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

OMG!!! The filthy Arabellaphobic bastards! It's worse than literal violence!

Yes, Your Gorgeous Majesty. I will comply.

Yet trans people can’t choose their name and pronouns? Whenever a trans woman is described as “a male pretending to be a female” this is violating this right.

So by this reasoning Isla Bryson's victim should refer to Isla Bryson as 'she'. Isla Bryson being a rapist.

Trans people can choose their names and pronouns all they want. Whether I want to go along with this - calling a clear as day man 'she' is up to me. That's MY right.

Oh my god, I've never read that article before. Thank you so much for posting it - it's so important. I really feel for her.

About bloody time.

More seriously, you seem to be suggesting that it's ok to commit a homophobic hate crime against a group of homosexuals and bisexuals because the conference organisers, the LGBA, didn't tally up the sexual orientation of its supporters correctly a few years ago.

//

Thank you, I've been trying to word my thoughts along these lines and you've articulated it perfectly.

It's an attack. Trans and sexuality are separate issues, and attacks such as this only go to prove what women knew all along about men acting like wolves in sheeps' clothing, stamping their feet to get their own way.

"Trans people are also very likely to experience discrimination and in many cases assault as a result of being trans."

And this would be already protected under 'beliefs'. So, yes, this should be addressed. I don't agree that people should be discriminated agains based on their belief if there is no other negative impact on another group's rights.

But there is that conflict, recognised by even the Prime Minister, and the EHRC.

Perhaps refer to the EA2010. Excluding male people from female single sex spaces is considered 'legitimate discrimination.' Female people have a basic human right to safety as well as privacy and dignity. This allows the exclusion of male people legitimately using exceptions in the EA.

This is just one of the conflicts that you seem to be dismissing with a statement as I have quoted here.

"In my work I research women’s health (a historically under-researched area) and advocate for equal opportunities for women within the profession."

And yet, you don't seem to differentiate between legitimate discrimination with your post and illegitimate discrimination.

So a question, do you believe that an organisation that has achieved a 50 | 50 ratio of men to women in the workplace has achieved 'equality' if any % of those women is a male person?

This group does not define itself as LGBT. They are LGB.

They have observed that the charity/pressure group previously existing to serve their interests has now shifted focus. They take the stance that not only have their own interests taken a back seat, but that the two sets of rights sometimes come directly into conflict. If references to the 'cotton ceiling' don't immediately strike you as coercive, misogynistic, homophobic and deeply problematic, then either you're being wilfully obtuse or you buy into that same coercive rhetoric yourself. I'm not asking which of the two that is.

Given the above, the LGBA broke away and formed a new group - one group out of many LGBT 'approved' organisations, thereby excluding themselves from Stonewall and Pride - which does put their interests at the forefront. (This, incidentally, does not incorporate the nasty, pejorative label of 'hate group'. These views are perfectly legally held, are a legitimate position as to what might happen when rights come into conflict, and the group is terrorising no one).

They have an absolute right to do the above. And they define themselves as LGB. You can identify as whatever 'identity' you like until the cows come home, but you don't get to redefine others against their stated wishes.

The word you're looking for is 'coercive'. Ring any bells, @Curlyboot?

"Whenever a trans woman is described as “a male pretending to be a female” this is violating this right."

Perhaps you are not up to date.

Here is a man pretending to be a woman.

https://x.com/salltweets/status/1846701660011483319 

Do tell us how we are to know which male people are not to be believed in your opinion?

And can you tell us how any male person can be a female person as it is not objectively and materially possible? They can be 'transgender' but they cannot be a female person.

It seems we need a reminder on every x pages:

No male can ever experience life as a woman. They can only ever experience life as a male person who believes they are a woman.

Even when they 'act' like a woman, they are acting as they believe a 'woman' should act. Which is fucking misogynistic!

Even if they are treated 'as a woman' by some people, they are being treated as a 'male who presents as a woman and believes they are a woman'. Because their every reaction is based on that. Not on them being female in any way.

Even when they have extreme body modifications, it is to be their own concept of what a female looks like to them. It is not what a female is. How can it be?
The only way a person can experience life as a woman, is to have a female body, formed around the production of large gametes, even if it doesn't produce those and to navigate their life based on the decisions they and society makes that revolve around them having that body.

A male can conceptualise what it might be like to be a female, but that is all it ever is - their concept of being female.

They may do it because they don't feel they fit into how they conceptualise how a male person interacts with the world (ie. their own stereotypes around being male) or they do it because they want to be seen as a female (using their own stereotypes of how a female navigates life). It really doesn't matter though. Their motivation is irrelevant to the outcome. And I consider the outcome can only be described as misogyny.

Which is that they will always be just a male who believes they are something they are objectively not.

How can the material reality be any different? This is why someone's gender is only based on someone's philosophical belief. And philosophical beliefs are fine for people to hold, but not one person in the UK has to comply with another's philosophical belief.

The logic cannot be any different than that I am afraid.

Oh Arabella! You remember the transgender manifesto that demanded that any person who had a transgender identity should have whatever treatments they want provided by the state.

Wasn't there the part where they should be able to do surgeries on each other too!

But yes. More seriously, what other group of people get access to surgeries and irreversible hormonal treatments for what once was considered a mental health conditions but is now not even a mental health condition?

I have never yet seen a coherent answer as to why the NHS should paying for treatments that take a physically healthy body to create a life long medical patient with a high likelihood of lowered life expectancy and bodily limitations.

And yet, we see the emotional pleas that to deny this group is denying their 'right'.

Another additional privilege that they have convinced society that they should get that is not available to anyone else in society.

Sorry this question is for @Raspberryripple11 :

"So a question, do you believe that an organisation that has achieved a 50 | 50 ratio of men to women in the workplace has achieved 'equality' if any % of those women is a male person?"

https://www.tumblr.com/edinburghath/163521055802/trans-health-manifesto

'We demand hormones & blockers are made available over-the-counter and by free prescription upon request.* *We need free, universal access to safe hormones & blockers at any age, the opportunity to decide our own doses, and universally accessible information on the safety & efficacy of different regimens. We are already taking hormones in this way, so this demand is simply that the danger of doing so is effectively mitigated.
We demand that all therapies that can be are made available at drop-ins, with self-referral for any therapy or procedure for which drop-in is unsuitable.
We demand anonymous blood tests, both postal & at drop-in endocrinology clinics, where we can seek the advice of a consultant if we wish.
We demand the freedom to alter our bodies without justification. We demand an end to all surgical prerequisites - nobody should have to prove life experience,health or have to be taking hormones in order to exercise bodily autonomy. We demand that these surgeries can be highly customised to meet our individual & unique needs. We demand the right to multiple surgeries, including reversal of previous surgeries if desired, so that we do not have to fear regret. We demand the free & timely provision of genital surgeries, additive & reductive chest surgeries, hysterectomies and orchiectomies, tracheal & vocal surgeries, facial surgeries, lipoplasty, contouring & microdermabrasion, surgical hair removal & transplantation, and any other possible procedure to meet our needs as we express them.
We demand resources for hair removal anywhere on our bodies, and the option of local anesthetic during these procedures. We demand voice coaching that does not coerce us to alter our voices in ways we do not express a need for, but respects our accents and our right to express ourselves however we desire.'

That one?

I forgot this bit:

'We demand medical training to enable us to safely carry out medical procedures & research for each other, for anyone of us who wants to learn.'

Which I suppose is linked to these trans activists:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trans-history-underground-sugical-clinic-b2114777.html

Yes.

How about this one raspberry and piggle? Should we be giving this group what they want, if so, can you tell us which other group of people in the UK get this preferential treatment for what is not a medical condition according to academic transgender spokespeople?

It is, however, misogynistic to believe that a woman is something anyone can identify as, and homophobic to believe that a male person can be a lesbian if they want.

Of course they do and as I said I don't condone the attack at all. What I said was that the attack was not Homophobic because they were not targeted for being gay, lesbian or bi but for being trans exclusionary.

And again, I'm not saying that they deserve to be attacked for excluding trans or even that they should have to include trans people if they don't want to. However that is what they were attacked for.

It is not misogynistic or homophobic to respect a trans person’s gender and sexuality identity.

It is simply treating another human being with the dignity , value and understanding that all human persons deserve.

Gender is nothing but sexual stereotyping, so yes, it is misogynistic to define 'woman' as the stereotype of a woman.
As has been said repeatedly on these boards, we are actual people, not things to cosplay as.

Even the one’s who are different to how you expected them to be .

Being trans has nothing to do with stereotypes;
being trans does not make a person a misogynist.
Some people are trans; it’s just who they are.
Trans people are not inherently wrong or bad.

It is not misogynistic or homophobic to respect a trans person’s gender and sexuality identity.

You do you, but it is misogynistic/homophobic to demand that everyone else does too.

You're not asking us to respect it. You're asking us to obey it. That is misogynistic, yes.
Especially when actual respect is not given to women. Same old patriarchy with a shiny new bow.