Is this the most 'woke' headline ever? "How climate change is hitting vulnerable Indonesian trans sex workers"

[RandySavage]

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/indonesian-transgender-climate-change-bandung-b2522422.html

I don't think I've seen even Titania McGrath manage to get so much oppression into so few words.
Can anyone do better?

The case study had a happy ending

Phwoarr!

It goes back to point I've made several times already in this thread.
I'll cut and paste them so you don't have to read the rest of my posts.

That's fair, but you have to take into context how the stuff gets reported.

That an obervation might be true doesn't mean that the way it's dealt with is necessarily in good faith.

Does it mean the UK landmass was deliberately placed on the Earth where there is less sunlight by racists to try and keep black people away?
No, that's clearly an absurdly silly idea, but my point is some of these articles read just as insanely.

To directly answer your question. "Do you think it is "woke" to point out when things disproportionately effect women? Or is that OK in your opinion?"

No I don't think it's woke to point things disproportionately effect women. It is OK. How something is presented, the manner of the presentation, is where "woke" arises in my opinion. Not the actual facts being reported.

Give you an example - The VAT on women's sanitary products before Brexit. This was reported in my opinion very responsibly. The facts were laid out without hyperbole in a very clear way.
VAT charged at 5% on women's sanitary products.
EU rules prevented this tax being any lower.
Essential day to day hygene products needed by women are not a "luxury" item.
VAT was originally meant to be a tax on luxury items.
Some other essential items were 0% taxed.
It's incredibly unfair that's women's basic hygene essentials are taxed as a luxury item. Would men put up with this if the situation affected them?
The argument against the tampon tax was very strong, and very well presented. I would class the topic as a basic injustice and as far from woke as it's possible to be. I'm really glad it stopped the day we left the EU.

But I'm sure that topic could be presented in a hyperbolic way that would make it look woke and a few words into the headline people would start rolling their eyes. The point I'm trying to hammer home is that for me woke is about hyperbolic presentation of a particular form of leftism and not the underlying subject.

I think more than ever things are disproportionately negatively affecting women. I think it's going up not down. The idea that a woman in prison should daily face the danger of male rapists is abhorrant, and yet it's the needs of the rapists being put above the needs of the women. Shove him in a men's prison, if something happens to him maybe he'll understand how his victims felt. Women's sports, changing rooms, toilets, free speech, being utterly ignored by politicians as if women are invisible.

Going off topic a bit here, but surely homeless people are moat affected by climate change as they are out in all weathers, or farmers. Sex workers must spend at least half their time inside unless Indonesian sex workers all perform outside.
I guess 'homeless/farmers most affected by climate change....' isn't quite as eye catching a headline though.

Yes, but the minority group is trans people, woke refers to racial prejudice/discrimination.

Wow, the ignorance on this thread is astounding!

Trans people are stigmatized and marginalised throughout the world. In many countries they are excluded from economic participation through the discrimination that they face and the hostility they experience, and their vulnerability is especially pronounced in places where there is no social security provision for them to access.

They subsequently live lives of poverty and exclusion, cut off from their families and the social networks that others have access to, and are forced to take insecure, dangerous work for whatever money or food they can get. Their living circumstances and housing options are understandably limited and insecure, and naturally more vulnerable to the impact of climate change.

How anyone with 2 or more brain cells to rub together can fail to get this and laugh it off as a woke headline, is utterly beyond me.

Isn't that the opposite of intersectionallity? I thought all oppression was interwoven with every other form of oppression? They were all strands of the same rope. Everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is homophobic. Are you saying the trans people are now a separate group of their own?
I think woke is one of those words that each person has their own definition. Just like I doubt we'd agree on the definition of the word woman, I don't think woke means the same to me as it does to you.

It doesn't matter what it means to you, it has a definition. You can't just change the definition of a word as it suits you, although mass misuse can literally make that happen. I think that should be opposed or language will cease to be of any use!

If you don't know what a word means look it up, don't just decide it means whatever you want it to!

@ConJob
What's the definition of the word "woman" please?

Woke means "awake to racial injustice." It's a term used by black Americans. Its original meaning has been bastardised by racists to mean "everything I personally despise (especially black Americans)". It's similar to how people use "gay" as an insult.

The definition of "woman" is "adult human female."

HTH.

And that's THE definition, or your definition?

Adult human female.

@Soigneur
@ConJob

The principal dictionaries in both the US (Webster) and the UK (Cambridge) do not limit the use of the term woke as being exclusively racial in nature, but referring to broader social issues and injustices. This is in the non-derogatory sense, before it took on a "anyone I don't like is woke" meaning.

This reminds me of a black patron we used to have where I work, whenever camping came up (which it seemed to regularly), he would insist that he had never camped because "black people, we don't camp, because we got enough of that shit with slavery." He totally meant to be silly, I would always say, "Now, Joe, don't stereotype, I've seen black people camping."

He was right though of course, at least in my country, very few black people camp. But that's also similar to white people in the same social and economic demographic. Even when those families become middle class, they just don't have a family tradition of camping so most don't start unless they are really drawn to it.

The biggest issue I have with this kind of analysis though is it ends up leaving people behind. I see it a lot, even here at FWR, where some social problem is identified, and people make a big deal because it effects some group (non-white people, gay men, women, etc) disproportionately. Especially when they are trying to argue that something should be done. The overall sense it gives is that if this thing mainly affected straight, white, men, it wouldn't really matter so much. Which is morally wrong, imo, but also bound to create social and political resentment.

An example - near my home, during covid, there were a few communities pinointed as being covid hotspots over and over. One of them was a black community. It got a ton of attention in the press and calls for help, and that this was systemic racism in action. The other two were similar economic demographics, with the same kinds of large households that were likely the reason for the whole situation. They recieved very little attention in the press. No talk of the fact that this was primarily an economic issue, or that the government lockdown measures were really hard on all of these kinds of households.

It becomes a way to grab funding or political influence for certain groups, rather than for everyone affected by a problem. It's a totally bogus kind of analysis.

It becomes a way to grab funding or political influence for certain groups, rather than for everyone affected by a problem. It's a totally bogus kind of analysis.

But that is the endpoint of trying to divide people rather than unify them. Different groupings will emerge to try and gain an advantage. And when the funding is exhausted - invent a new division and repeat again. So it's not enough to address the needs of <x> community ... you have to look at <x> + <y> community.

On a spectrum, you have "single individual" at one end and "all of humanity" at the other. There are an almost (and effectively) infinite ways you can divide that up if you are looking to.

Once again, Python nailed it:

Brian: "You are all individuals"
Crowd (as one): "Yes, we are all individuals !"

"although this includes provisions for vulnerable groups, trans people are not listed among them.
“Women, the elderly, and people with disabialities are mentioned, but there is no provision for sexual and gender minorities,” Darmawan said."

As suggested in this quote Hijra/transwomen in countries like Indonesia don't have the exact same concept of gender as first world TRAs. Darmawan doesn't seem to see themselves in the same category as women/being impacted in the same way as women and wants specific recognitions of transwomen's needs rather than asking them to be included in the woman category (reasonably)

How interesting...

I agree re the clickbait, but I remember reading many articles detailing the research into the questions you ask there and the issues regarding race and access to nature and healthcare are well-researched, documented and known.

@Mrbumpssmile
Perhaps you could tell me some information about race and access to nature please.

There's so much, it depends on what you're interested in. Just googling, "research into race and access to nature UK" brings up a mix of academic research, government reports, news articles and policy documents or suggestions for change by environmental groups.

You don't understand what woke means.

@Mrbumpssmile
When people are havig a debate about something on the internet, "go google it" isn't much use at getting the other person to challenge their internal views on the subject. Especially when it's followed by "well-researched, documented and known". This sounds very similar to a "the matter is settled" type argument, which is no argument at all.
How about providing me with 3 main points on race and access to nature that highlight at least there is a discussion to be had on the subject?
I'll try and contribute by asking some questions.

Is there racial disparity in access to nature?
If yes, is that disparity due to racist or non racist factors? e.g. I would say living in a city where you have to travel a significant distance to get to nature is not a racist factor.
Is there racial disparity in how people are treated when they are accessing nature?
What could be done to improve things?

Can you see how by putting some words down instead of sending you off to google is more engaging?

I would say living in a city where you have to travel a significant distance to get to nature is not a racist factor.

You don't think racism is a factor in why black people are more likely to live in a city?

No.

Another embarrassing thread.

OP, this is the source: https://www.context.news/climate-risks/indonesian-trans-women-seek-stable-work-amid-unpredictable-weather

It say "This story is part of a series supported by HIVOS's Free To Be Me programme"

"The program is funded by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs under the ‘Power of Voices’ subsidy framework to strengthen civil society."

"Free to be Me is an innovative program that builds and maintains a movement of self-confident and diverse LGBTIQ+ organizations and activists who advocate for their human and socio-economic rights."

https://d-portal.org/ctrack.html?publisher=NL-KVK-41198677#view=act&aid=NL-KVK-41198677-00.0158-Indonesia

"The programme aims to include all colors of the rainbow in the CoA. These include LBQ, TGNC [transgender and non-confirming] and Intersex organizations that have been underfunded withing the LGBTIQ+ movement/CSOs"

"The Civil Society organisation *approached the Director General for Population and Civil Registration with advocacy tools and survey from the Indonesia Puzzle Community which found out that 84.2% of transgender community do not access public services due to a lack of Identity documents. The Director General announced waivers for Transgender community to create a simpler process for obtaining Identity documents."

It is a five year program from January 2021 to December 2025.

It says "The Civil Society organisation *approached the Director General for Population and Civil Registration with advocacy tools and survey from the Indonesia Puzzle Community which found out that 84.2% of transgender community do not access public services due to a lack of Identity documents. The Director General announced waivers for Transgender community to create a simpler process for obtaining Identity documents."

Hivos are a Dutch international humanist NGO. Most of what Hivos does in Indonesia is not related to LGBT: https://www.instagram.com/humanisfoundation/

Hivos are trying to imply that they have succeeded in getting transgender people ID cards

https://www.context.news/socioeconomic-inclusion/long-sought-ids-give-trans-indonesians-the-right-to-vote

This is misleading.

This article explains https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/penjelasan-kemendagri-soal-e-ktp-bagi-transgender-lt6086a75f100eb/

1. all Indonesians are entitled to/required to have ID cards by law
2. the 'jenis kelamin' (this is an Indonesian word which means sex in the biological sense; jenis = type, kelamin = 'sex', e.g, 'alat kelamin', where 'alat' means equipment means 'genitals) column only has the options 'male' and 'female', no 'transgender'
3. sex can only be changed by court order 'the sex recorded will be the original sex, except for those who have obtained a court order'
4. the name recorded will be the legal name, "so if the person's name is Sujono, then Sujono, not Sujono alias Jenny". Legal name can only be changed by court order.

It might be that there is a difficulty for them to get ID cards for other reasons - e.g., they've lost their birth certificate, live far from their home village, and the charities perhaps help them with what are essentially administrative tasks, not transgender rights - these 'transwomen' will mostly have ID cards in the name of 'Abdul', 'Muhammad', and other male names, because they are not going to court to get name changes. The 'change of sex' requires a court procedure with evidence - either proof of a DSD, or having undergone a full 'sex change operation' https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/prosedur-hukum-ganti-jenis-kelamin-lt5499758a512e5/

As far as the article goes it's likely just an eager journalist who gets paid by the Dutch government and the charity gets paid to perform this research. The combination of 'climate change' and 'transgender' will get him paid.

There are a few points in the article:

1. if it's raining, men will not go out (mostly by motorbike) and pickup prostitutes, be they transgender or otherwise - yes, I believe this is true
2. "The rainy season was lasting longer across the West Java province, winds were stronger and in some particularly bad years Patiha lost up to 80% of her earnings." - this is obvious nonsense. Does Patiha keep accounts? I did quite a bit of searching and could find no evidence that the rainy season is lasting longer in West Java. It is true that Bandung has got warmer, but this wouldn't make men less likely to go out in the evenings and look for prostitutes
3. 'Sherly Wijayanto, a 28-year-old trans woman from the capital Jakarta, worked as a busker for around seven years until the increasingly volatile weather made her seek other options. "I no longer want to endure the heat and rain on the streets"' It's Indonesia. If is usually extremely hot at midday, and often torrentially raining at night, then something is wrong.
4. 'Nearly 93% of respondents saw decreased income during the rainy season, and 72% had increased expenses.' I mean some businesses are seasonal, yes. I'm not entirely sure how transgender prostitutes find their customers though? I assume there are apps and websites for this?
5. When I was looking for a masseuse in Bandung it was clear that a substantial proportion of those advertising online were offering prostitution services. I don't think any of the masseuses were transgender, but I quickly closed the websites when they were obviously offering those services, so I really didn't check very carefully. However, for those working via websites it's likely that they would still get bookings during the rainy season, and it's not going to be THAT much of a problem - take a car taxi instead of a motorbike taxi. I suppose it does it into earnings, though both forms of taxi are still probably cheaper than public transport in the UK.

So the article is basically nonsense but there's obviously reasonable sums of money floating around from various NGOs to employ a few journalists in countries like Indonesia to write this kind of stuff.

(Sidenote: I'm sure transgender NGOs get much more funding than LGB in Indonesia - the other sexual minorities don't like to draw attention to themselves and Western-style campaigning has the potential to cause harm to LGB Indonesians living quietly, because Indonesians are certainly more tolerant of T than LGB.)