Guardian article on stonewall.

[Dadalus]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/20/stonewall-trans-rights-gender-wars-tory-lgbtq

Mostly nonsense - Objection to stonewall is hate whipped up by the Tories, if stonewall falls, who will stop it when gay people's children are taken away from them etc.

Unsurprisingly, comments aren't enabled on this piece.

It's Finn Mackay wittering on again. Really not worth paying attention to. Mackay is very much on the wrong side of history now, and if the Guardian had any sense they would stop commissioning Mackay and start implementing a reverse ferret.

The current gender wars are not a fight against the binary roles that constrict our society, instead this particular manifestation of the culture wars is a battle against trans women in particular. Most of the debate concerns what services trans women should or should not be allowed to access, from public toilets to public services.

The current gender wars are not a fight against the binary roles that constrict our society, instead this particular manifestation of the culture wars is a battle against trans women in particular. Most of the debate concerns what services trans women should or should not be allowed to access, from WOMEN'S toilets to WOMEN'S services.I

There, Finn, I've corrected it for you.

If Stonewall falls is rather telling, perhaps not the message they wanted to get across. Must be some serious impacts from the self inflicted harms

Isn't Finn MacKay irrelevant these days
Hanging on to a career by their finger tips. Isn't being trans all they have?

Graun has been a complete basket case for years, and self righteous twattery is a difficult position to back down from so they will be the last to back track from gender woo woo bollocks

Uh huh. If I could speak to Finn Mackay I would say this:

So thinking it’s worth having a discussion about what it means for (for example) women’s refuges to become trans-inclusive is trying to uphold an idealised gender binary? Really, Finn? Is that really what you meant to imply?

Or that saying there might be good reasons to keep “woman” as a word in HR policies, where it is clearly an issue that will affect women most, such as maternity policy, is the same attitude as saying lesbians should have their children taken into care?

FFS Finn, I really thought you were one of the few trying to address this issue in good faith.

Yeah, I’m really fed up with the teenage hyperbole of all the TRA commentators. Say there might be a clash of rights or that women are vulnerable too, and it’s instant “yOu wAnT tRaNs fOlx tO DIEEEEE!!”

Same with all the stuff about “Fash” and the shouts of “there’s a TRANS HOLOCAUST!!!!” It doesn’t look like an adult argument: it just looks stupid and overdone and like they’re engaging in bad faith — the equivalent of shouting “you’re the WORST MUM EVA!” because you ask if they’ll also join in the dishwasher rota.

If comments are disabled then maybe some letters to the Guardian. I'm sure they won't be published but they may at least notice them if there are enough?

I imagine this is penance for the positive article on radical feminism:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/17/radical-feminism-social-justice

That article was badly written, rambling, full of non-sequiters and in desperate need of an editor.

No-one reads the Guardian anymore do they? Even my father in law who never read anything else has switched to the Telegraph and feels it's more rounded and interesting.

I no longer need a lining for my cat's litter tray so I've stopped buying it.

Good grief, Stonewall have assisted the Conservatives with the greatest, most effective movement against gay rights since Clause 28! If gay people stop supporting Stonewall they only have themselves to blame.

Finn really isn't helping gay people.

So the article says "Yet society still remains deeply sex- and gender-conservative, and, at times of economic and political uncertainty, those stances become more entrenched as people try to find some certainty in a mythic ideal of complementary gender roles."

Who exactly does he think is promoting a 'mythic ideal of complementary gender roles'? Does he really think this is what's behind gender critical views?

Yeah, seems to me that calling yourself a “queermale”, when you’re in fact a biological woman, requires quite some belief in gender roles being mythic and ideal. Otherwise why would there be any such thing as a “queermale” to believe in….?

Quite a few of the FB comments are surprisingly reassuring, given that it's The Guardian, which usually invites a slew of TRA supporters.