its widespread rejection in academic and scientific circles . In the wider world, however, ultimately this harmful ideology (“gender critical feminism”) will fall, as do all ideologies that fail to account for the reality of actual human lives and experience. Trans people are here to stay, no matter how much you fear and hate them, they are part of human diversity in the real world, and sooner or later you will just have to accept that.

Thank you x

@PiggleToes I read the statement by the ‘Krickids’.

It criticises the LGBA for opposing child medical transition, but acknowledges that transition as an adult (not opposed by LGBA) is a comforting prospect that allowed them to be ok as a child.

It criticises the opposition to ‘conversion therapy’… conversion therapy contouring up visions of coercive processes like something from the Excorcist or Clockwork Orange. Opposition was based in not wanting to go straight to gender affirming medicalisation in children… Cass Report et el… Again it comes down to definition: is a ‘support and wait’ policy for children akin to ‘conversion therapy’?

I’ve read their statement. There’s nothing transphobic about it. Just because you try and redefine red as blue to suit an agenda doesn’t mean it’s true.

Reality does usually win over fantasy yes. No one cares if trans people are here, as long as those people don’t try and insist others believe in their fantasy too, and insist gay people include them in their dating pool. Like religion. Believe what you want but you don’t get me to compel too, if I don’t want to.

Men should be staying out of women’s spaces and sports too. If that’s adhered to then all will be fine.

You are losing the argument here and indeed the big world - because you present no rational arguments or evidence to back up your views

Trans identified people are indeed here to stay, but the number of them will plummet as holistic, whole person mental health support is brought online, alongside questioning counselling support - as the affirmation and medical model has been entirely discredited in both scientific and academic circles

This is no attack on trans identified people, it is a statement of fact that the vast majority trans identified person has one or more of serious trauma, mental health issues, awful parenting, rape, abuse, autism, ADHD, OCD and they are ALL crying out for HELP and the best you can say is "yeah those evil LGB people trying to defend their rights, filthy transphobes"

Gender critical feminism harms NOBODY - but it does protect vulnerable children, who should never be told they are in the wrong body and need full holistic whole person help - it does seek to protect Women and Girls from invasion of their private safe spaces by Men

Please point at the anti-trans hate? One example will do...
(I feel like a stuck record...)

You filled the other thread on this subject up with homophobic nonsense too.

Being gay is not transphobic. How many times do you have to be told?

What you're doing is causing immense harm to the very people you are attempting to support.

Are you going to provide any examples,
or just plop down this without any explanation too, like this and the other thread?

I’ve asked previously, why should females be expected to include biological males in their romantic dating pool?

Trans people are expected (like the rest of us) to be part of society, to uphold the laws and social contract and to respect the rights of others. As your revealing comments display, transactivism is getting so much push back because of the refusal to respect the rights of others.

I know you won't see that - it's the cornerstone of the #nodebate approach to life. A fragile totalitarian approach that brooks no dissent, tramples all over the rights of others and is completely tone deaf about the rights and needs of children to mature safely without dangerous psychological and medical interventions.

I can’t believe I am wasting my day playing the TRA “everything is transphobic” game. 🙈.

Show us the transphobia or GTFO

Trans people are here to stay, no matter how much you fear and hate them, they are part of human diversity in the real world, and sooner or later you will just have to accept that,

Trans people have always been here. No one on MN (that I can see) hates and fears trans people for being trans.

Trans people are here to stay, no matter how much you fear and hate them, they are part of human diversity in the real world, and sooner or later you will just have to accept that.

Look.
This hyperbole will get you no where because no one, including GC people "hate" or "fear" trans people.
But transwomen aren't women, and the sex of people matters. Especially in women only spaces.
That it literally it. That's the end of it. No "hate", no "fear". Just that: Women do not have a penis.

We used to all be able to live together in peace and harmony, negotiating our unique and beautiful differences in hand held love and smiles.

Then came along "TWAW/NO DEBATE or else" and we all had to say "what the....?"

How about everyone goes back to the drawing board and agree no one can change sex, women need spaces away from biological males, trans people exist and need their own considerations, and we can all just get along.

The session that the attackers disrupted (which then went ahead in another room) was a conversation with Jamie Reed, a lesbian who is married to someone who identifies as a transman, and she literally works (or worked) in a gender clinic in the US. She whistle-blew when she saw vulnerable adolescents being prescribed hormones and blockers without proper assessments. It was a very odd session for them to try and stop, as there is no way even the most rabid, deluded TRA could paint Jamie Reed as a transphobe, however much they pretzeled their arguments.

Also just to note I've been at all four of the LGBA conferences, and have seen trans-identified people (plus detransitioners) at all of them.

Also just to note I've been at all four of the LGBA conferences, and have seen trans-identified people (plus detransitioners) at all of them.

You are surely mistaken? According to Piggle the LGBA excludes trans-identified people.

However, despite being asked repeatedly over two separate threads, they have not been able to provide a single quote, clip, sentence, photo or word to back up their claims. Oh dear.

No. It is not transphobic. It is your opinion that that statement is reaches the level of transphobia, yet your definition of transphobia is not recognised by the authorities that define and apply the law.

"This statement presents recognition of trans experience as a harmful ideology / belief that is threatening the rights of gay people."

This statement presents the negative impacts of one group's demands on another group of people living in the UK. That you cannot acknowledge those negative impacts seems to be your sticking point.

I think you will find that the Charity Commission for the UK did not find the LGB Alliance to be supporting anything that would have their charity status revoked. So, I don't believe that it is 'only' me that finds the statement about how the group view themselves being negatively impacted as 'acceptable'.

But please do continue with the hyperbole and the emotionally manipulative tactics. The catastrophisation and absolutism is not really working these days, but I guess maybe it has become a habit.

you need to stop with the ‘you’

you seemed to be struggling with what evidence was asked for and I provided the help

extrapolating from that is not a clever thing to do