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]"

"And there we have it" Have what?

I see you missed the first question in that post. It was pertinent. Maybe you answered it before or after but I have missed it.

Here it is again

Perhaps you can tell us then why T has been forced teamed with the LGB?

You did attempt to comment on 'why if a trans person was LGB why their needs as a LGB person Will not be looked after by LGB Alliance?', but it was again just to level your own prejudice against LGB Alliance.

I don't think the below is an answer just some more hyperbole..

'I really don't know why they won't help those they don't like, you'd have to ask them that. But it seems if you're also trans, or a trans ally, then that negates the fact that you're also LGB, you're trans therefore you're not "one of them" and are abused, insulted, dehumanised and ridiculed, and classed as 'homophobic' even if you're LGB yourself. And yes, I'm speaking from lived experience of myself and many others that I know.'

If you cannot see why the claim of 'homophobic' is stated against those who have forced open the definition of homosexuality to suit that group's own needs and where it harms those who don't want the definition changed in that way, then that really says a great deal about you.

There was a whole lot of prejudiced hyperbole in the rest of that paragraph.

And here is your answer to the last question.

'And yes "There are supporters of LGB Alliance who are trans". They will be a relative few who have completed the whole process in days when they weren't at the mercy of increasingly long waiting lists - currently up to 7 YEARS for a first appointment a gender reassignment clinic depending on where in the country you live. They see themselves as 'special', genuine, yet denigrate other trans people still stuck in that ever increasing waiting list for treatment, even though they are still covered under the Equality Act as a "Protected characteristic".'

'Of course not all post-op trans come under that label, as ever it's the loudest minority who get heard, the rest are more than happy to support those who are still going through what they themselves have already been through.'

So.. you ARE calling other trans people, who wish to support LGB Alliance as LGB supports 'anti-trans'?

How have you come to this conclusion as to who these trans people are that you can categorise and dismiss them like that?

Who are you, starlee? Who are YOU to tell them this?

Who are YOU to the trans community that you are able to tell trans people that they are 'anti-trans', and to sort them into such categories of those to dismiss and those to elevate?

And do you see the similarity here. You are again ignoring that those trans people you are categorising as 'anti-trans' are also people who are perhaps (from speaking to a few here and other places) very unhappy with the forced redefinition of their situation. Just like many homosexual people.

Who is this group forcing other groups to redefine themselves to suit this group's purposes? In fact, the entire population of the world to redefine themselves forcibly?

You seem to be supporting it unquestionably. Yet YOU are the one here labelling others as 'anti-' and 'haters'. Do you ever wonder at the polarised language you use? And how you have nothing but emotionally manipulative reasoning to prop up your very poor arguments?

Yes.... Here we have it... The lack of any coherent argument and just a whole lot more very prejudiced hyperbole that follows from the rest of your emotionally manipulative posts.

Which readers do you think you are convincing posting in this manner? All you are doing is allowing others who disagree with you to point out the deficiencies in your arguments.

Not once have you posted anything that logically gives a reasoned viewpoint on why LGB Alliance (or anyone else) should not be supported to host a help line just for LGB young people.

All you have done is show in each post just how much prejudice you have against them for disagreeing with your ideological position.

Yet.... even you admitted in that post that being 'T' was not like being 'LGB"'.

You stated it clearly: 'In the past far too many trans kids never knew about gender identities and grew up thinking they were LGB although something still felt 'wrong'.'

Interesting that this line is trotted out when convenient to the TQ+ political agenda: L and G kids know they're L and G so TQ kids must know too!

And yet lesbian and gay people are being told by the same TQ+ political agenda that they cannot be L and G, homosexuality is like racism, they know wrong and it's all bias and prejudice that they must unlearn, and they must 'learn to cope' with straight sex so they do not distress a TQ+ person who wishes to maintain the uninterrupted illusion of their preferred sex and so identifies as being gay and wanting sex with a gay person.

As this conversation shows: it's illogical, confused, and frankly increasingly unhinged. Be TQ+. Leave L&G and female people and safeguarding people alone. The world cannot be forced to revolve around someone's self perceptions when those perceptions are factually untrue, and there are inevitable limits to how far a transition can be taken before it runs up against reality. This is not ever going to change.

The way forward is to accept and embrace what TQ+ is and find third ways. Not to try and bludgeon everyone into moving reality around until it fits, and cutting out and erasing the people who don't fit. As women have been bounced out of womanhood and gay people are bounced out of LGB.

This is all and only about the panic of LGB being permitted a voice and identity that is not under the control of TQ+ politics.

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.

The world cannot be forced to revolve around someone's self perceptions when those perceptions are factually untrue, and there are inevitable limits to how far a transition can be taken before it runs up against reality. This is not ever going to change.

I think that this statement artichoke is one that is being stated more and more often.

It is this statement that is also getting more and more direct and, to some, blunt.

Material reality is going to eventually need to be acknowledged.

So you don't actually know if "saying something 'is equivalent to' means 'co-opting'"?

Perhaps go and look up what words mean before you use them, eh? Otherwise you aren't exactly discussing in good faith, and also look a bit silly.

The simplistic take of 'feeling wrong' is very worrying.

The very nature of 'wrong' and 'right' here lacks nuance. The just as simple, they transed and they felt 'right' is also completely ignoring the effect of 'euphoria' on such decisions. What would be very much more appropriate is discussing how people feel in 5 - 10 years and whether they would, in times of complete honesty, make the same decision.

I think it's much simpler to say someone is unhappy with their body. It's true and it doesn't necessitate any belief in souls or a higher being intending certain bodies to match with certain people.

Once we can state that plainly, we can start to identify what the cause of the unhappiness is. Some people feel their bodies aren't feminine enough, because our culture tells us feminine = certain size breasts (for example). Others feel too feminine, for the same reason.

Some people conflate femininity with "being female" to the point where they can't unpick it, and so go on to believe that cultural aspects of femininity means "femaleness".

So many people can't get their heads around the notion that feminity and being female can be mutually exclusive. You can be feminine and male. You can be unfeminine and female. One doesn't necessitate the other. But we are so saturated with the assumption that it does that many people are uncomfortable with acting against it.

There are tons of reasons why people might be unhappy with their bodies, btw. I think of my friend who is becoming increasingly unable to walk. She has never said she was born in the wrong body.

Agreed, it would be like saying they're a huge problem to a sane world

It would be like if people with a disability such as paralysis would demand non disabled people would also never walk but use wheelchairs and all stairs would be banned. That would pose a huge problem to existing society. Just like certain people demanding everyone loses single sex spaces and sports just because of a few people who don't like it.

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?

When homosexuality is no longer acceptable or permissible and involves shame, harrassment and exclusion unless someone completely re writes their sexuality and desires - not because they wish to or need to but solely in order to meet the needs of someone who wishes to perceive themselves as the opposite sex?

Yes, that's a problem to a sane world. It really is. Other people's lives, perceptions and feelings and bodies cannot be commandeered and bent to fit the personal perceptions and agendas of TQ+ people. This is not rational nor reasonable.

No binary gay? That’s quite a strange one isn’t it?

Yes, NotKevinTurvey, it's quite the puzzle...

I hope it turns out to be a passing phase. It must be a bit discombobulating for them.

Well, that is rather depressing.

Just visited an old thread on James Esses where I feel like I was having a very similar discussion back in September 2021.

It really feels like some people have been convinced so deeply that any deviation from the extremist activist view that we are simply in 'rinse and repeat' mode and little progress has been made.

Despite the fact that each month, it becomes more clear just how unsupportable the ideological thinking that some people have is in the long term.

Despite the fact that each month, it becomes more clear just how much harm it is causing to young people and to females of all ages.

No, this service will not recognise Trans at all, they already say it does not exist. If kids tell them they're lgb, then yes this service will rightly say they're fine as they are, but if they say they're trans they'll be told no, you're just a confused lg or b. Which is exactly what they tell kids now.
You need to listen to the trans kids that have been wrongly 'advised' by the LGBA, not to the LGBA who were set up to oppose trans people.

why a helpline from a reputable organisation that has safeguarding at its forefront is so important.

From a reputable organisation, yes, but the LGBAlliance is far from reputable, it has had funding stopped, it is know to be anti-trans, they are in a small minority of LGB groups who do not support the T, they have admitted they don't believe trans people exist when they plainly do.

What makes you say TQ+ helplines are not likely to help, you know that from lives experience do you, how many have you personally dealt with?

Don't tell me what I mean by 'LGB', I am LGB and know exactly what it means thank you. And not all trans people are heterosexual, same as not all LGB people want rid of the T, only a small minority do!

Of course it's against transgender people, they admitted it in their opening mission statement, that's why they were set up in the first place!

And you're right, trans has nothing to do with sexuality, so why do the LGBA think if trans people are refused the help they need to transition then they'll just be LGB instead? You can't turn one into the other.

Ok then, biological males can be homosexual, and then realise they're trans, and biological women can be homosexual then realise they're trans.
As homosexuality and gender identity are two different things then it's entirely possible to be both.

But the LGBA are anti-trans, that's why they were set up and they made that perfectly clear in their opening mission statement..

There is no such messaging, it's all a myth.
And "could not be less tolerant or caring if it tried."- sounds exactly like the majority view of this forum towards trans people.

"but the problem is that any "LG" people in that combined grouping are now either (a) not actually homosexual, or (b) have to pretend they're not homosexual, and would be open to partners of the opposite sex"

And that is absolute rubbish, all in you imagination, homosexual people are the same as they've always been, they haven't changed and no-one is telling them they must.