Guardian being pathetic again

[Theeyeballsinthesky]

Look at the headline “majority of uk public agree with liberal views on race & sexual identity”

but the actual article barely mentions sexual identity (I assume in old fashioned parlance what they mean is whether people are LGB) and when it dies it of course conflates it with gender identity. Then of course they push the tried & tested line of ‘young free thinking ppl are completely cool & think it’s all brilliant and it’s only Tory dinosaurs who think otherwise’

They really good think people are idiots

Nothing about sexual identity in the actual article though

interestingly the real divide seems to be London/Cities v the rest of the country

The Times reports this v differently, including pointing out a fall in people who think birth certificate sex should be changed www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1a28cbb2-39c6-11ed-a8ae-d2d57cd0511a?shareToken=1182b2fe8d7faa7306f63d5579233f02

'Researchers discovered that the balance of public opinion mostly tipped in favour of socially liberal views, except on the transgender issue.'

Hre's the source of the reports.

www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/

All seems a bit vague, and therefore liable to manipulation, to me, tbh.

Even "sexual identity" the Graun is trying to force a new terminology. The EQA is clear:

SEXUAL ORIENTATION

That's the protection. That's the law. Tacking "identity" on is a creep of gender ideology which as the Times reports, is unpopular once people know about it and understand it.

Yeah, most people are fine with people's sexual identity i.e. sexuality.

Do they mean to conflate this with gender identity? Because I keep seeing evidence to the contrary on that one.

Because, actually, what activists claim is a "liberal" stance on the transgender issue is the exact opposite. It's a stance that supports male rights and harms women and children.

Here's a link to the PDF of the relevant section: www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/media/39478/bsa39_culture-wars.pdf

Former CEO of Natcen? Nancy Kelley.

Ah.

'Researchers discovered that the balance of public opinion mostly tipped in favour of socially liberal views, except on the transgender issue.'

Exactly this. Just read the linked PDF.

The use of the words "sexual identity" to describe LGB is pure spin. There appears to be a worrying trend downwards for them too though.

They know people not versed in these arguments will conflate it with trans identity, which they think is about "sex change".

Thanks, I couldn't find the detail!

I find it REALLY weird that Brexit is lumped in with this. And attitudes towards race/racial equality.

'The first of these debates is about what should be done to recognise
the culture, identity and economic position of some minority groups.
It is argued that they face disadvantage because of their personal
characteristics, such as being Black or transgender, and that to
address these disadvantages it is important to acknowledge and
challenge ‘white male’ or ‘heterosexual’ privilege. Critics of this
position, in contrast, feel that society has already done enough to
recognise and enhance the position of ‘equalities groups’ and that to
go further could have a detrimental impact on social cohesion and
fairness.'

Why smoosh blackness and 'transgender' together like that? What on earth do they have in common?!

Reading this, I'm quite astonished at how clumsily it's trying to create a narrative, with broad-brush concepts ('culture wars' ffs) and loaded language. Not sure how much I can be bothered to read, because this just stinks of dishonest propaganda, to me.

I've skimmed it and it is breathtakingly dishonest propaganda.

Not one person I know agrees with it
The Guardian is a woke rag

It is, Eresh. Bullshit. From start to finish. I can't quite see who they're aiming this at. Don't people want to find truthful, untwisted information? Who finds this kind of frothy, narrative-skewed pish useful?

It seems that Natcen is a registered charity:

andersonquigley.com/content/uploads/2020/08/NatCen-Annual-Report-2018-19.pdf

The guardian lives in its own echo chamber

I also find their constant framing of any disagreement around transgender issues as ‘urghhhh only horrid old people think this & who wants to be them amirite ’ breathtakingly ageist

'The charitable objects of NatCen are 'the advancement of education through research into the social,
political and economic sciences, the dissemination to the public of the results of such research and
for educational purposes incidental thereto''

Progressive, innit. Which is to say, part of an industry whose self-sustaining aim is to keep pushing for societal change in pursuit of some mythical Utopian ideal.

Nancy Kelley listed on NatCen as 'Deputy Chief Executive and Director of Policy Research Centre'

This is what it says about transgender people:

About 64% of people thought rights for transgender people “had not gone far enough” or were “about right” compared with 34% who believed they had “gone too far”. The question had not been asked in previous years.

There was a further, and significant fall in the proportion of the public who agreed transgender people should be able to change the sex on their birth certificate, from 58% in 2016 and 53% in 2019, to 32% in 2021. However, the survey said the wording of the question had changed slightly after 2019 to make it clearer it wanted the public’s views on the recording of sex on the birth certificate, rather than whether a person should have the broader right to change gender.

“It may be that some people accept that people should be able to secure some form of legal recognition of their ‘acquired gender’ but also believe that this should not involve changing the sex that is recorded on their birth certificate.

It's quite clear that as people have educated themselves about this issue the number of people who think falsification of birth certificates is a good idea has fallen.

The last paragraph there is pure speculation. They didn't ask this question so they can’t say what the answer would be.

Love the reporting. Look, all these things we agree with the survey backs up.

But this bit, where we don't, the question is the problem not the answers.

And why are they not asking that in this clear shift towards more left leaning thinking, this is an exception. Fuck all curiosity and once again shitty journalism clearly teinted by activism.

What have they said about the Canadian teacher with the enormous prosthetic breasts?

From 53% to 32% in just two years, that's a massive drop!

And why are they not asking that in this clear shift towards more left leaning thinking, this is an exception. Fuck all curiosity and once again shitty journalism clearly teinted by activism.

Yes, that's a genuine point of interest for anyone, surely? Don't they want to understand it in order to try to educate people better, because it looks like the "education" the advancement of which is one of their charity objectives, isn't working all that well?