From Our Own Correspondent - did anyone else hear this?

[inkjet]

A family left Florida for Chicago since the ban on giving children puberty blockers because they feared their child would be taken away from them, because one of the couple is transgender. The child isn’t trans. Ok that’s their decision but they now consider themselves refugees. Does anyone else find this a little bit offensive? A lot of refugees have literally just their clothes in a foreign country where they don’t speak the language. The reporter here describes their massive car with leather seats and their 3 cats.

I’m aware I’m probably over-reacting but I am fed up with the hyperbole and language being twisted. I’m probably supporting trans genocide by saying this.

I think they are fools but no, I don't think it's offensive.

For one thing people can use a word like refugee in a more figurative way. THat is fine, it's how language works.

Also, not all actual refugees are in the situation you describe. Some have money in the bank and are able to come with some significant resources. Middle class and even wealthy people can be refugees.

Presumably as long as they are not planning to give their child puberty blockers they have no reason to be fearful. I wonder what their motivation for publicising their decision is?
I agree it is absolutely tone deaf to describe themselves as refugees.

It's typical transperbole. There are people fleeing war zones with just the clothes on their back, often with complex PTSD from having witnessed unspeakable horrors such as their family being murdered, or having been repeatedly raped. They are refugees. Moving from Florida to Chicago because you can't give your child harmful medication does not make you a refugee.

I just listened. I didn't find it offensive. They sounded (at least by the description since we only heard the narration of the 'correspondant') deluded and simply following their delusions to the logical conclusion. Since the segment also included a Republican voter moving his family in the opposite direction it felt like a good way to look at the situation in America.

I heard it. The item also covered those moving TO Florida to avoid the transideology in their home state.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001sthr
From 6:45 minutes in

This is a great example of how people make themselves unbelievable.

They are deluded enough to think they can change sex with words. They will delude themselves about anything and everything.

It was a shortened version of a piece that had been on earlier in the week in the programme Crossing Continents about people moving states in the US, particularly progressives moving from red states to blue states and non-progressives moving from blue states to red states. Bearing in mind this is the BBC and the presenter was being very kind, even she observed that those heading to blue states gave as a reason that they felt psychologically unsafe and wanted to escape hearing opinions that distressed them while those heading to red states cited rising crime.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001smlr

The programme notes say "conservatives and liberals swapping states" while in the programme it wasn't just conservatives heading to red states and those heading to blue states sounded very illiberal in their judgemental views.

I heard it. I thought it was well done, the presenter mace the point that none of the people were actual refugees but that they identified themselves as such. Also made the point that the trans man family were worried their child would be removed due to changes in the law even though the law said no such thing.

Yes, “liberal” has taken on a new meaning in America. It now means belief in a particular set of views. A “bigot” is someone who does not believe in that particular set of views, no matter that they are happy to accept that others might hold them.

none of the people were actual refugees but that they identified themselves as such

Go figure...

I haven't listened but thought I'd share this.

I work for a very woke American company. They participate in a LGTB points type accreditation, I got the impression it was quite similar to a stonewall type accreditation if that gives any steer. There was a company wide overview of how you get points for this accreditation and they mentioned that there were now optional bonus questions which gave steer on what would become mandatory in years to come. One of these optional questions which would have given extra points was whether the company would give financial assistance to help employees move from "LGBTQ unfriendly states".

This was not long after the roe vs wade furore and I just kept thinking about women needing to move from States where their rights to decide over their own body had been removed.

Americans getting 'red' and 'blue' wrong never ceases to irritate me. I always have to do a double-take.

The red and blue thing goes back to NBC coverage of Bush-Gore 2000, where Republicans were assigned red and Democrats blue. It makes no sense to Americans as well. Consider Red China and communists as Reds. Republicans are still more anti Communist than Democrats who collude with the CCP.

Thanks @nauticant i hadn’t realised it was from a longer programme.