Guardian dissection of how woke went wrong. Close but no banana

[Taytoface]

Long read in the guardian today, reflecting on the reasons why there has been backlash to trans rights, climate and racial activism.

Lots of interesting stuff in there, but some shocking blind spots. At no point does the journalist recognize that in contrast to previous civil rights movements, TRAs want extra rights, such as the right to change officially recorded information on documents such as passports. She thinks opposing this is shocking. Call me an old bigot, but the purpose of a passport is to help others confirm your identity, not as a tool for self validation.

Also, no recognition that the harm to children has been downplayed, or the obvious unfairness of males competing against women. I could go on, but you all know the drill.

Oh, and some insight into changing tactics from Stonewall

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/jun/10/how-does-woke-start-winning-again

First bit of introspection I have seen. Also the start of calling out how having middle class blue haired wankers, spouting gender studies bollocks just doesn't appeal to anyone. Who knew?

These days, he [Robert Wintermute] argues that perhaps there shouldn’t even be a right to legally change sex on birth certificates and passports. Perhaps you consider this view extreme enough to justify his attempted cancellation, but it is one shared by a startling 50% of the British public,

startling eh? I come at it from the other side Gabby. 50% of the population thinks you should be able to LARP as a member of the opposite sex on official documents? Crikey

It's not quite that bad, Molluscs: in the 2023 survey the article refers to, 24% agreed with changing birth certificates, 50% disagreed, and 26% were undecided.

Gosh, so Gabby worded the sentence in a way that made it look like there is far more support for changing sex on documents than there really is?

how incredibly ironic

The media lecturing from people who often, frankly, seem quite shallow, has done them no favours.

And I think you are right about the over-reach. Much of it simply seems unfair on the face of it. Men competing in women's sports, giving someone a job (denying someone else a job) because or his or her race.

The tarring of people as backward for making what are clearly reasonable points. Climate change suffered from this, people asking about how certain things would actually work (say, electric cars and mining issues) was seen as a declaration that they hated nature.

As a previous poster said, GH's article on Cologne NYE made me disregard whatever she has to say. On anything.

There’s still the implication that these people were ahead of the curve in some way. Not that they were just wrong. Oh and, um, sorry.

Outlandish movements and ideas utilise existing groups as Trojan horses and sneak in on their goodwill and on the public's desire to be 'progressive' and 'on the right side of history'.

People like to imagine that history runs in a straight line, culminating at 'equality' and general 'all round loveliness'...but it doesn't. It's a substitute religious belief for secular society - hence no real logic or analysis , only faith.

Yes, it is faith based. When you lose your faith or become disillusioned you end up questioning everything and people resist the inecurity that comes with that.
And when you have constructed an identity based on such beliefs and advertised them publicly then you have a lot to lose.

Many of us here have been through that in recent years, as we saw how the Labour party and the Left, in general, treated women who understood the reality of sex and wanted to protect women's sex based rights. Once you've seen, you cannot unsee...and you begin to question every single article of faith you previous held.

And when you have constructed an identity based on such beliefs and advertised them publicly then you have a lot to lose

Worse than that - when you have supported the mutilation of your children in the pursuance of this ideology, there really is no going back.

I liked quite a bit of this article simply because it helped me articulate quite how irritated I am by being lectured by privileged people on how progressive politics should work. I speak as a white, middle class professional who has always seen themselves as progressive, but the hectoring and self-righteousness from a smallish number of people with the right 'suite of beliefs' has gradually alienated ME and I can only therefore imagine how irritating it is for people who started off feeling more marginalised than I did.

I rolled my eyes thoroughly for example at a recent local Pride movement which created a new 'trans-centred, Pro-Palestinian' pride. While I sympathise with those who find the current Pride too corporate for example, with some sponsorship from dubious organisations, why bring in Palestine? Why is anti-corporate necessarily linked to 'trans-centring' the event when big corporations historically have been driving trans-positive initiatives? How can people work out how to be progressively ideologically 'pure' or be told off?

Got around to reading the article. I reckon it's 95% good still right?

Not only is the media at fault. Our government is also at this. From my MP re amendments to the Sex and the Data (Use and Access Bill):

'The purpose of this Bill is to establish a statutory footing for digital verification services, enabling the use of trusted digital identities, where people can digitally present their information. New Clause 21 would have required public bodies to record sex data as biological sex, where such data is collected.

The proposed amendment was voted down on in the House of Commons on 7 May. A motion disagreeing with this was passed in the House of Lords but then rejected in a subsequent House of Commons vote.

The government has accepted the recent Supreme Court judgement but wants to take time to ensure it is worked through carefully and sensitively, considering the specific and particular requirements of public authorities.'

I fail to see why anyone would record anything but biological sex as it is the only sort of sex there is. A dreadful safeguarding issue with this Bill re children as wll as allowing self-ID by the back door. But MPs don't/won't see it.

God, this is so true.