The Guardian... Blind Date 23 November

[Backinthecloset123]

I post this aware that I might get a warning.

However!

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/nov/23/blind-date-jen-anna-glasses-fog-up

The woman, a lesbian, Anna (and the Guardian readership) did not reveal that Jen is a trans woman.

The whole thing is gaslighting.
And I may be deleted for that sentence.
There is a good thread on Twitter which I'll link.

Ok they had a good time, but worth remembering as a pp said they would never have set up a hetero male with a TW or put two lesbian TW together. So actually doesn’t that make the Guardian transphobic?

Ahahahah ha. I hope they have their chequebook ready...

www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/sky-pays-contestants-transsexual-tv-show-500k/199379

the Guardian have done here to enforce that female homosexuals should be inclusive of biological males,

That’s nonsense. One possibly lesbian woman went on a date with a trans woman. The Guardian hasn’t enforced anything. Lesbians can be inclusive if TW if they wish. Or not if they don’t.

Lesbians can be inclusive if TW if they wish.

How would one go about analysing that sentence - but without risking a strike? I wonder.

Interesting Fekko

Though that was before the GRA and the EA. .

Lesbians can be inclusive if TW if they wish

A woman who actively wants a sexual relationship with a male person is not a lesbian. Bi maybe, but not lesbian.

They may perceive that person as a woman.

The Equality Act is very clear on this, a person who is same sex attracted is a gay man or lesbian, people who are attracted to both sexes are bisexual.

Consent is only consent if it is informed. A person who tries to have sex by stealth is risking prosecution.

"Lesbians can be inclusive if TW if they wish."

How would one go about analysing that sentence - but without risking a strike? I wonder.

Vegetarians can be inclusive of meat in their diet, if they wish. They wouldn't actually be vegetarians - but never mind. Who cares about language and meaning?

Some vegetarians may also choose to say that they include meat in their diet while having no intention of doing so if they feel that it may get a particularly persistent "but why not at least try some?" nuisance off their backs.

I'm betting that the next step is that Anna will be put under pressure to actively prove she is not GC. Guess how.

I'm betting that the next step is that Anna will be put under pressure to actively prove she is not GC. Guess how

If "GC" means "gender critical" and agreeing with the prevailing orthodoxy on here it was patently obvious from the article that Anna isn't "gender critical".

You can tell from this reply by Anna.

What did you talk about?
Her sister’s upcoming wedding, shitposting, the queer community, shared houses, worst drinking stories,board games, tattoos, Pride.

Really can't you (general you) take a break from telling Anna what she should think and do? She has made it clear on Twitter what her position is.

Ok they had a good time, but worth remembering as a pp said they would never have set up a hetero male with a TW or put two lesbian TW together. So actually doesn’t that make the Guardian transphobic?

I don't know that I think that's true. If they were in the business of that sort of decision I think they might.

But from what other posters have said, they really don't give much oversight to the dates. They get a form filled out and the information they have is just what each person chooses to give. And the dates all know this, it's the same procedure for all of them. Anyone could withhold any information they wanted to, or even lie.

Really can't you (general you) take a break from telling Anna what she should think and do? She has made it clear on Twitter what her position is.

Tarkus, I did nothing of the sort. I did not tell her what to think or do. I said that she will now be put under pressure by transactivists, and judged.

Because:

Anna received, here and on Twitter and FB, overwhelming support from GC women and outrage at the Guardian for putting her in this situation. Anna remained neutral in the interview and afterwards but finally, according to the Guardian, (paraphrased), she says she does not want our support, she is OK with everything.

So OK, we take a step back. Our support and outrage was misplaced.

Yet the possibility remains that she will now be encouraged to actually, of her own free will, date a TW in order to underscore the fact that she is woke, believes that TWAW, and thoroughly repudiates our support and outrage.

Isn't that the final, solid, validating proof that TWAW?

But anyway, I'd prefer in future not to refer specifically to her.

It's really about the general issue, of a lesbian being put in this position at all, and how she is to deal with it.
People were right to call out the Guardian.

A lesbian would never be sexually interested in a male. However feminine, TW or not.

The Guardian should not send lesbians on dates with adult human males. Is the bottom line.

I've skim read the thread - is there anything to conclusively say that Anna wasn't told about Jen being trans?

If she wasn't told then I agree that's bad.

I disagree with the assertion that a lesbian can't be attracted to a trans woman and that if she is she can't be a lesbian. I'm straight, if I dated a trans man I'd still be straight..

*Ahahahah ha. I hope they have their chequebook ready...

www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/sky-pays-contestants-transsexual-tv-show-500k/199379*

See that would never happen now, that was 15 years ago.

Today the TW contestant would sue for transphobia (and we're getting closer to them winning if they did).

A woman who actively wants a sexual relationship with a male person is not a lesbian

Words which require the exclusion of men as a defining characteristic are being rewritten as oxymorons. This is newspeak language.

I'm straight, if I dated a trans man I'd still be straight.

It depends what you mean by "dating". If it includes sex (See, I'm of an older generation: this is not a given for me. I often dated without sex.), and you enjoyed that sex, and continued to be attracted to transmen, then you would not be straight, you'd be bisexual.

Tarkus, I did nothing of the sort. I did not tell her what to think or do. I said that she will now be put under pressure by transactivists, and judged

Did you actually read my post? You (general you) are so determined that Anna is a victim here. Anna did not strike me as neutral in her replies. I'm not in the least bit surprised she is now telling the "gender critical" brigade to get lost.

She seemed very happy in her replies. She also mentioned they chatted about "the queer community" and Pride. Does that sound like the sort of subjects which "gender critical" women would have a nice over dinner chat about? Certainly doesn't to me.

Your (general your) "support and outrage" was indeed misplaced and unwanted (which you, general you, could have worked out from her replies) so you are now turning to another tack for your unwanted sympathy- that she will be under pressure because of it.

Words which require the exclusion of men as a defining characteristic are being rewritten as oxymorons. This is newspeak language.

ANd when words lose their meanings so that their defining characteristics become vague and open to subjective interpretation, communication disintegrates. There can be no more dialogue. No more rational communication. Society falls apart.
Yes, it's that serious, taken to its logical conclusion.
We cannot arbitrarily change the definition of a word to suit our politics.

The young woman never specified her sexuality. Someone simply assumed she was a lesbian (not bi, cis, pan, q*eer) and everyone ran with that. She has since said she was happy with the match and disagrees with GCF - so let’s respect that.

The age old discussion about words and meanings can always continue on a new thread, completely separate to the individuals involved here.

I’m vegan. I can be inclusive of meat if I want.

I wouldn’t be vegan then, though.

FFS

Jeez, people are STILL talking about the ‘pressure’ Anna is under and the ‘blink twice’ comment is so stupid. She has made her feelings plain. You need to stop it, seriously. Stick up for children and anyone who has actually complained. But victimising grown adults for no reason other than that they are female (Anna has NEVER said she is a lesbian and exclusively attracted to females). She very clearly doesn’t want or need help and this is not the scandal it’s being made out to be.