Why is there 'no LGB without the T'?

[Righthandcider]

Something’s been going around my head in circles.

I’ve seen the mantra ‘No LGB without the T’ repeated in several places.

But exactly why have so many LGB organisations aligned themselves with trans hook, line and sinker? I mean one might argue that well-meaning LGB groups have been sucked in by TRAs who are blatantly piggy backing, borrowing the legacy of the gay liberation movement to shut down any debate by making it seem backwards and ‘phobic’ to question them in any way. But LGB groups themselves obviously don’t see the relationship this way. Most of them don’t seem to think they’re being used.

So what is it that they think they have in common with trans activists? Isn’t there a bloody huge elephant in the room? LGB rights are about ensuring nobody is treated differently because of their sexuality. That's literally what unites lesbian, gay and bi people.

I thought the party line for trans rights is that being trans is separate from and independent of a person’s sexuality. It’s simply about whether they feel they are male, female, neither or both.

So where’s the overlap? Why are LGB groups giving their energy to fighting for the ‘T’, to the point of saying there’s ‘no LGB without it’, if it’s not about sexuality?

Is it because they actually feel deep down that it IS about sexuality?

That it’s partly about same sex attraction, in that a lot of gay people still feel the pressure of homophobia and would rather be transed out of it?

That it’s partly about autogynaephilia, in that many cross dressers can now hold their heads high as stunning and brave better versions of 'cis' women, while enjoying the fulfilment of their ultimate sexual fantasy?

If it’s not either of those things, then where exactly is the natural connection between LBG and T? The only explanation I’ve seen anywhere is that ‘they are another marginalised group’. But there are many other marginalised groups, so why join with this one in particular?

I’m interested to hear people’s views.

There are three people on the thread who disagree that "LGBT" as an acronym was widely talked about in the 90s. It's all anecdotal. No one needs to prove anything.

That wasn't happening in the area where I lived in the noughties and onwards. (Not London, I'd moved out of London). I was still publicly advertising lesbian-only events up to around 2013 without hassle. There were one or two older men, in their 50s, who used to try and get into events and would occasionally find a back way in, or arrive in the final hour when no one was on security, and everyone just ignored them. No one had heard of paraphilias back then. After that things became more complicated. We had one raging, aggressive TW who systematically approached every women-only group and organisation in the area and insisted on becoming a member or he'd get the event/ organisation shut down/ cut off funds etc. In some cases he did: the council and other funding was turned off for non-inclusivity. He terrified all sorts of organisations into compliance, including DV shelters.

Sorry Bernard, 4 people.

By the end of the 1990s, activist organizations started using LGBT or GLBT, including the T for transgender folks. Though according to Salon, it was debated because some believed the GLB community should be restricted to sexual identity, and not inclusive of gender identity

www.seventeen.com/life/a18209179/lgbtq-meaning/

LGBT has been used since the 1990s after it was adapted from LGB – which stood for lesbian, gay and bisexual. LGB replaced the term gay in reference to the LGBT community in the mid-to-late 1980s.

www.thepinknews.com/2017/11/06/how-has-the-lgbt-acronym-evolved/

I don't appreciate being called a liar and having it insinuated that I am deliberately misleading to make some kind of point.

It's my experience too. I didn't call you a liar. I just don't find your account compelling, sorry.

@AdamRyan would you kindly check your links and follow them until you get to the primary evidence that the acronym was in use. These are as flimsy in their rigour as the Wikipedia entry.

And those links are retconning, I agree with pp.

I have no issue with you erish and as I said before when the term came in is largely irrelevant to what I wrote.
I was just trying to answer ops question with a perspective that had not yet been added to the thread.

Unless you have had false memories planted by all the retconned articles you read.

LGB was still commonly used when I was at uni (2000). No body dysmorphia or paraphernalia either; just standard same-sex couples. It feels like a bastion of sanity compared to today.

Based on what?
I made a statement that 1) is based on my own experience in the 90s and 2) backed up by some sources, whether or not you like those sources

Before you call me a liar you need to find some proof I am lying. Otherwise you are just reflecting your own confirmation bias, by assuming I'm lying because my POV is different to yours.

Most LGB groups aren’t ok with being bullied and used in this way. That’s why the LGB Alliance was formed. That’s why the founder of Stonewall has said that Stonewall has been destroyed by trans activists and no longer represents him.

Some people are clever, some are average, and some are gullible idiots. All these different types of people exist in the general population, and so of course also in the LGB population.

In the LGB population, the gullible idiots have allowed themselves to be used as camoflage by some very dodgy activists whose top priority seems to be access to young children.

@StalkedByASpider that was a really eloquent, beautifully argued post.

Thank you. I shall try to rember how you have phrased some of your points.

Reading through, how can anyone have the smallest possible regard for women's safety, and still disagree with you.

I was alive then, never came across the T added until at least a decade later.

If you are not deliberately misleading then you have had false memories planted by all the retconned articles you read.

The addition of the ‘T’ to the LGB is a very very recent thing.

We were not all born yesterday. We have actual memories of what things were like 20 and 30 years ago.

20 years ago I had never met anyone who used the term LGBT, and all the support groups at university etc and mainstream media were using the term LGB.

But don’t let actual facts get in the way 🙄

Most Pink News "journalists" are children. Plus it isn't exactly the most reliable publication. Retconning nonsense.

I find it disturbing how easy it is to peddle ignorance and lies on a grand scale. Twitter, Facebook, Wordpress, Mumsnet - even thewaybackmachine is having its archive censored by these activists.

So much brilliant journalism and analysis has been memory-holed and the empty space left to the “children” at Pink News to make shit up.

It is Orwellian.

@aseriesofstillimages
Personally, and on the basis of the views of most other LGB people I know, our support of trans inclusion stems from a sense that a lot (though not all) of the objections to trans people are similar to the objections that were being raised to LGB people until quite recently.

This is interesting and possibly gets close to the heart of things. Before I really started to take notice and explore this subject my opinions on it (largely be kind, live and let live, don't be a bigot) were also founded on a 'sense' of what was being said.

It perfectly illustrates why T activists aligned themselves with the existing LGB cause. It gave them a lovely camouflage of assumed similarity that got all sorts of dangerous policies waved through and gave them a ready-made right to police our thoughts.

I'd like to know because the 90s was the one period when I thought I had a pretty good overview of the gay scene. I was working with a number of gay men who were on the scene, I'd been a volunteer with THT for some time and I was also involved with a couple of lesbian groups, so I thought I was offering a fairly accurate overview of the situation. I'd like to know more.

Agree with whoever mentioned Third Wave (be kind to men) feminism. It knocked the legs from under us just when we needed to be strong.

Censored and replaced by reams of ipse dixit.

St Andrews University (my bold)

LGBT students studying in St Andrews during the 1970’s experienced a very different society compared to today. As social attitudes and laws have changed, LGBT representation at St Andrews has evolved to reflect this change. GaySoc transformed into the LGB Society, acknowledging the broader spectrum of sexuality that exists; then in 2006, the group voted to rename as LGBTSoc, becoming one of the first universities in Scotland to represent transgender people in the Society’s name.

news.st-andrews.ac.uk/long-reads/lgbt-life/

I didn't go to St Andrews (my best friend did) but like Bernard I also went to a red brick uni with an LGBSoc.

Hang on, what? It’s possible to get waybackmachine edited? 😲

I posted earlier about my T experiences at uni in the 90s and thinking about it more - both these post-ops were in the sphere largely known (now) for trans and autism.