Worrying Increase in Transphobia

[PorcelinaV]

https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/09/09/transphobia-uk-press-media-negative-coverage/

An increase in transphobic sentiment among the British public has been fuelled by hostile coverage of trans people from the right-wing press, argues data journalist Ell Folan....

Unfortunately, newspapers still have a great deal of influence on the public and political agenda in Britain, and nowhere is this more obvious than in how perceptions of trans rights have changed.

As recently as Feburary 2021, an absolute majority of British voters (51 per cent) agreed with the statement “a transgender woman is a woman”, including 6 in 10 women. Just 34 per cent disagreed. But after years of negative coverage from the press, those numbers have changed.

In April this year, only 33 per cent of voters agreed that trans women are women, with 47 per cent disagreeing....

It is clear that the media plays an important role in shaping public perceptions, and unless their negative coverage is corrected and refuted, public opinion will continue to worsen.

@Helleofabore

i asked you to leave me alone
please so do and not believing people can be trans is utterly a crazy view.

why tell all people with a challenge or a mental health issue to pull themselves together.

dear me

you are a hell of a bore for sure

<le sigh>

define trans

define gender identity

define what a woman’s gender identity is like

no using sexist stereotypes or circular definitions now!

that’s why ‘cis’ is sexist bullshit

Cisgender means a gender identity which is on the same side as a biological sex.

It is offensive to people who believe gender identity is a nebulous and sexist concept.

not believing people can be trans is utterly a crazy view.

no one doubts that there are people who define themselves as trans

no body believes they have changed sex

not even you whatever you tell yourself

not everyone shares your religion, deal with it

Lovely

describe a woman’s gender identity

should be easy no? You really believe this

Rats, sorry @hangonsnoopy reading in a rush, please disregard

Yes wes

I do not think that deflection means what this poster think it means. I did notice though that the abusive false accusations have been toned down.

Maybe we are all getting somewhere and the answers we seek will be forthcoming. I must admit though to still having a very fuzzy head due to a virus and I might need some help deciphering the posts that I am sure will come.

I think instead of asking the poster who posted them, I should ask for a crowd translation. Do you think that would work?

I think cis will soon become known legally and widely as an offensive term used against women along the lines of the N* word and others.
There is no other avenue for it. We have an identity and name already collectively as a women. Cis means nothing at all to anyone except a tiny percentage of activists hell bent on degrading us.

I would discipline any of my staff who used such language. I would call out in public if I heard this offensive term and I do not tolerate hate speech of any kind. I consider this to be provocative hate speech and would act accordingly.

I'm still wondering...

Cis is offensive in that it depends upon a belief in two types of women; cis women and trans women, as set out by gender theory.

Most of us on this board reject that belief. I would say there are just women (the adult female human type, evolved to produce ova). Transwomen aren't women, they are subset of males who wish to present in a feminine way.

So it is as offensive to refer to us as cis as it is for religious people to refer to atheists as infidels or heretics, or the damned.

No one is telling anyone else to pull themselves together. But as I said earlier a person thinking they are the Queen of Sheba doesn't make them so. We don't indulge a person in that fantasy, we might not directly contradict them but people with this sort of delusional psychiatric issue will be offered treatment in the hope that they accept reality, in the same way that others who have auditory hallucinations are treated so that they don't act on those hallucinations.
It's quite possible to think; If John wants to call himself Jane and wear a dress then OK, without buying into the whole idea that TWAW , or seeing them as women or allowing them to be in women's spaces.

People who believe they should be the opposite sex exist, can they be the opposite sex no. You can be transgender but you can't be transex.

Not everyone has a gender identity therefore they can not be cisgender.

Your posts are uniquely nauseating why raise child abuse against girls so flippantly if not to try and attempt to get a reaction or to trigger others. I am reporting you.

TRSOH has occurred to me after reading my prev post 94 times

@LizaBizza you must be aware by now that a dictionary definition is often not even half the story of a word.

We can see from the development of the meaning of the word "literally" from something that actually happened to "indication of hyperbolic statement incoming" in a few short years

you can certainly try to pass cis off as a Latin term, highly academic, no meaning outside of "not trans" (not trans, btw, doesn't need a definition) and carry on your disingenuous way. Or you can accept that it is a jargon word, 3 letters used to convey a WHOLE heap of piffle meaning

It is like the word "hygge" in Danish or "Gemütlich" in German which mean cosy, literally (i mean literally, not in a hyperbolic sense). But that is only the translation of the word. As we know because there are countless books on it, Hygge is the comfort of, say, being cuddled up under a fluffy blanket in your favourite jammies, while a storm rages outside, and you have the log fire going and you're sipping your hot chocolate, and your favourite music is on the stereo, your beloved is close by and your giant fluffy cat is cuddled between you. That's an awful lot of words you don't need to use when you say "hygge".

Same with cis. It's just a TRA abbreviation for "those hatchet faced radical feminist trans deniers the meanie old shrivelled cowbags". Or something.

Nobody is being remotely flippant about child abuse. They are explaining why safeguarding is important. Those dismissing the need for safeguarding on the grounds that they think all trans people have gentle souls and that child abusers would definitely never pretend to be trans in order to get easier access to children are the ones being flippant about child abuse.

Did you know that Mermaids, a charity which works with transgender children and their families, until recently had a self confessed paedophile on their board of trustees? Seems like they are pretty flippant about child abuse.

And yet you posted a reply to me.

So, you wish to post replies to anyone on this thread and to then dictate who can answer by false accusations that amount to you being abusive towards others.

Do you see how abusive you are being?

It is past hypocrisy by now and most definitely in the abusive category. Stop abusing posters on this thread.

And I really can no longer understand what you are trying to say.

WHO is saying that people cannot be ‘trans’? Me? Post where I have said this.

WHO is saying that people with mental health conditions need to pull themselves together? Me? please post the evidence of me saying this.

Please start fucking evidencing your now weird and fucked up accusations and abuse. Or readers will simply conclude that you have nothing to substantiate your assertions that there are a group of male people who should be excluded from robust safeguarding procedures because you say so.

Your posts are uniquely nauseating why raise child abuse against girls so flippantly if not to try and attempt to get a reaction or to trigger others. I am reporting you.

It highlighted the importance of the concept of safeguarding. Which trans ideology blind faith 'TWAW' and I am a woman because I say so' obliterates.

Report yourself for being so ignorant while you're at it.

I am sure plenty of racist slurs were in the dictionary once, doesn’t mean they stay there. It’s not a bible. The dictionary is an organic, growing organisation of words and meaning. Some of which are removed or added, adjusted to reflect the words and meaning in society.

not believing people can be trans is utterly a crazy view.

Who has done that in this thread? Why are.you berating people for saying stuff they haven't said?

why tell all people with a challenge or a mental health issue to pull themselves together.

Again, where on this thread has that happened? And again, are you saying that being trans is mental health issue? As that's considered very transphobic by Stonewall, Gendered Intelligence and loads of other trans organisations.

This.

Heretic, sinner and infidel are also in the dictionary.

It's highly offensive to use those words to others by enforcing your religion upon them.

I'm not a believer, get over it.

Report away.

Perhaps you should read the post and the entire thread after you have reported my post. I am describing my own sex abuse as a child and how a poster’s belief, a poster who simply doesn’t seem to wish to clarify their posts, will leave a massive fucking safeguarding loophole. They have been asked for about 10+ pages to clarify their words, yet have resorted to personal attacks and abuse.

But feel free to report my post. I can fucking assure you there was no flippancy in that post. What you call flippancy, is me stating clearly that excluding a group of male people from safeguarding is some fucked up thinking.

However, I apologise for any triggering discussing my own personal experience causes you.

Why do you keep tagging a poster to tell them to leave you alone? It's like pulling someone's hair and complaining when they tell you to stop.

How do you know if people find it offensive or not? You'd have to ask them, wouldn't you?

It is a superfluous descriptor - only used by those who subscribe to the theory.

@LizaBizza

As you are someone that supports Trans folk and will therefore be against the mis gendering/labelling of them.
Why do you insist, as so many of your side do) on mis gendering/labelling people that do not support gender identity in its current form?

Doesn't that strike you are being somewhat hypocritical?

I actually think it is a waste of time to expect responses and engagement from some people. I'm not even sure they read posts - and if they do, I cannot imagine what is going on in their mind when they do so.

Counter arguments are not acknowledegd at all.