Kicked out of club for wearing LGB Alliance Tshirt

[Imnobody4]

twitter.com/satiricole/status/1218744161874186242?s=19
This is just so wrong. How can this happen in the 21st century. No oppressed group ever had such power. Just have to dig some more.

I am thankful for some sense being spoken by Joanna Cherry. The twitter feed was awful - full of misogynistic nonsense.

The term ‘gay’ is now more generally used.

Except those of us, like me, who have returned to using the word homosexual to define ourselves to make it very clear it is sex based attraction, and that no, I will not be framing my sexual choices as a woman around some perceived duty of providing 'inclusivity' with my body for people born male. Because this is insane. And homophobic. To put it mildly.

the trans narrative requiring books to be removed from libraries, hounding people out of jobs, threatening venues holding meeting, censoring academics, issuing death threats etc might undermine your argument?

That might be what is happening, but is it required to happen, and more importantly, is your average person even aware it’s happening?

The LGB Alliance’s issue is that the easy story is:

‘What’s the LGB Alliance?’
‘They’re that organisation that are pissed off at Stonewall for trying to get trans rights’
‘What’s wrong with trans people?’
‘Dunno, but look, they’ve deliberately left the T off LGB’
‘Oh, wow, that’s fucked up.’

If refuting that story means going into technical detail about how you define homosexual, then you’ve lost.

Except the 'easy story' is not the one being reported.

The incident has led to angry exchanges between the LGB Alliance supporters and trans activists. The LGB Alliance was branded “trans-exclusionary” and a hate group for promoting the views that “biological sex is real” and “sex is binary, not a spectrum”.

The actual story is.

Joanna Cherry, QC, the SNP MP for Edinburgh South West, said "...Basically saying you can’t be a lesbian unless you’re my kind of lesbian, from a man, is unacceptable.”

I've heard so many people wonder out loud "what is the T doing in LGBT? Its not a sexuality, it's something different"

It's not something the general public have missed.

If refuting that story means going into technical detail about how you define homosexual, then you’ve lost.

It depends on the line you take, but saying 'lesbians can't have a penises' is the same argument but in a simply understood way that cuts across. From there you can make the argument.

If refuting that story means going into technical detail about how you define homosexual, then you’ve lost.

I think most people would think Stonewall/TRAs/angry men have "lost" when you explain they each insist homosexuality is wrong and bigoted, and lesbians should just do penis.

What is Stonewall’s definition of ‘heterosexual’? Attracted to opposite genders? But if someone is attracted to someone of the same sex but opposite gender then would they say they are not homosexual? And presumably as genders are not binary they do they mean attracted to a different gender? In which case given the diversity of genders then nearly every woke person must actually be heterosexual? Then what is bisexual and how does it differ from pansexual?

FWIW of all the arguments that I've used with friends about this debate, one of the ones that has cut through most is the 'lady dick' and 'lesbians with penises' points.

The penny starts to drop fairly quickly...

The average person on the street doesn’t give a shit about bisexual versus pansexual. It’s basically counting angels on pinheads. Twattery that other people (mainly students) seem to really care about that doesn’t really matter.

Have Stonewall released anything saying that lesbians should ‘just do penis’?

In general, people don’t care until it adversely affects them.

the trans narrative requiring books to be removed from libraries, hounding people out of jobs, threatening venues holding meeting, censoring academics, issuing death threats etc might undermine your argument?

That might be what is happening.... more importantly, is your average person even aware it’s happening?

Noblegiraffe

I just want to clarify. You accept that analysis of the trans lobby. You seem neither surprised, nor concerned by Aesop's description of appalling behaviour. The only relevant point to you is whether the wider public actually knows about these bullying, oppressive tactics. Is that an accurate summary of your position?

Bovary The MN feminism section seems to view trans people as either bully boys throwing their weight around, banning books, cancelling platforms, getting people sacked or taken to court.

Except when they view them as emotionally fragile, possibly abused, possibly autistic young people, usually female who have been sold the lie that medical procedures will solve all their problems.

Or the ‘old school transsexual’ who quietly gets on with things and hopes no one will notice.

The average person is more likely to have come into contact with the second two than the first, I would have thought.

So if you’re talking about trans people and how they’re so powerful that you have to break away from the organisation that supports them and deliberately create one that drops them from the usual name for the community, you should really expect the general reaction to be ‘WTF’.

Going on about how this t-shirt is innocently supporting LGB people just reminds me of when kids at school poke another kid in the back repeatedly out of sight and then when the kid snaps, go all wide eyed and innocent. It’s worth remembering that to most people, the kid you are poking isn’t some bloke wanting a wank in the women’s toilets, it’s their niece, or colleague or friend.

Going on about how this t-shirt is innocently supporting LGB people just reminds me of when kids at school poke another kid in the back

You haven't answered my question. You accepted Aesop's description of appalling tactics without demur. If it wasn't accurate, why didn't you challengeYou want to prevent people wearing LBG shirts by claiming the slogan is hateful? That's a demonstration of intolerance and control.

Noble many of those who are woke also are desperate to be nice and to project a certain image to the world.

When told they support homophobes it either horrified them or it is taken as a personal attack on them.

It can go either way tbh.

The thing is there is more than one group involved and there are some who are vulnerable and need protection and some who are actively abusing the situation for their own ends at the expense of more vulnerable groups.

The fact is that so people question things and instead are more concerned about branding and pr is precisely the reason we are in this mess.

It doesn't mean that awareness and activism by someone like the lbg alliance can not change that though.

Fashion only lasts for so long after all.

IMO the rainbow issue will start to fall a little out of fashion in favour of a green identity and I think that will start to change the dynamics slightly of activism too.

But why did the organisation that was set up to fight for the rights of same-sex attracted people ever start to support people who identify as transgender anyway, noblegiraffe?

I don’t see the connection.

We don’t expect the British Heart Foundation to fundraise for research into diabetes, do we?

You want to prevent people wearing LBG shirts by claiming the slogan is hateful?

No, I’m saying that it should be entirely expected for your average person to see that t-shirt and think it’s unacceptable, and also for it to piss off trans people (even ones who don’t want to wank in the ladies).

Yes I expect it would cause offence - but more bandwagon jumping offence. I found Emma Watson’s T-shirt a rather pathetic attempt to look right on and stroke certain groups. Rather naive and offensive (in the whole debate arena). I don’t think she was thrown out of anywhere...

What happens when the celebs move on to the next cause? Which they will (and are)...

I can hardly wait to see what that is.

It doesn't mean that awareness and activism by someone like the lbg alliance can not change that though.

Indeed. I’m not sure that they should have made their entry into the debate by full page ads criticising the GRA in technical detail though. Angel/pinhead.

LGB Alliance - fighting for the right to be same-sex attracted AGAIN? I dunno.

Noble. Drip drip drip is how Stonewall got its original purpose and aims achieved.

You don't change minds overnight.

The MN feminism section seems to view trans people as either bully boys [or] emotionally fragile, possibly abused, possibly autistic young people, usually female [...] Or the ‘old school transsexual

Here's a friendly explanation of who we view through what lens:

1. The MN feminism section consists of hundreds of contributors spanning the range of all viewpoints on transsexualism and transgender ideology and legislation.

1. For the most part it's not trans people per se who are seen as "bully boys" but trans rights activists, who may or may not be trans. In particular we are concerned with the extreme ideology currently dominating the discourse and its proponents.

1. You've also left out the group of crossdressers from which arise the late-onset, non-homosexual transsexuals (aka autogynephiliac). This group is frequently discussed in relation to boundary violations, which is one of our main concerns.

1. And because transsexualism comes in two distinct and mutually exclusive types, it is hardly surprising that we are indeed discussing these two groups of transsexuals as separate issues.

1. With the rapidly growing group of children who first identify as trans in post-adolescence, which is majority female and often underage, autistic and LGB, and the group of transvestites, which is majority male, heterosexual and usually middle-aged, we have four distinct groups of people who identify as trans forming a focus for our debates.

1. All have different needs, and different behaviours affecting the rest of us and consequently different issues concern us in relation to them and how they affect other protected groups.

HTH

No, I’m saying that it should be entirely expected for your average person to see that t-shirt and think it’s unacceptable,

Why on earth would the average person think it's unacceptable?

Addendum to 4.

Early-onset homosexual transsexuals, who you probably mean by "old school transsexuals" are the second type of transsexuals.

Kind of sounds like ‘well she was wearing a miniskirt our at night...’