Page 17 | LGB Alliance to plan helpline with Lottery funding

pombear · 2022-06-10T19:29:56+00:00

Fantastic news. I would link to their Twitter announcement, but in usual state of play, Twitter has marked it ' may not be appropriate for people under 18'. A helpline planned for 13 to 25 year olds, planned by a panel of experts in child protection, education, helpline delivery, fundraising and psychology. Yep - shut them down (much better to have helplines planned by IT workers who took their child to Thailand...) As LGB Alliance state there is no dedicated national service of its kind for young LGB people in the UK. I'm sure the Lottery Fund will be getting a lot of feedback right now, given the outpouring of hyperbole against LGB Alliance right now on Twitter. So they may appreciate feedback from those who may see this as a positive move too: ""We really value your feedback. If you have a comment or complaint about the services that we provide, or if there's something important you think we should know, we'd love to hear it. Please email us at customer.services@tnlcommunityfund.org.uk"

Starlee · 17/06/2022 03:14

VestofAbsurdity · 13/06/2022 12:54

It's repellent to say to children that their body is wrong I don't know how those who advocate this such a starlee can look themselves in the face. Can you imagine the uproar if that comment was used about disability? It's as revolting as that comment by Glen Hoddle that asserted that those born with disabilities or life damaging illnesses were being punished for misdemeanours in a previous life.

Show quote history

Stop lying. I have never advocated that anyone should tell children that their body is wrong. But many trans people DO use the term "being born in the wrong body" to try and describe how they feel.
And as a disabled people I can tell you that of course we know our bodies are wrong, it's what being 'disabled' actually means: "a person who has a physical or mental impairment". Shock horror! 🙄

Starlee · 17/06/2022 03:30

ANewCreation · 13/06/2022 13:48

My oldest used to say that they were a transgirl but, for the last year or so, has said that they now see themself as non binary.

They also say that they are gay.

I wonder if any of our new friends would be able to confirm whether that means my oldest's sexual orientation is towards male people or female people?

Surely the best way to confirm a person's sexual orientation would be to ask the person themselves, not a stranger?

Starlee · 17/06/2022 03:59

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 15/06/2022 07:58

Of course trans women and trans men can be homosexual,

I will spell it out in a simple and unmistakable manner because the deliberate obfuscation is annoying to read.

That was in response to the question “Do you think a trans woman can be a lesbian?”

This response from Starlee has confirmed the following points:

-When they refer to homosexual trans people they mean heterosexuals.
-When they refer to LGB trans people they mean heterosexuals and bisexuals.

If they were to discuss “straight” trans people they’d be talking about homosexuals, but it seems like homosexual people aren’t at the top of their priority list.

I have confirmed no such thing, and don't tell me what I mean, you are wrong.

EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn · 17/06/2022 04:40

What absolute rubbish! No-one is telling them they "cannot be L and G, homosexuality is like racism" etc or that they "must 'learn to cope' with straight sex".

The comment about lesbians being like sexual racists was from Nancy Kelley, the CEO of Stonewall. Also, at Allison Bailey’s recent tribunal, a Garden Court Chambers barrister repeatedly drew parallels between the cotton ceiling (lesbians not being attracted to biological males) and apartheid in South Africa. I’m linking to Sonia Sodha’s excellent article for easy reference but there are plenty of other citations.

amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/29/if-lesbian-prefers-same-sex-dates-thats-not-bigotry-desire-personal-thing

Learning to cope with straight sex came from cyclist Veronica Ivy, formerly Rachel McKinnon.

Helleofabore · 17/06/2022 04:58

EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn

How interesting that Nancy Kelly is considered ‘no one’. And that the parallel drawn in Allison Bailey’s court case with apartheid is overlooked.

I mean, I consider McKinnon is probably more important in their own head than reality but USA media, and some UK media consider McKinnon/Ivy as being some kind of spokes person on trans issues. It will be crushing, just crushing that they are also considered as ‘no-one’.

But yes… apparently no one is telling the L and the G those things …

Helleofabore · 17/06/2022 06:12

Kids in the past didn't have access to info like they do today, they assumed they were gay because that's all they'd heard about. And then finally they realise, often after many years, sometimes decades, that they are actually trans and everything becomes clear. THAT is what you will be told over and over again if you actually listen to trans people talk of their own experiences, they're not my words.

So, were they males sexually attracted to males or females attracted to females?

You acknowledge that they could have benefited from support to identify if they were L, G or B so they could have worked out their needs earlier.

Yet you are attempting to deny young people today greater access to services that can assist them?

Because of your own deeply held prejudice, that you provide reasons why, but seem to be unable to provide evidence to substantiate those reasons.

You are fully entitled to hold whatever opinion you want, of course. Just as I am.

As for the rest of your post, you don't agree with my replies, well that's your problem, not mine.

No. I pointed out that your answers were hyperbolic, seem to be based on emotional reasoning, misinformation about the organisation and were effectively non-answers.

And you are on a thread arguing against the provision of extra support services for young people based on those opinions which in turn, you seem to have formed based on misrepresentation and misinformation.

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 17/06/2022 07:38

Starlee · 17/06/2022 03:59

I have confirmed no such thing, and don't tell me what I mean, you are wrong.

Show quote history

Yes, you have. You have confirmed that you think a “trans lesbian” i.e. a male attracted to women, i.e. opposite sex attracted, is homosexual. From that, the other points in my comment follow.

You’ve also made it clear in other posts that you don’t even understand what is meant by the letters LGB in “LGB Alliance.” It’s fucking pathetic.

DeaconBoo · 17/06/2022 08:13

starlee i asked "You believe that heterosexual (ie a person of one sex attracted solely to people of the opposite sex) people can be gay, don't you?"

You said, about a "biologically male transwoman attracted to women" that they would be a lesbian.

It looked like you were answering my question as "yes" with that answer. Are you now changing it?

DeaconBoo · 17/06/2022 08:19

Also @Starlee you didn't answer my question about wrong bodies.

So you acknowledge that to believe that, you have to have a belief in a soul and some greater being that has 'intended' bodies for those souls to go in?

More importantly, what do you mean by 'match'? Can you be specific - which kinds of souls/minds/psyches 'match' which kinds of bodies?

If you don't know, could you please at least have the courtesy to say so instead of ignoring me? You quoted an older question of mine and repeated an answer to that question that you'd already given, so perhaps you hadn't spotted my following question.

You're telling us to chat to trans people to find out - yet you're here, you're trying to explain lots of things about gender but it's pointless if you can't clarify what you mean when you are asked.

Artichokeleaves · 17/06/2022 09:43

EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn · 17/06/2022 04:40

What absolute rubbish! No-one is telling them they "cannot be L and G, homosexuality is like racism" etc or that they "must 'learn to cope' with straight sex".

The comment about lesbians being like sexual racists was from Nancy Kelley, the CEO of Stonewall. Also, at Allison Bailey’s recent tribunal, a Garden Court Chambers barrister repeatedly drew parallels between the cotton ceiling (lesbians not being attracted to biological males) and apartheid in South Africa. I’m linking to Sonia Sodha’s excellent article for easy reference but there are plenty of other citations.

amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/29/if-lesbian-prefers-same-sex-dates-thats-not-bigotry-desire-personal-thing

Learning to cope with straight sex came from cyclist Veronica Ivy, formerly Rachel McKinnon.

This ^^

Kind of is the evidence of the stalemate, isn't it?

Because in objective reality this happened. There's the evidence. The interviews on radio (Women's Hour I think for both, radio 4) and the written interviews published in the mainstream newspapers. It's objective, it's verifiable, anyone can go and listen or look for themselves and hear the exact same evidence anyone else can.

But in some people's personal realities this did not happen, does not exist, and you must not say that it does.

You cannot have a reasonable discussion with someone who lacks the capacity to be reasonable and is operating mostly out of a reality that exists in their own head, with no shared meaning, who sees objective evidence as threatening and hostile, and perceives anyone mentioning it as ill treating them.

You can be sorry for them, but you can't really have any kind of meaningful conversation that is going to get anywhere.

The important point is that policy, law and which gorups are permitted funding cannot be affected or involve instruction from those operating in this personal reality way. It's ridiculous it's wandered into being through a lot of well intentioned and rather soggily sentimental niceness and keenness to show what a nice, progressive person one is without basic common sense, sense of responsibility and boundaries.

Helleofabore · 17/06/2022 09:49

Artichokeleaves · 17/06/2022 09:43

This ^^

Kind of is the evidence of the stalemate, isn't it?

Because in objective reality this happened. There's the evidence. The interviews on radio (Women's Hour I think for both, radio 4) and the written interviews published in the mainstream newspapers. It's objective, it's verifiable, anyone can go and listen or look for themselves and hear the exact same evidence anyone else can.

But in some people's personal realities this did not happen, does not exist, and you must not say that it does.

You cannot have a reasonable discussion with someone who lacks the capacity to be reasonable and is operating mostly out of a reality that exists in their own head, with no shared meaning, who sees objective evidence as threatening and hostile, and perceives anyone mentioning it as ill treating them.

You can be sorry for them, but you can't really have any kind of meaningful conversation that is going to get anywhere.

The important point is that policy, law and which gorups are permitted funding cannot be affected or involve instruction from those operating in this personal reality way. It's ridiculous it's wandered into being through a lot of well intentioned and rather soggily sentimental niceness and keenness to show what a nice, progressive person one is without basic common sense, sense of responsibility and boundaries.

Show quote history

Yes! Exactly.

Helleofabore · 17/06/2022 09:54

Because in objective reality this happened. There's the evidence. The interviews on radio (Women's Hour I think for both, radio 4) and the written interviews published in the mainstream newspapers. It's objective, it's verifiable, anyone can go and listen or look for themselves and hear the exact same evidence anyone else can.

Still rather gobsmacked to be told Nancy Kelly, and McKinnon, are ‘no one’ and the transcript of the employment tribunal must therefore amount to nothing.

It must be nice to exist in that plane where you can pick and choose what is real and documented and what is not.

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 10:36

Helleofabore · 16/06/2022 18:15

I mentioned three achievements from the past two decades - which you've now rejected as immaterial because they are "historic". Well they are not that historic because most LGBT people remember a time before marriage equality. Thank you Stonewall for everything you've done for us!

Coming back to this.

I have not dismissed these events as immaterial. Please show me where I did, and if I need to correct my statement I will.

I said, and you even posted it in your answer:

You wrote, "you can discount the things they have not achieved recently for LGB people as one of the largest charities / educators about LGB people for decades".

I said specifically 'recently'. Maybe you missed that even though you posted it. My sentence may not have been clear, and I will take that criticism as it is very true. Just to put it back into context.

I said "So, you can discount the things they have not achieved recently for LGB people as one of the largest charities / educators about LGB people for decades, because of their work in 'Afghanistan'?"

Let me rephrase it.

So, you can ignore that Stonewall has delivered significant LGB targeted successes, despite them being one of the largest charities / educators about LGB people for decades, because of their work in 'Afghanistan'? ie. you can accuse LGB Alliance of not achieving anything in comparison to ???. What has Stonewall achieved in the UK since LGB Alliance's creation just for LGB people (despite having the amazing goodwill and power that they have earned for decades).

Is that clearer?

I have been also very clear in stating that these events may well have been supported by the founders of the very organisation you seek to portray as 'hateful' and of being of no relevance.

Please post successes that Stonewall have achieved just for LGB people since LGB Alliance has been created .... such as have they denounced those abusing and threatening lesbians for rejecting male partners for example. Have they done this one simple thing?

Afghan evacuation and marriage equality in NI all happened in the past two years. We can all (those of us who are not homophobes at least) be grateful to the role Stonewall played in these things.

LGB Alliance achievements in the past two years?

Calling for gay clubs to be shut down and 9k in scoping money for a hotline that will never happen.

Not comparable.

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 10:38

Helleofabore · 16/06/2022 17:58

Secondly, they have very few volunteers and most of them are motivated more about having a go at trans people than actually helping gay people.

Again, please provide evidence for this?

Where are you getting this information from that has been verified as to its accuracy?

And please provide evidence that 'most of them are motivated more about having a go at trans people'. Because we are on page 15, and there has been nothing, nothing as yet to show this. Just a whole lot of hyperbole and supposition.

Thirdly, young people are very trans inclusive, so the phones will not exactly be ringing off the hook.

Perhaps you might be surprised to also realise that young people are also some of the least tolerant people in the UK. You can look up the Dr Frank Luntz study published by yougov in July 2021, and the follow up study in December 2021.

I also think that this was a finding in the moreincommon data just released.

www.moreincommon.org.uk/media/p5uln04a/britons-and-gender-identity-data-tables.pdf

P. 22 is the question: How would you feel if your child, sibling, or close family member came out as gay/bisexual/lesbian?

The age group 18-24 reported that 5% would be angry and 6% would be disgusted.

25-34 was 3% & 4%
35-44 was 4% & 4%
45-54 was 2% & 2%
55-64 was 3% & 4%
65+ was 1% & 2%

And by the way, on page 24 that same group reported they would feel 'disgusted' at 7% which again was higher than the other age groups for the question How would you feel if your child, sibling, or close family member came out as transgender?. They also reported higher on 'unbelieving' and 'angry'.

thank you by the way for Starlee* for mentioning that study upthread.

There are several threads on MN looking at the data now. Maybe Starlee would like to check those out. Considering the analytic qualifications of many MN'ers, this is a good place to see what that data says.

So... again, hearache please provide evidence that young people will not be calling LGB Alliance because they are 'very trans inclusive' when it seems very clear that these young people are facing some very negative reactions from 'other young people'.

"Published on Thursday, the report reveals widespread acceptance that a trans woman is a woman and a trans man is a man, with 46% agreeing, 32% disagreeing, and 22% who don’t know, with agreement highest among younger generations."

www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jun/16/britons-not-bitterly-polarised-over-trans-equality-research-finds

Great to see the young are the most pro-trans of any generation! And this is the generation the LGB Alliance thinks will be calling them up to discuss how trans people are like "vegan cats"? I think this unlikely.

dolorsit · 17/06/2022 10:40

Correction- LGBA called for all licensed sex premises to be closed for a limited time period.

When was LGBA formed?

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 10:40

Helleofabore · 16/06/2022 18:17

yes. I believe they were instrumental in that.

Show quote history

Yes because the current Government has made trans hostility a policy - e.g. not banning conversion therapy for trans people.

Why should Stonewall attend something a conference organised by someone who does not share their aims?

Should a pro-choice org go to a conference hosted by a Government seeking to restrict access to abortion?

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 10:42

Helleofabore · 16/06/2022 18:15

I mentioned three achievements from the past two decades - which you've now rejected as immaterial because they are "historic". Well they are not that historic because most LGBT people remember a time before marriage equality. Thank you Stonewall for everything you've done for us!

Coming back to this.

I have not dismissed these events as immaterial. Please show me where I did, and if I need to correct my statement I will.

I said, and you even posted it in your answer:

You wrote, "you can discount the things they have not achieved recently for LGB people as one of the largest charities / educators about LGB people for decades".

I said specifically 'recently'. Maybe you missed that even though you posted it. My sentence may not have been clear, and I will take that criticism as it is very true. Just to put it back into context.

I said "So, you can discount the things they have not achieved recently for LGB people as one of the largest charities / educators about LGB people for decades, because of their work in 'Afghanistan'?"

Let me rephrase it.

So, you can ignore that Stonewall has delivered significant LGB targeted successes, despite them being one of the largest charities / educators about LGB people for decades, because of their work in 'Afghanistan'? ie. you can accuse LGB Alliance of not achieving anything in comparison to ???. What has Stonewall achieved in the UK since LGB Alliance's creation just for LGB people (despite having the amazing goodwill and power that they have earned for decades).

Is that clearer?

I have been also very clear in stating that these events may well have been supported by the founders of the very organisation you seek to portray as 'hateful' and of being of no relevance.

Please post successes that Stonewall have achieved just for LGB people since LGB Alliance has been created .... such as have they denounced those abusing and threatening lesbians for rejecting male partners for example. Have they done this one simple thing?

The Afghan evacuation was last summer - that is since the creation of the LGB Alliance.

You may not think rescuing LGBT people from the Taliban is much of an achievement but I do and am very grateful for Stonewall for the part it played.

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 10:51

dolorsit · 17/06/2022 10:40

Correction- LGBA called for all licensed sex premises to be closed for a limited time period.

When was LGBA formed?

Formed in 2019 and since then the only thing they've done it complain a lot about trans people - who they believe are like "vegan cats" - and call for gay clubs to be closed.

Forgive me if I think this is not a group worthy of respect or public funds.

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 17/06/2022 10:53

[I] am very grateful for Stonewall for the part it played [in the evacuation of LGBT people from Afghanistan]

yes, isn’t it great to have multiple organisations with a plurality of aims and focus?

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 17/06/2022 10:55

Forgive me if I think this is not a group worthy of respect or public funds.

but that’s ok because you’re not in charge of dispensing all public funds, and some of the people who are have chosen to give some to LGBA to deliver a service which I and they think is necessary

Conflictedunicorn · 17/06/2022 10:58

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 10:40

Yes because the current Government has made trans hostility a policy - e.g. not banning conversion therapy for trans people.

Why should Stonewall attend something a conference organised by someone who does not share their aims?

Should a pro-choice org go to a conference hosted by a Government seeking to restrict access to abortion?

Show quote history

And there you have it. Are stonewall’s aims now not to support LGB people? Are you saying that stonewall supporting LGB people would be like a pro choice org going to a pro life conference? So you admit trans rights and LGB rights are in conflict? That’s good to hear the truth coming out.

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 11:01

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 17/06/2022 10:55

Forgive me if I think this is not a group worthy of respect or public funds.

but that’s ok because you’re not in charge of dispensing all public funds, and some of the people who are have chosen to give some to LGBA to deliver a service which I and they think is necessary

I do wonder whether the public funding will be pulled back. Their arts funding was stopped once the Arts Council did some research into who they are.

"The London Community Foundation (LCF) announced its decision to support the LGB Alliance was under investigation, and the grant suspended, after it [became] “aware that the charitable status of the organisation is being questioned”."

www.artsprofessional.co.uk/news/lgb-alliance-grant-suspended-after-outcry

I suspect the lottery funding will go the same way.

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 11:02

Conflictedunicorn · 17/06/2022 10:58

And there you have it. Are stonewall’s aims now not to support LGB people? Are you saying that stonewall supporting LGB people would be like a pro choice org going to a pro life conference? So you admit trans rights and LGB rights are in conflict? That’s good to hear the truth coming out.

Show quote history

Stonewall supports all LGBT people. So if the Government suddenly became pro-trans people but anti-gay it still would not attend. Because all the letters matter 😀

Hearach15 · 17/06/2022 11:04

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg · 17/06/2022 10:53

[I] am very grateful for Stonewall for the part it played [in the evacuation of LGBT people from Afghanistan]

yes, isn’t it great to have multiple organisations with a plurality of aims and focus?

Yes, so important that we have an org out there than think trans people are like "vegan cats", wants to shut gay clubs and doesn't think people against gay marriage are homophobes.

The LGBT community has been crying out for a group like this for generations.

Helleofabore · 17/06/2022 11:05

What has Stonewall achieved in the UK since LGB Alliance's creation just for LGB people (despite having the amazing goodwill and power that they have earned for decades).

Incidentally, strange that you are so keen to detach the work that may have even been done by the founders of LGB Alliance from the result (after many years of campaigning) that was finally achieved. I actually cannot work that one out. Do you believe that it was only actions from those in Stonewall over the past 3 years that brought about that final result??

And, of course, nothing at all to do with any action from any of those in the LGB Alliance.

But as amazing as it was that people were rescued from Afghanistan, we are of course, focused on the UK. And the continued mention of it is a bit of a squirrel distraction.

So, you have again mentioned a success that the founders of LGB Alliance was most likely involved in.

Anything else? Just for LGB people in the UK?