Telegraph: growing prejudice against transpeople

[Queenofscones]

Very dodgy article in the Telegraph about the British Social Attitudes survey, a survey that has been held annually for the last 40 years. The questions asked was whether people were 'very prejudiced', 'a little prejudiced' or 'not prejudiced' against transgender people. According to the results, twice as many people declared themselves 'prejudiced' against transgender people as did in 2019. But the question is appalling — it assumes that having questions about the validity of a belief system that actively seeks to destroy women's rights is prejudice, when it's a rational response. The authors of the article seek to blame it all on JKR...

Link to the archived version here:

http://archive.today/yOlJF

If that’s the survey I think it is, it’s been used for decades and is used internationally, so changing the words of the questions to something more sensible would create all sorts of problems with comparing it to previous versions. But it really is an appallingly worded question. I think I would probably decline to answer.

What it indicates is the negative impact of TRA activists have done to an issue that used to be about a small % of the population that suffered from gender dysphoria.

The responses to the question are a response to the hate filled messaging of TRAs (and the MRAs who are piggy backing on it) and the wholesale onslaught of the underlying queer politics that put both women and children's safety at risk.

That's whole polls like this fail. They dont reflect the changed context.

They're going to need to define 'transgender people'.

What irresponsible reporting.

Why did the headline need to be about JK Rowling?

OK her initial tweet was three years ago, and they are commenting on changed attitudes over the same period. But they haven't explained how either of the tweets they have quoted are transphobic.

Perhaps they should have joined the dots and said, "People have become less supportive of the trans community since JK Rowling became the subject of a high profile witch hunt after tweeting in support of a woman who was fired for stating a biological fact."

Or perhaps they should have said, "The public have growing concerns about transgenderism in the wake of the Isla Bryson scandal."

How about they blame the people actually giving trans people a bad name rather than the woman who said that water is wet?

It suggest that there is a kind of problem with the conceptualization of the question. And that applies to other groups too, even if we might think prejudice is an appropriate word that we would use, it's clearly a value judgement about attitudes, rather than just recording the attitude.

Agree 100% with this!

Write to the Telegraph. If you can make it succinct and witty.

"Prejudice towards trans people has doubled in three years in the wake of the <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/yOlJF/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/11/jk-rowling-mopop-cancel-transphobia-seattle-museum-exhibit/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">JK Rowling cancel culture row"

I bet Rowling must be proud

in some sas way though it has a grain of truth - years ago when I saw a transexual I generally felt a bit sorry for them. Generally the transexuals I encountered appeared someowhat mentally unstable and I felt compassion for their situation. Now when I encounter these people I feel less compassionate, I think 'absolutely no fucking way are you accessing any private space with me or my daughters.'

I think there is going to be repercussions from the boundary pushing and eroding of women's rights. Sadly it has come so strongly from just opportunistic misogynists, rather than transexuals themselves.

ps. decided im reverting back to 'transexual' not 'transgender'. More aptly describes situation... who in the hell wants to support 'transexual children'?

Exactly

Everything is rigged to gender ideology

Polls, rankings

Whatever, nothing is based on women’s rights. It’s a meta failure

Here is JKR's essay - www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

We've asked many a visiting TRA to quote (directly) the transphobic statements in this essay.

We've never had an answer. Occasionally a link to a dreary YouTube video where someone 'interprets' her writings. I suspect Arabella is still on her vigil.

But please, do continue. So many women (including myself) were told 'JRK's transphobic!!!', went to actually read her essay and were peaked.

ps. decided im reverting back to 'transexual' not 'transgender'. More aptly describes situation... who in the hell wants to support 'transexual children'?

Agreed @BlessedKali . when did it change from transsexuals and cross dressers to transgender? It seemed to suddenly tip over and become #nodebate in a nanosecond.

Well I don't know her personally but in her position I would be really fucking aggravated that every time I said something about WOMEN'S RIGHTS it was twisted by trans activists and the captured media into "JK Rowling has said yet another transphobic thing about how trans people shouldn't have any rights."

Puts on hard hat:

The reporting slant is dire ( but the findings are not)

Honestly I think women's sport has been the turning point for public opinion. That and the prisons fiasco finally seeing daylight.

Too many photos of obvious males in exclusively female spaces. Too many boundaries being pushed & not respected.

Sports coverage shows up the physical disparities too clearly, making 'TWAW' harder to swallow and sport the one thing many men seem to give a single fuck about, so it got some attention.

The question is frigging awful though.

This is the result of operation 'let them speak'. The more they tell us what they think and what they want the clearer it is that the whole ideology is based on a pile of lies and narcissistic demands. People are seeing the movement for what it really is and rejecting it. Look at Canada yesterday!

No wonder no debate was the favoured strategy.

This is a slightly different report of what the survey shows:

The proportion of the public who think a transgender person should be allowed to change the sex on their birth certificate has fallen from more than half to less than a third in recent years, according to a major survey.

The percentage of people characterising themselves as “not at all prejudiced” against transgender people also fell, from 82% to 64% since 2019.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/23803479.self-id-support-trans-change-birth-certificates-plummets/

I think their campaigning on prisons and sports has been an absolute disaster for the trans rights lobby.

I know they're not one coordinated organisation and so it's not like they have any overall governance or a PR department to step in and handle reputational damage, but you'd think at least some of these various trans rights or LGBT organisations (and ideally the main ones like Stonewall) would have realised that the optics of being seen to support rapists are really not great.

If you need the support of the public, why on earth would you push for male rapists like Karen White to be housed in women's prisons with inevitable consequences, rather than saying, "Karen is nothing to do with us, he's not even really trans, he's just pretending he is so he can go into a women's prison and rape more women, real trans people aren't like this at all."

It doesn't make any sense.

Likewise with sport, you'd think someone would have said, "Listen, letting a middle aged white male weightlifter from a rich country compete in the Olympics instead of a young woman of colour from a poor country would be a really bad look. Hey, New Zealand, can you have a word with Laurel Hubbard please because the general public are not gonna love this. Laurel needs to accept she isn't good enough for the Olympics, just like most people aren't good enough for the Olympics, and that's OK."

I don't get why they didn't anticipate these things really pissing people off and bringing the whole trans rights issue back into the limelight.

They'd have absolutely got away with toilets and changing rooms otherwise, but now people are questioning those things too.

Is it just incredible arrogance? Did they just believe there was nothing they could do to lose the support of the political class so the views of the general public didn't matter?

They went for the prisons because they thought if they got away with it then they were high and dry. Someone stated this explicitly.... trying to remember who.

The changes these last few years are the big problem

We’re being threatened and attacked and the shifts have been pronounced

It stems from the GRA and the legal fiction but it’s so long ago, the expectation of a few males is completely different to the societal push

It’s in our institutions too now, because of the law

Women and girls lack legal recourse

The more men push the more women will say no

James Morton, Scottish Trans Alliance:

https://gendercriticalwoman.blog/2019/09/19/ministry-of-justice-new-policy-on-caring-for-transgender-prisoners/

James Morton, I believe. One of those behind the scenes transitioners who are rational enough to drive things forward, mostly out of sight.

That was a strategy from Christine Burns & Press for Change, a long while ago. They (PfC) thought the public would have more sympathy for transsexuals than for transvestites so they worked on blurring them all into one category.

The questionnaire was worded as if to affirm the tenets of transgender ideology - so one of the questions was about " prejudice against trans people" - presenting the findings as an automatic negative in terms of supposedly growing liberal attitudes in society.

People still need to be aware that the whole transgender movement is rooted in a theory - it is not like 'being gay'. It is the theory and its conclusions and edicts that are the issue - not the people who for whatever reason end up adopting a trans identity.

Obviously some types of people are generally an issue, though. Males in women's spaces and categories is certainly an issue for women's rights, protections and dignity - regardless of whether or not their are predatory sex offenders.

I suggest many people are still confused about what a transwoman and a transman are - due to the media practice of using preferred pronouns when reporting on incidents or situations.

Well that was a catastrophic error of judgement wasn't it?

The general public might not be passionate about defending the rights of women imprisoned for stealing money to buy drugs in general terms, but they sure as shit are going to balk at a double page spread of Karen White or Isla Bryson's face and a piece detailing the crimes "she" committed using "her" penis, and the knowledge that if someone like that goes to prison tomorrow, that means they are still at large today.