LGB Alliance to plan helpline with Lottery funding

[pombear]

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 [email protected]"

It is the tactics of Boris, Trump and Blair.

If you say to them that they are standing on your foot, they look you straight in the eye and tell you "I am not standing. There is no such thing as a foot."

The reliance is that most people will be too baffled or irritated with this stonewalling and nonsense to bother engaging further, and so they get away with it. And continue doing what they are doing.

This week we have seen a major step forward in the almighty harms this is achieving. I hope it will wake up the millions of women who need to get their eyes open and start doing something before they discover it is far too late.

If you say to them that they are standing on your foot, they look you straight in the eye and tell you "I am not standing. There is no such thing as a foot."

YY. That's exactly what it's like!

Of course then you also get a whole lot of blarney about 'foot' being a white colonialist social construction that naice people don't use any more, and that 'on' is a spectrum you couldn't possibly understand. And the word 'privilege' will appear somewhere in amongst it all.

Ooh, look at all the typos sowiwag did! By which I mean square brackets.

Dunning and Kruger are never far from my thoughts these days....

You have a foot? Check your privilege fgs.

My Canute-style contribution: The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
The darling of those who wish to explain why incompetent people don’t know they’re unskilled, the Dunning-Kruger effect may actually just be a data artefact.

www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/critical-thinking/dunning-kruger-effect-probably-not-real

Yes. An artefact of experimental design? Maybe so. That's an ever-present danger in experimental psychology, anyway.

But still, the general artefactual status of a cap need not affect trying it on a particular head. Does this one fit? It looks roughly the right size.

What does that article mean by random data? Two uncorrelated normally distributed random samples where one is labelled “actual skill” and the other is labelled “estimated skill”? Or they made the estimate some function of actual skill? If the latter then how is it random?

sorry I know I could probably look this up myself but I just don’t want to go down the rabbit hole and that article promised to explain it!

experts and novices underestimate and overestimate their skills with the same frequency. “It’s just that experts do that over a narrower range,”

If experts are more precise at predicting their own competence that’s sort of Dunning-Kruger adjacent, isn’t it? In that it explains all the people who bring the words “Dunning-Kruger effect” to mind. Though I guess this interpretation of the data is unsurprising, and that paper would never have gone viral.

I think also in the real world, there’s a cutoff effect. An incompetent person who underestimates their own competence is probably going to avoid the activity they believe they’re even worse at than they are, or at least not draw attention to themselves . So most of us are only noticing the over-optimistic variety of incompetent.

Here is just another reason why LGB Alliance and their dedicated LGB helpline is needed. To counter content such as this produced by content producer Dr Michael Ann DeVito.

www.instagram.com/tv/CeP2jo2KZyr/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Because the community is supposedly so inclusive, loving, happy and tolerant.

I think the original has been deleted by Michael Ann DeVito, but this person's rebuttal captured it (in sections)

twitter.com/EuanRL/status/1428261949498871809?s=20&t=jmCn1WhUq6E-dnns4TB8_w

Apparently NO ONE is telling lesbians they are hateful for rejecting any males. Apparently.....

From that video... a TW, addressing female homosexuals: 'you won't get a pass when we're through'.

Yeah unpack that hon. Are you planning on corrective rape? Because how else do you intend to avoid females saying no to sex with you?

Call me whatever names you feel you need to, you crack right on. I seriously don't care any more. No. It's a world of no. And your attempts to make my refusing you sex a failing in me that you demand I fix is passing from outrageous to just plain funny. And quite sad really.

And frankly, as I repeat so often I'm starting to mutter it in my sleep, it does not matter whether the person you are considering a sexual relationship with is male, female, NB, a furry, a Vulcan or a reincarnated angel.

If they don't think you're entitled to enjoyment of sex, bodily autonomy, consent, have no respect for your wishes, feelings or attraction, want to dictate to you like this, or feel entitled to lecture you, or even in the case of this person lean forward at you with so much patronising that you find yourself subconsciously leaning backward from the computer,

they really are not dating material. Run a mile from anyone who wishes to treat you like that.

Some people in the TQ+ politics movement are going to have to realise that no one is ever going to want to date someone who behaves to other people like that. The deal will be off before even getting round to other forms of compatibility. No one is 'owed' sex, or has an entitlement to it regardless of their lack of reciprocation. The demand to treat a sexual partner like shit, or frankly like an unpaid sex worker, is not going to work that well. It really isn't. And shouting 'transphobia' about it won't help either.

And here is another survey showing that this current generation of young adults are not tolerant at all..... despite that they think they are the most tolerant and we keep getting told that they are by posters who don't seem to have read the research.

This backs up the two yougov surveys last year.

www.hepi.ac.uk/2022/06/23/you-cant-say-that-new-polling-shows-students-want-more-controls-on-free-expression/

We are living in a time where words no longer have meaning. 'Tolerant' has also been changed to make some people feel very good about themselves by describing themselves that way..... but they have been duped into believing shutting down dialogue to keep themselves or others 'safe' is tolerant, that what they are doing is tolerant, when it is in fact the very opposite.

Anyone who voted for that motion was being spiteful and homophobic.

It’s during the TUC’s LGBT+ conference so that’s especially ironic.

Stole this from another thread, (thanks FooFightersFan).

Ivy/McKinnon is not getting the hypocrisy of the fact they are talking about competing in female categories of sport based on their ‘feelings’, but that wasn’t the point.

The point is the second tweet. This academic / elite sportsperson (after transitioning) / activist who is a trans spokesperson tells women to Stop policing feminity and womanness.

As if that is what being female is.

feminity and womanness is what being a female is….

This is the prominent trans spokesperson who tells dissenting women to die in greasefires, and that lesbians can learn to cope with girldicks.

And to be clear, they are still being platformed just this week as a prominent trans spokesperson.

But we never did receive acknowledgement that yes, there are people who have influence (particularly Nancy Kelley) making statements that pressure lesbians to lower their sexual boundaries, did we?

Haha! What stunning projection is that!

No wonder their thesis is entitled "Reasonable Assertions: On Norms of Assertion and Why You Don't Need to Know What You're Talking About".

They've got bullshitting down to an art form.

Wonder how many of those who voted really, in full, had the information to be able to make an informed judgement and knew what they were doing? I'd imagine this was very carefully spun and highly selective in information sharing.

Yup. Homophobic. <slow clap> So kind . So inclusive . As an L person, that one is one I shall stay right away from as I'm not going near any agency that believes I have a social responsibility to have unwanted sex with male people who tell me to. And that my homosexuality is wrong and I should either fix it or be punished/forced to/disposed of.

I mean I'm actually having to type this absolute horror of a shit show out in words in 2022, and people are still somehow ok with this. Can we have a planet where all the sane grown ups go at this point and leave the nutjobs to get on with punishing and controlling and being vile to each other in peace a long way away?

we never did receive acknowledgement that yes, there are people who have influence (particularly Nancy Kelley) making statements that pressure lesbians to lower their sexual boundaries, did we?

This is a political position entirely based on the idea that personal reality is ok, and it is based on selecting from facts and evidence that you choose while eliminating and dismissing the bits of facts and evidence that you don't, and which undermine that personal reality. And then stating that to remind you of those facts and evidence is either a hate crime (fact shaming ffs...) or 'unkind' or simply just blanking it.

Looking people straight in the face and ignoring/denying is a current very fashionable thing, look at Trump and Boris for example. Also look at the police programmes any night of the week, where blind drunk motorists are pulled out of the wreck of their car and then say to the police arresting them "that's not my car. I don't drive. I wasn't in that car."

"Sir, we just cut you out of it. We have it on camera, look."

"That's not my car. I was never in that car."

You can't argue with someone entrenched in this viewpoint, I don't know what the term is psychologically speaking. But as those motorists find: there are limits to how far your personal reality can be indulged by others and by law.

This is a political position entirely based on the idea that personal reality is ok, and it is based on selecting from facts and evidence that you choose while eliminating and dismissing the bits of facts and evidence that you don't, and which undermine that personal reality. And then stating that to remind you of those facts and evidence is either a hate crime (fact shaming ffs...) or 'unkind' or simply just blanking it.

And this thread has been a live demonstration of those very steps.

The accusations of being a hate group aimed at LGB Alliance.

The lack of evidence and an extremist polarise view of them that is reinforced by other posters who also cannot show any evidence or indeed, any critically thought through logic.

The doubling down. And again. And again.

The personal attack.

The blanking.

When all that was really required was some actual evidence to support the initial claims and some clearly thought through logic.

The Feminist Library was captured some years ago, sadly.

That's shameful. I note that they don't allow anyone they don't approve of to respond. How did a library come to this?

Yes, they were infiltrated years ago.

Text of tweet for anyone wondering.

We are incredibly disappointed and worried about The National Lottery's decision to award LGB Alliance a grant, through its Awards For All programme. Please read and sign our open letter here:

This link should readily explain that archive.ph/JSaVT