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.

Thread divert...how did your date go...and how honest were you in your feedback?!

nauticant I think that's a cache from yesterday. It was this morning that the 'story' broke and mid-morning that The Guyliner's article and tweet disappeared.

Reading the responses, Anna came across as reticent and Jen was weirdly over-enthusiastic, with extremely high expectations ('super'-this, 'super'-that), like someone who had not been on any dates before. This would align with the usual script that a trans person is 'starting her/his new life as a woman/man' etc. But there was hardly anything on Anna as a person.

I am actually waiting for Anna to weigh in now and make a public stand: TWAW, nasty bigots & haters invading my privacy, trans women are oppressed, suicide & murder stats ... or maybe not?

That's right ThatsMeInTheSpotlight. It was just to highlight that these days making stuff disappear from the Internet is not so easy.

I'm confused. In the original, Jenn says they dicussed being queer teens. But if Jenn is biologically a man, attracted to biological women, how is that an experience of queer teenage years?

I shared this with a group chat made up of 8 women, all of whom who are lesbians like me. To a one they were horrified at the thought being deemed unreasonable for not fancying a transwoman. We’re all mid thirties, mix of married,with girlfriends and single women. Have directed some of them to this board. I’ve lurked forever but this hit so close to home today. The Guardian have demonstrated with this the utter contempt in which they hold lesbians and how far away they are from reality.

I think the Guardian has been put in a difficult position
I think Anna was the one put in a difficult position.
Yes it would have been a 'tricky' question but sometimes you have a duty of care to do the right thing, however awkward.

Have LGB Alliance commented yet?

I may have to ring PC Gull, I'm profoundly and multiply offended on grounds of homosexuality being a protected characteristic, and get the judge ready because on the links on this thread alone I have a ton of evidence, and the 'hate' from the TRAs is definitely clambering out of the foothills and up the slopes.

I'm so upset by this. How can we be having these simultaneous conversations about boundaries & consent and gender identity and not join the dots when one encroaches upon the other? The Guardian has covered #MeToo extensively, it understands consent. IF staff turned a blind eye because of fear of uncomfortable conversations (if that's the benefit of the doubt being afforded the paper here), then that is deeply depressing and worryingly familiar.

Is it just me, or is the photo contrived to show just how very similar these two gals look?

Would love to hear what Anna really thinks.

I'm confused. In the original, Jenn says they dicussed being queer teens. But if Jenn is biologically a man, attracted to biological women, how is that an experience of queer teenage years?

Queer is nothing to do with homosexuality.

Queer is a term used by those wanting to reject specific labels of romantic orientation, sexual orientation and/or gender identity. It can also be a way of rejecting the perceived norms of the LGBT community (racism, sizeism, ableism etc). Although some LGBT people view the word as a slur, it was reclaimed in the late 80s by the queer community who have embraced it.

Definition from Stonewall.

Can it really be, that the Guardian does no vetting or safeguarding whatsoever?

It is horrific if they just have people fill in a questionnaire and meet a photographer, and possibly, an editor.

They should do background checks and have someone accompany participants on their date.

If they don’t, they are gambling with everyones safety. For all they know, they may be setting anyone up with an axe-murderer.

(Not suggesting trans people are anymore likely to be dodgy than others, but chocked they don’t do any checks of anything at all).

The guardian are facilitators in encouraging people to meet strangers off the internet, who may not be who you thought they were.

The Guardian has covered #MeToo extensively, it understands consent.

For certain parts of the Left, whether consent from a woman is necessary seems to depend on who the man is.

Yy I'm surprised at the lack of safeguarding especially as iirc there was a discussion years ago around the column's approach to it.

Didn't you know that not wanting to sleep with a transwoman is transphobic?
Riley Dennis did a piece on it.

When are they setting up a date between a gay man and a trans man then?

Being a gender non-conforming cis gay man born in a woman’s body I’m tempted to write in myself.

fallingirl I really don't think they would have time to do much checking with one blind date to organise a week and the pressure of deadlines. They have to work pretty fast to keep up. I think in this case they got caught out by Jen not declaring her status as trans, and then perhaps at the shoot people weren't sure/didn't like to ask because it's such a loaded question.

In terms of safety, it's not really much different to meeting people off the internet. They meet in public, after all.

How do you decide which pants to buy?

What nonsense is this? No one has to date any person they don't want to. No one has to give reasons and any reason is valid. "I don't want to" is reason enough. Attraction is a very specific thing. No one should feel forced. They just did not click. Like most of these blind dates!

LGB Alliance tweeted about it here: twitter.com/alliancelgb/status/1199233580037267456?s=21

then perhaps at the shoot people weren't sure/didn't like to ask because it's such a loaded question.
I would have thought that, if you work in the mainstream media, then asking loaded questions would kind of be part of your job.

I wonder why the restaurant really asked them to move on? Taking an hour over their time to eat the meal sounds a bit tenuous, especially when this date was to be publicised.

In the juxtaposed picture of the two of them, they appear to have made the female face larger even though she is 'behind' - the trans woman's wig is in front of her. So that points to a deliberate attempt to feminise the transwoman to avoid contrast.

In terms of safety, it's not really much different to meeting people off the internet. They meet in public, after all
I'm not sure it is the same tbh. If you meet someone off the internet, you know their name and chat to them beforehand. You can research them and decide whether you're happy to meet or not. You can also get a friend to call and give you a reason to escape if it's going badly.

Blind Date doesn't allow opportunity for the research or chats/messaging and it's much harder to walk out on a date that's going to be published in a national newspaper.