FFS disability is now on the pride flag

[sashh]

I'm livid. I'm disabled and I do not want to be represented on the LGBTQ+ flag.

Also this quote: Dayna Halliwell (she/her), Content and Engagement Manager at Evenbreak, led the collaboration and organised the Pride visit. She said: “It was very moving and amazing to see the reaction of disabled people in the audience. You could see the joy on their faces of being represented in the parade.”

https://blog.evenbreak.co.uk/2024/07/02/new-disability-inclusive-pride-flag-unveiled-at-london-pride/

LGB Alliance are, of course, motivated by their campaign against trans people.

If you genuinely think that then there’s really no point trying to debate anything with you.

Charitable status isn't some sort of human right. It is a status granted based on specific legal criteria which some people - myself included - think the Charity Commission misapplied in this case.

That is the entire point of judicial review - to challenge public bodies if there is a concern that they have misapplied the law.

None of that determined whether LGB Alliance was allowed to exist or not. It was solely about whether they ought to have charitable status. I rather suspect that if the standing hurdle had been cleared, a court would have some sympathy that granting charitable status based on a mission that bears almost no resemblance to what the organisation does in practice is grounds to consider the decision-making by the Charity Commission flawed.

By all means - let me know your top five things the LGB Alliance has achieved for LGB people that is not related to gender or trans people.

I suspect you don't know what sealioning is then.

To give you a hint - it involves repeatedly asking questions or making requests, feigning some sort of confusion or fence-sitting, to troll someone, by a poster who already has a firm but secret position on the issue they are pretending to be seeking clarifications on.

I make no secret of my views on attempts to split the LGBT+ community, nor my support for trans people. What's more, I've asked very few questions of posters here (not least because the answers can always just be copied and pasted from any number of threads on here).

No worries.

Who precisely is preventing you from doing so?

The people who issue rape threats, death threats, and would try to get me fired from my job.

1. Setting up a helpline for LGB youth.
2. Filed amicus curiae brief supporting Fedotova & Others v. Russia.
3. Campaigning for pensions equality, finally resulting in regulatory change to force pension providers to treat same-sex married couples like opposite-sex married couples in late 2023.
4. Written to the Minister of State for Development and Africa to demand that Ugandan LGB and trans refugees have their asylum claims fast tracked after Uganda increased State persecution of LGB and trans people.
5. Supporting the campaign to have British Newspaper Archive digitise the entire publication history of Gay News.

They're a young charity who spent the first couple of years of their existence fighting to prevent other charities from shutting them down, so it's not surprising that they've not done huge amounts yet.

Can anyone explain why the original rainbow flag excluded people of colour and the disabled?
Was it deliberately exclusionary? Have all the flags up till now been horrific bigoted?
And why have the disabled queers only been included now?

No. That is precisely the point I've made - the original flag does and should encompass the whole LGBT+ community.

I think trying to represent all groups within that is probably not helpful - both because aesthetically it's unlikely to be pleasing, but also because it brings the (incorrect) implication that a group not explicitly represented is therefore excluded.

BUT I absolutely understand the view from certain groups within the community who have been historically marginalised that there is value in both symbolic as well as tangible inclusion. And I have certainly noticed a lot more discussion of racial inclusion within the community in the last few years, so it may well be that the changes to the flag have had some tangible impact.

The problem is the ongoing claim that there is a representative "LGBT community".

Because what you are actually talking about is just a group of people who have a certain political viewpoint. And - this is the important part - represent it as the viewpoint of the community.

It's the same in many other groups, there are certain people who set themselves up as representing a community and then use that claim for access to political influence.

So what you’re saying is, is the only way LGB people aren’t going to be bigoted is to have them on a flag? If they’re not on the flag they aren’t worthy of being included. Suddenly the widespread misogyny from certain quarters makes sense! We’re not on the bloody flag!

Those are excellent questions

No - you literally just made that up and it’s not even closely resembling what I’ve said.

Like any community, of course there are disparate voices within it.

That doesn’t render the community non-existent or null and void. There are multiple views and voices within the Jewish community - that doesn’t mean there isn’t a Jewish community.

No, I think that’s exactly what you said

It's the political element that is the problem. This is not just people that happen to be at a bar or social event together. It's claiming a political voice and that those who oppose it are bigots and unrepresentative.

I mean community can mean anything. Jewish people have a long history as a people that hold them together, a culture, and also for believers a very holistic belief system, which is a lot more than people who happen to fancy other people of the same sex. That's a very marginal connection and you can see that in terms of how many people don't maintain any relationship with the idea of it as a community.

If you look at people who are into Pride, or joking sexuality related lobby groups, the "allies" have more in common with their politics than many of the actual gay and lesbian people. Because it's actually a partisan group.

The Transgender movement colonises other groups such as Lesbians, Gay and for people who are born with disorders (or differences) of Sex Development (DSD). they have been able to recruit a larger population of activists who are personally invested in supporting the movement.

Yet actually I believe that Gender dysphoria should have stayed aligned with disability discrimination law and been a protected charicteristic as mental health is covered in disability legislation.
DSM4 categorised it as a mental disorder but this was changed in DSM5 because of transactivist lobbying.

Trans people ARE forcing things on LGB people, particularly lesbians. A lot of trans identified males seem to have a fetish about lesbians, demanding the date them, getting venues to cancel them if they don't include them in events.

As for this not concerning straight disabled people, the problem with that is that I have been forced under that umbrella. I don't have a gender ID but that is ignored.

Because of the toys I played with as a child they claim me as a trans man. Crazy.

There are multiple Jewish communities and their beliefs are often in conflict with each other. Example: when Reform Jewish women want to pray at the Western Wall, they are in conflict with Orthodox Jews who believe that the Wall is mandated by religious law to be male-only.

Throwing disabled people under the bus by, for example, declaring accessible loos to be also all-gender loos without building any extra accessible loos so that disabled people with continence problems end up waiting whilst an able person with special non-binary gender feelz uses the only accessible loo

Try being a 1 to 1 carer in this instance too. Knowing your client/relative has urgent toilet needs, yet someone who is perfectly capable of holding their pee or poo for a few minutes is ahead of them in the queue. I have a disabled daughter and she simply cannot wait. Of course she wears suitable incontinence products but they must be changed immediately for her dignity and comfort.

Not have to stand behind Paul/Paula George/Georgina who could easily access the urinal next door but doesn't want to because he wants to assert his assumed womanhood. My daughter cannot assert anything for herself. She does not have the intellect or indeed any speech at all. I despair that having faced this waiting problem for many years, it might get even worse if disabled toilets become a dedicated space for trans people also. There is absolutely no comparison.

If you have a vagina, go in the womens loo. If you have a penis, go in the mens loo. Everybody knows which one they have. It really is that simple.

Leave the disabled toilets for people and carers who need the extra space, the changing facilities, the support bars around the room, the higher loos and the lower sinks. All the handholds that disabled people need to get out of their wheelchair and support themselves toward the toilet bowl.

Now I've written that, it seems ludicrous that it has to be said.
The world has gone bloody flaming mad.

Well said WhatsUp.

I also want to remind everyone of this incident.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12535827/Transgender-ex-Labour-MSP-Heather-Herbert-disabled-toilet-Gatwick-Airport.html

I think that third spaces (or maybe that should be fourth spaces) are needed. This does not mean rebranding the disabled toilet or making the ladies mixed sex.

Maybe a small section of the gents could be taken to make an additional cubicle that is gender neutral. This would of course be accessed from the hallway/public space and not via the gents.

It's about time that men gave a tiny bit to help ease this situation.

Maybe a small section of the gents could be taken to make an additional cubicle that is gender neutral.

Yes.