The worrying rise of TERFism in the UK (MOD WARNING IN OP)

P_1

Something that I haven't seen discussed here yet. What are people's opinions on this.

Sadly it seems Graham Linehan has gone fully to bat on the side of those who disgraced themselves at London Pride.

A bit of digging seems to indicate that this movement is being funded by the same types that fund Iona and the likes.

To me this is dangerous and quite worrying seeing some of the stunts are being pulled. Is it a little englander thing a la Brexit or is it part of a wider schism within the LGBTQ+ movement?

Mod
Thread reopened following a second review. The thread went very far off topic this morning and a number of off topic posts have been deleted.

To clarify, this thread is about TERFism in the UK. Irrelevant posts this morning included trans regret, reversal surgery and puberty blockers for kids - if the thread goes off track again it will be locked permanently. The thread has already resulted in a vast number of reported posts, 4 separate on thread mod warnings, multiple infractions being handed out and 2 mod reviews so this thread will be under close scrutiny.

All previous mod warnings are still in effect,
1. No personal abuse or trolling
2. No back seat modding or arguing about moderation on thread
3. Report posts you feel are inappropriate
4. STAY ON TOPIC

Finally, to be crystal clear, it is against the forum charter to say or imply that transwomen are not women, or that they are men in disguise. The mods take a very dim view of such posts and we have handed out infractions in this thread for such posts already. Any further posts along these lines will be met with a 3 day ban from the forum. You have been warned.

baby and crumble

Tbh TERFs have been around a long long time. The history of the feminist movement is interesting in and of itself.

It’s indicative of a wider fear and disdain of trans folks. I had to cut ties with an Aussie friend of mine becaus she turned into a raging TERF a few years ago. Started telling me that it was “sad” that all the butch women were getting surgery to “mutilate” themselves because the patriarchy was so overwhelming the only way they felt they’d fit in and have power was by “becoming men”.

Suuuuuuuure.

JackTaylorFan

Yeah, it's not just an isolated case in the UK. Australia and the US have their fair share of TERFs as well. The links to organisations such as IONA would not surprise me in the least. There's a small but vocal number of them in Ireland too, and I suspect it will grow as the cultural backlash against transpeople continues to gain momentum.

But I don't know what, if any, good a discussion on TERFs here is going to do anyone. I'm not really interested in hearing or arguing the merits of their "concerns" either, because, quite frankly, it's just hate speech and fear-mongering when you boil it down.

Also, Linehan has displayed on numerous occasions, before the events you refer to now, that he is a transphobic piece of **** - including a deeply harmful episode of the IT Crowd. So this is nothing new.

As for schisms within the LGBT+ community. Well, you make it sound like this is the only thing that divides opinion within. LGBT+ is not a cohesive groupthink. Truth is, a lot of people in the community hate other parts of the community or even being associated with it in any way.

One eyed Jack

P_1 wrote: »

Something that I haven't seen discussed here yet. What are people's opinions on this.

Sadly it seems Graham Linehan has gone fully to bat on the side of those who disgraced themselves at London Pride.

I don’t agree that they did disgrace themselves at London Pride to be honest. Some people still regard Pride as a protest rather than a celebration, and lesbian feminists should protest, because they have little to celebrate if they allow themselves to be spoken down to, condemned and patronised by transgender advocates.

To me this is dangerous and quite worrying seeing some of the stunts are being pulled. Is it a little englander thing a la Brexit or is it part of a wider schism within the LGBTQ+ movement?

It’s part of a wider schism within the LGBTQ+ movement, and it’s a schism that’s only going to get wider as each group separately lobbies for social and political representation and recognition, rather than being dismissed by the greater majority who imagine they hold all the power, as ‘little englanders’.

P_1

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t agree that they did disgrace themselves at London Pride to be honest. Some people still regard Pride as a protest rather than a celebration, and lesbian feminists should protest, because they have little to celebrate if they allow themselves to be spoken down to, condemned and patronised by transgender advocates.





It’s part of a wider schism within the LGBTQ+ movement, and it’s a schism that’s only going to get wider as each group separately lobbies for social and political representation and recognition, rather than being dismissed by the greater majority who imagine they hold all the power, as ‘little englanders’.

I'm sorry but if peoples rights to exist are being challenged and dismissed then you damn well believe I will challenge them and call their actions a disgrace.

Trans people are people. Full stop. Also if you think trans people or their advocates hold all the power then with the greatest of respect, you are delusional

One eyed Jack

P_1 wrote: »

I'm sorry but if peoples rights to exist are being challenged and dismissed then you damn well believe I will challenge them and call their actions a disgrace.

Trans people are people. Full stop. Also if you think trans people or their advocates hold all the power then with the greatest of respect, you are delusional

I don’t think anyone is challenging anyone’s right to exist (undoubtedly that person does exist, clearly, there’s no right necessary to acknowledge that fact), but rather they are challenging among a host of other ideas -

- the right of people who are transgender to identify themselves as women (or indeed as men, as in the example by b&c)

- the right of lesbian women to identify themselves as women, who are only interested in women.

I think it’s more a question of competing rights being in conflict rather than any suggestion of questioning whether someone exists or not. Clearly they do, and I don’t think it’s delusional to acknowledge that transgender advocates absolutely do imagine they hold all the power right now over ‘TERFs’. You can hardly deny that when the organisers of the protest were roundly condemned by some people within the LGBT community for their actions, but there was little or nothing in the way of criticism from the wider feminist community, which was unusual in itself as one would almost have expected they’d be all over that.

Awkward shuffles.

P_1

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t think anyone is challenging anyone’s right to exist (undoubtedly that person does exist, clearly, there’s no right necessary to acknowledge that fact), but rather they are challenging among a host of other ideas -

- the right of people who are transgender to identify themselves as women (or indeed as men, as in the example by b&c)

- the right of lesbian women to identify themselves as women, who are only interested in women.

I think it’s more a question of competing rights being in conflict rather than any suggestion of questioning whether someone exists or not. Clearly they do, and I don’t think it’s delusional to acknowledge that transgender advocates absolutely do imagine they hold all the power right now over ‘TERFs’. You can hardly deny that when the organisers of the protest were roundly condemned by some people within the LGBT community for their actions, but there was little or nothing in the way of criticism from the wider feminist community, which was unusual in itself as one would almost have expected they’d be all over that.

Awkward shuffles.

Can both rights not coexist?

One eyed Jack

P_1 wrote: »

Can both rights not coexist?

They could potentially co-exist of course as rights being recognised in a legal sense, but I don’t think anyone would actually be either interested or satisfied with that outcome, and to be perfectly honest, I wouldn’t be satisfied with it either. There are a number of what I would consider legitimate concerns that feminist lesbian women absolutely have every right to be concerned about that warrant consideration -


Feminists Clash with Transgenders at London Pride Parade

JackTaylorFan

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There are a number of what I would consider legitimate concerns that feminist lesbian women absolutely have every right to be concerned about that warrant consideration -

You seem to be deliberately confusing and conflating all feminist lesbians with TERFs, but okay. Just to be clear, I know many "feminist lesbians women" and they all denounce TERFs as the trash they are. And to be honest, your continued attempts to push TERF agenda on here, and to speak on their behalf is both transparent and laughable.

Edit: And for every ridiculous anti-transgender biased weblink you can find I can find one that says the exact opposite - https://www.them.us/story/lesbians-join-the-fight-against-terfs

JackTaylorFan

And I'm just looking into the background of PJ Media where OEJ found that article...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pj-media/

Yeah, why am I not surprised...

The ratiwiki entry on them is good though https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pajamas_Media

Well, it gave me a laugh

One eyed Jack

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

You seem to be deliberately confusing and conflating all feminist lesbians with TERFs, but okay. Just to be clear, I know many "feminist lesbians women" and they all denounce TERFs as the trash they are. And to be honest, your continued attempts to push TERF agenda on here, and to speak on their behalf is both transparent and laughable.

Just indeed to be absolutely crystal clear - did you just use the token “I know a token someone who agrees with my point of view” to support your lack of an argument?

To be even clearer, I have no interest whatsoever in feminism of any description, but you know what it’s like - politics often makes for strange bedfellows, and it’s not as though I’ve ever been in the closet about my politically conservative leanings. It’s just not quite the struggle for me as it was for Caitlyn Jenner to come out as Republican. Her sense of humour doesn’t appear to be your cup of tea though, but I think she’s alright really, as long as she’s not claiming to speak on behalf of anyone else but herself.

Of course I have never claimed to speak on anyone’s behalf but my own, and I think I made that clear earlier when I specifically pointed out that it’s not something I personally would agree with. I would also never refer to anyone as trash either btw, and when referring to women your opinion is a damn good example of the kind of misogynistic rhetoric they shouldn’t have to put up with.

Edit: And for every ridiculous anti-transgender biased weblink you can find I can find one that says the exact opposite - https://www.them.us/story/lesbians-join-the-fight-against-terfs

Well at least that’s a better attempt than your last effort where the author initially attempted to claim Storm DeLarverie was transgender, until it was pointed out to the author in the comments that she sure as hell wasn’t. Then tell me again there’s no attempt to erase lesbian women from having their place in history like it’s not just another example of misogyny and lesbophobia.

JackTaylorFan

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Just indeed to be absolutely crystal clear - did you just use the token “I know a token someone who agrees with my point of view” to support your lack of an argument?

I literally posted a link with cis lesbians denouncing TERF trash, but okay...

One eyed Jack wrote: »

To be even clearer, I have no interest whatsoever in feminism of any description

Oh, I wholeheartedly agree on one point: I mean, nothing you said at all could be described as supporting feminism (as defined: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes). TERFs on the other hand? Yes, you pretty much have an unhealthy interest/obsession with their cause.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well at least that’s a better attempt than your last effort where the author initially attempted to claim Storm DeLarverie was transgender, until it was pointed out to the author in the comments that she sure as hell wasn’t. Then tell me again there’s no attempt to erase lesbian women from having their place in history like it’s not just another example of misogyny and lesbophobia.

Nope. No idea. I think you have me confused with someone else, dear. I am sure since attacking transwomen on the internet seems to be your favourite pastime it gets kinda confusing and hard to keep up with whom you are arguing with, but I assure you, this latest callback is completely lost on me; I literally have never even made mention on boards of the person you speak of until right this moment.

One eyed Jack

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Nope. No idea. I think you have me confused with someone else, dear. I am sure since attacking transwomen on the internet seems to be your favourite pastime it gets kinda confusing and hard to keep up with whom you are arguing with, but I assure you, this latest callback is completely lost on me; I literally have never even heard of the aforementioned person you speak of until right this moment.

The first link in your own post, not the second one that doesn’t work -

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

https://sites.psu.edu/womeninhistory/2016/10/23/the-unsung-heroines-of-stonewall-marsha-p-johnson-and-sylvia-rivera/

https://mic.com/articles/121256/meet-marsha-p-johnson-and-sylvia-rivera-transgender-stonewall-veterans

How language evolves with time and understanding.

Finally, when a police officer clubbed a butch lesbian named Stormé DeLarverie over the head for saying that her handcuffs were too tight, a violent riot broke out and the crowd exploded. They could no longer stand silently and watch members of their community be assaulted and unjustly imprisoned for their sexuality.

Edit: In the first version of this post, I said that a drag queen was clubbed over the head by the police, sparking the rioting. Thanks for reader Logan for pointing out that it was in fact Stormé DeLarverie who was clubbed for saying her handcuffs were too tight.

And when the author has already suggested that drag queens then would be referred to as transgender today, I would say that was rather convenient if you’re gonna rewrite history to support your own narrative -

Transgender: (adj.) denoting or relating to a person whose self-identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender.

Transvestite: (n.) a person, typically a man, who derives pleasure from dressing in clothes traditionally worn by the opposite sex.

Drag Queen: (n.) a man who dresses up in women’s clothes, typically for the purposes of entertainment.

Note: at the time of the Stonewall riots, the gay community did not have the same extensive vocabulary to describe sexuality as we do today. Marsha and Sylvia were transgender women, but primarily referred to themselves as drag queens or transvestites, which have separate meanings today. Transvestite is now considered a derogatory term.

JackTaylorFan

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The first link in your own post, not the second one that doesn’t work -










And when the author has already suggested that drag queens then would be referred to as transgender today, I would say that was rather convenient if you’re gonna rewrite history to support your own narrative -

So let me get this straight: you are now attempting to appropriate things said in a random comment section to me?

Okay...

JackTaylorFan

Finally, when a police officer clubbed a butch lesbian named Stormé DeLarverie over the head for saying that her handcuffs were too tight, a violent riot broke out and the crowd exploded. They could no longer stand silently and watch members of their community be assaulted and unjustly imprisoned for their sexuality.

Edit: In the first version of this post, I said that a drag queen was clubbed over the head by the police, sparking the rioting. Thanks for reader Logan for pointing out that it was in fact Stormé DeLarverie who was clubbed for saying her handcuffs were too tight.

And to be honest, this sounds like anything but erasure. It sounds like the author was corrected and graciously made amends. You are really reaching here.

One eyed Jack

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

So let me get this straight: you are now attempting to appropriate things said in a random comment section to me?

Okay...

That’s not getting anything straight. You claimed that you hadn’t heard of Storm DeLarverie before now, and accused me of all sorts of nonsense. I was able to point out to you that it was from a link that you had posted yourself, and still you try play like I’m doing something which I haven’t done at all? Just go back to your own previous post, you’ll see it for yourself. You tried to claim I was targeting you and you had no recollection of whom I was referring to. That’s why I posted the exact post I was referring to and the link within it, because that’s all I was ascribing to you, that which you had already written yourself. Now you should be straight on the matter.


And for what it’s worth -

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

But I don't know what, if any, good a discussion on TERFs here is going to do anyone. I'm not really interested in hearing or arguing the merits of their "concerns" either, because, quite frankly, it's just hate speech and fear-mongering when you boil it down.

This just shows for all your talk about the “LGBT community”, when you boil it down quite frankly it appears your concerns are only for yourself and those people who already agree with you. Of course you’re not interested in hearing the concerns of others within the community who’s interests conflict with your own. Can’t say I blame you, but that still doesn’t give you any right to refer to anyone as trash.

P_1

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They could potentially co-exist of course as rights being recognised in a legal sense, but I don’t think anyone would actually be either interested or satisfied with that outcome, and to be perfectly honest, I wouldn’t be satisfied with it either. There are a number of what I would consider legitimate concerns that feminist lesbian women absolutely have every right to be concerned about that warrant consideration -


Feminists Clash with Transgenders at London Pride Parade

Erm how and why? Not being obtuse but out of all the feminists of all orientations that I know and count among my friends from everywhere between Dublin, Belfast, Manchester, London, Boston, Los Angeles and everywhere in between, not a single one follows that logic.

If you are cis female and are only attracted to other cis females there is no issue there whatsoever. Nobody is threatening that whatsoever.

Quite why such an issue has suddenly developed in what appears to be a very small minority of people who are twisted the equality message of feminism is quite beyond me.

baby and crumble

My issue with TERFs is that they basically disagree that trans women are women, or that trans men are men (although that last bit gets mixed up sometimes, poor babas seem confused). They also seem to think that transitioning weakens their position as women or something. I still can’t wrap my head around that one.

Of course in theory anyone has the right to protest for what they believe but also there’s a time and a place. Fundamentalist transphobic/ homophobic protestors would likely be quickly moved on from protesting at Pride, yet because the protestors were queer themeselves it’s ok? Nope. It’s LGBT pride, the T needs to be protected.

And if they have the “right” to assert that trans women aren’t women then I have the right to tell them they aren’t true feminists. Not one feminist (or to push it further, not one lesbian feminist) I know these days agreed with those protestors at London Pride.

Tbh I’ve gotten huge grief from TERFs online. They seem so angry. I don’t understand how one group of people obtaining rights could possibly undermine another.

P_1

baby and crumble wrote: »

My issue with TERFs is that they basically disagree that trans women are women, or that trans men are men (although that last bit gets mixed up sometimes, poor babas seem confused). They also seem to think that transitioning weakens their position as women or something. I still can’t wrap my head around that one.

Of course in theory anyone has the right to protest for what they believe but also there’s a time and a place. Fundamentalist transphobic/ homophobic protestors would likely be quickly moved on from protesting at Pride, yet because the protestors were queer themeselves it’s ok? Nope. It’s LGBT pride, the T needs to be protected.

And if they have the “right” to assert that trans women aren’t women then I have the right to tell them they aren’t true feminists. Not one feminist (or to push it further, not one lesbian feminist) I know these days agreed with those protestors at London Pride.

Tbh I’ve gotten huge grief from TERFs online. They seem so angry. I don’t understand how one group of people obtaining rights could possibly undermine another.

Thankfully it appears to be confined to London. The messaging at Manchester Pride appears to have indicated that

One eyed Jack

P_1 wrote: »

Erm how and why? Not being obtuse but out of all the feminists of all orientations that I know and count among my friends from everywhere between Dublin, Belfast, Manchester, London, Boston, Los Angeles and everywhere in between, not a single one follows that logic.

If you are cis female and are only attracted to other cis females there is no issue there whatsoever. Nobody is threatening that whatsoever.

Quite why such an issue has suddenly developed in what appears to be a very small minority of people who are twisted the equality message of feminism is quite beyond me.

You’d be forgiven for being unaware of it, but it’s absolutely not true to suggest that nobody is threatening the rights of lesbian women to decide for themselves whom they consider potential sexual partners.

It’s developed into such an issue simply because lesbian women just like straight women didn’t speak up about issues which affected them, instead deferring to a more submissive position in society under men.

Women who identify as feminists are generally concerned with promoting women’s equality and empowering women to be able to speak up for themselves and support each other, and that’s why you’re hearing about it now, and it has been going on long, long before the stunt they pulled at London Pride. I expect this is their turn as women and as lesbians to say that they aren’t interested in playing a submissive role for transgender politics either.

baby and crumble

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You’d be forgiven for being unaware of it, but it’s absolutely not true to suggest that nobody is threatening the rights of lesbian women to decide for themselves whom they consider potential sexual partners.

Show me. Show me where there is more than an odd comment here and there on a weird online board or on social media.

One eyed Jack

baby and crumble wrote: »

Show me. Show me where there is more than an odd comment here and there on a weird online board or on social media.

The term cotton ceiling is used to identify what some transgender activists have identified among lesbian women as a reluctance to include people who are transgender in their sexual communities. There are plenty of sources on the internet and not just obscure random blogs, and of course there is plenty of it on social media because that’s where a lot of this sort of stuff gains traction. It’s been around since the ‘70’s in feminist circles, so it’s not like this is anything particularly new. It’s just a more modern take on how to guilt trip women into submission.

splinter65

baby and crumble wrote: »

Show me. Show me where there is more than an odd comment here and there on a weird online board or on social media.

Is it not the case that all lesbians including those who have fought hard to stop the violence visited on women by men, are being asked to accept that anyone can now self identify not only as a woman but as a lesbian?
As a straight woman I have no problem understanding how in particular feminist lesbians would feel very threatened by that notion. Especially when your own extended community is telling you that you must accept this without question.

baby and crumble

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The term cotton ceiling is used to identify what some transgender activists have identified among lesbian women as a reluctance to include people who are transgender in their sexual communities.

I think this whole argument still hinges on whether or not you see transwomen as women or not. If you fancy women, and a transwoman is a woman in your eyes then you may be attracted to her. I know I fancy plenty of transwomen, because I see them as women, and I am attracted to women. Obviously I'm not attracted to all transwomen because that would be weird and slightly creepy.

If the reason you don't fancy any transwomen is because you don't view transwomen as women FULL STOP then yeah, your assertion is transphobic. Of course it is. Nobody should be forced into sexual activity with someone they are not attracted to (or anyone, obviously) and I just can't see these assertions that women are being guilted into being attracted as having real life merit. Being told your transphobic beliefs are transphobic isn't bullying.

splinter65 wrote: »

Is it not the case that all lesbians including those who have fought hard to stop the violence visited on women by men, are being asked to accept that anyone can now self identify not only as a woman but as a lesbian?
As a straight woman I have no problem understanding how in particular feminist lesbians would feel very threatened by that notion. Especially when your own extended community is telling you that you must accept this without question.

Everyone self-identifies as a gender and a sexuality. You yourself identify as a woman and as straight.

And yes, I am being asked to accept that anyone can self-identify as a woman and as a lesbian. I'm 100% fine with that because I'm secure enough in myself to understand that what Nancy down the road does is of no consequence to me.

Look I will be totally honest and admit I was horribly transphobic when I was in my early 20's. I was like "don't be stupid, you can't be trans and a lesbian, why would you identify as a woman and then as a lesbian when you could stay as a man and be straight?" It literally made no sense to me. But then I grew up and realised that people identifying as who they are, people realsing late that they are trans, or queer, or asexual, or whatever it is literally makes zero difference to my life. I mean honestly, how is a person trasnitioning of their own accord impact your life directly? Unless that trans person is an asshole about it, then they are not. Not one bit. My status as a lesbian is not even remotely threatened by somebody transitioning. It's not like there's only X number of vaginas allowed in the world, and if someone gets one when they're 40 my minge will magically disappear.

:rolleyes:

P_1

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You’d be forgiven for being unaware of it, but it’s absolutely not true to suggest that nobody is threatening the rights of lesbian women to decide for themselves whom they consider potential sexual partners.

It’s developed into such an issue simply because lesbian women just like straight women didn’t speak up about issues which affected them, instead deferring to a more submissive position in society under men.

Women who identify as feminists are generally concerned with promoting women’s equality and empowering women to be able to speak up for themselves and support each other, and that’s why you’re hearing about it now, and it has been going on long, long before the stunt they pulled at London Pride. I expect this is their turn as women and as lesbians to say that they aren’t interested in playing a submissive role for transgender politics either.

Well all I can say to that is that my circle of friends is as wide and diverse on many many spectrums and not once has this issue cropped up on anybody's radar. Having said that I do have a suspicion that TERFs would recoil in horror at some of our world views as they would not fit into the black and white they seem to like to assign people into.

The TL:DR version can be essentially boiled down to.

If you're straight that's fine
If you're gay that's also fine
If you're bi guess what that's fine too
If you're pan, also fine
If you're poly, fire ahead
If you're ace, if you'll forgive the pun, that's ace

So long as all parties consent and it's safe and sane then frankly where is the bloody issue.

pl4ichjgy17zwd

P_1 wrote:

If you are cis female and are only attracted to other cis females there is no issue there whatsoever. Nobody is threatening that whatsoever.

baby and crumble wrote:

If the reason you don't fancy any transwomen is because you don't view transwomen as women FULL STOP then yeah, your assertion is transphobic. Of course it is. Nobody should be forced into sexual activity with someone they are not attracted to (or anyone, obviously) and I just can't see these assertions that women are being guilted into being attracted as having real life merit. Being told your transphobic beliefs are transphobic isn't bullying.

I was told I was scum and 'I should just die already' when I was pressured into answering a question about genital preference that was nobody's business. This was at a gathering for queer women. I honestly don't think it's transphobic that I accept transwomen as women but have no interest in sex involving a penis no matter whom it's attached to. This was the crux of the discussion by the way, I didn't bring it up nor would I ever, I would never assume what someone has or hasn't and I don't think it defines their gender. But it definitely defines if I'm going to engage in a sexual relationship with them and there is rhetoric creeping in that that's not okay. Surely as LGBTQ people we should be encouraging consent not coercion. It doesn't make you not a lesbian if you're cool with a woman no matter the genitals, but it also doesn't make you transphobic if you do have a preference.

I tried read all I could on the matter at the time, and the TERFs prey on that. A lot of the discourse sounded reasonable and then suddenly bam you get to transwomen are not women/transmen are not men territory. I knew to click away at that point but a lot of people probably don't and get sucked in.

I worry about the two extreme voices shouting the loudest and vulnerable people, trans or cis, getting caught up in it when I think most people aren't so filled with bile.

P_1

Adrian Few Medicine wrote: »

I was told I was scum and 'I should just die already' when I was pressured into answering a question about genital preference that was nobody's business. This was at a gathering for queer women. I honestly don't think it's transphobic that I accept transwomen as women but have no interest in sex involving a penis no matter whom it's attached to. This was the crux of the discussion by the way, I didn't bring it up nor would I ever, I would never assume what someone has or hasn't and I don't think it defines their gender. But it definitely defines if I'm going to engage in a sexual relationship with them and there is rhetoric creeping in that that's not okay. Surely as LGBTQ people we should be encouraging consent not coercion. It doesn't make you not a lesbian if you're cool with a woman no matter the genitals, but it also doesn't make you transphobic if you do have a preference.

I tried read all I could on the matter at the time, and the TERFs prey on that. A lot of the discourse sounded reasonable and then suddenly bam you get to transwomen are not women/transmen are not men territory. I knew to click away at that point but a lot of people probably don't and get sucked in.

I worry about the two extreme voices shouting the loudest and vulnerable people, trans or cis, getting caught up in it when I think most people aren't so filled with bile.

Jesus that's horrific. Was this in Ireland? Honestly I thought we were better than that

pl4ichjgy17zwd

No, the US.

I'd like to hope we're better than that too, and TERFism, but I'm sure people have experienced it everywhere.

baby and crumble

Adrian Few Medicine wrote: »

I was told I was scum and 'I should just die already' when I was pressured into answering a question about genital preference that was nobody's business. This was at a gathering for queer women.

That's really ****ty and awful.

It's all a bit weird really to have so many people fixated on gentials. What ones do you have, what ones to you not like, what ones would you allow smush up into yours...

pl4ichjgy17zwd

baby and crumble wrote:

It's all a bit weird really to have so many people fixated on gentials. What ones do you have, what ones to you not like, what ones would you allow smush up into yours...

I agree, I always thought that would only be a conversation I need to have with a prospective partner.

P_1

Ok that's frankly bizarre.

Would it be fair to say that there are extremes on both sides that are causing normal trans people harm in the crossfire? Is there any chance of the middle ground telling both extremes to cop on and maybe just maybe trans people will get the rights that they deserve and have deserved for a long bloody time or have we descended too far into the rabbit hole?

pl4ichjgy17zwd

P_1 wrote:

Would it be fair to say that there are extremes on both sides that are causing normal trans people harm in the crossfire? Is there any chance of the middle ground telling both extremes to cop on and maybe just maybe trans people will get the rights that they deserve and have deserved for a long bloody time or have we descended too far into the rabbit hole?

I think we have to be the ones shouting the loudest. As I said, I tried to read a lot when that conversation happened; I'm someone that's in the community, I know how to navigate community spaces, I know how to spot established rhetoric and still most of the reading I came across was from two extreme camps.

I think there's plenty of good resources available, but it's pretty useless unless they're readily and easily available to those searching for answers. I've been trying to make sure to comment articles I retweet on Twitter and stuff with relevant wording and pushing it to spaces I wouldn't have before (my Twitter is very gay, my Facebook is not, as an example but I share across platforms).

One other thing I noticed when I would come across those TERF forums was a lot of them claimed to be straight women 'concerned' for their gay sisters. It's BS obviously, their concern is just prettied up transphobia, but it just showed me that sharing across queer spaces isn't enough.

Gay or straight or cis or trans, it feels like young vulnerable people with questions are being radicalized into certain ideologies that are equal and direct opposites, ie, well if those people are saying THIS I'm going to say THAT as if THAT is better just because it's the opposite. Extreme example, but kill all trans people vs kill all cis people. One is not a reasonable reaction to the other.

We have to elevate the voices that are staying in the universe of sane.

Sonics2k

baby and crumble wrote: »

That's really ****ty and awful.

It's all a bit weird really to have so many people fixated on gentials. What ones do you have, what ones to you not like, what ones would you allow smush up into yours...

IMO, it's because no matter where they lean on the political spectrum, the US is obsessed with sex.

pl4ichjgy17zwd

I saw the cotton ceiling mentioned earlier, I think this is a good example of where things have gone off the rails.

Before the term, I believe there was a general discussion about implicit bias and people who didn't want to date a transgender person. I saw some trans activists ask cis people to reflect on why they might feel that way, was it a bias they could overcome etc. This is a good reflective exercise for anyone to do, and doesn't expect or ask anything but your own willingness to examine yourself. Honestly I don't believe this conversation should ever have been broken down to genitals or not, I don't believe there's much of a wider societal pressure on whether you like penises or vaginas. And no one owes anyone an answer into which category they fall.

What some (few but loud) extremists now say is 'you're bigoted unless you don't want to sleep with me'. They have the cotton ceiling term, which seems extremely misguided at best seeing as the metaphor is 'breaking through' and the ceiling is underwear. Even if it's more nuanced than that, TERFs are going to run away with that terminology.

You Google the term as someone might who's trying to learn and it's all TERF stuff or articles that say labels should be dropped and people just say 'I like vaginas and/or dicks'. Neither of those commentaries are helpful. Erasing someone else's identity isn't the way to prop up your own. This goes for lesbians who claim they wouldn't date a transwomen because they 'don't like men' too.

It's all hindering and making volatile a discussion that could have opened minds.

One eyed Jack

baby and crumble wrote: »

If the reason you don't fancy any transwomen is because you don't view transwomen as women FULL STOP then yeah, your assertion is transphobic. Of course it is. Nobody should be forced into sexual activity with someone they are not attracted to (or anyone, obviously) and I just can't see these assertions that women are being guilted into being attracted as having real life merit. Being told your transphobic beliefs are transphobic isn't bullying.

You can’t see the assertion that there is an attempt being made by a minority of transgender advocates to coerce and humiliate women into including individuals they have no wish to include in their sexual spaces as having any real life merit, but you’ll still maintain they’re transphobic if they refuse. That’s coercion - knowing that someone has no wish to regard other people as potential sexual partners, and condemning them as transphobic on that basis. It’s the equivalent of me walking up to a lesbian in a bar and suggesting that she doesn’t know what she’s missing and perhaps she should be more open minded and accept me as a potential sexual partner. It would be like someone suggesting I’m homophobic because I do not consider men potential sexual partners.

Obviously I personally am not going to care for their opinion if that’s the way they see it, that’s really not my problem. On that basis I can see why those women who object to including transgender persons as potential sexual partners would feel that their concerns are no longer represented in the mainstream LGBT community.

P_1 wrote: »

The TL:DR version can be essentially boiled down to.

If you're straight that's fine
If you're gay that's also fine
If you're bi guess what that's fine too
If you're pan, also fine
If you're poly, fire ahead
If you're ace, if you'll forgive the pun, that's ace

So long as all parties consent and it's safe and sane then frankly where is the bloody issue.

The issue is that some people take issue with the fact that other people do not consent to being coerced into submitting themselves to something which is fundamentally objectionable to them.

P_1

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You can’t see the assertion that there is an attempt being made by a minority of transgender advocates to coerce and humiliate women into including individuals they have no wish to include in their sexual spaces as having any real life merit, but you’ll still maintain they’re transphobic if they refuse. That’s coercion - knowing that someone has no wish to regard other people as potential sexual partners, and condemning them as transphobic on that basis. It’s the equivalent of me walking up to a lesbian in a bar and suggesting that she doesn’t know what she’s missing and perhaps she should be more open minded and accept me as a potential sexual partner. It would be like someone suggesting I’m homophobic because I do not consider men potential sexual partners.

Obviously I personally am not going to care for their opinion if that’s the way they see it, that’s really not my problem. On that basis I can see why those women who object to including transgender persons as potential sexual partners would feel that their concerns are no longer represented in the mainstream LGBT community.





The issue is that some people take issue with the fact that other people do not consent to being coerced into submitting themselves to something which is fundamentally objectionable to them.

What? So people are taking issue with what other people do when it has no material effect on them whatsoever?

I'm sorry but how does that make any sense? Its skin to suggesting that somebody who supports Man Utd would have a valid objection to their neighbour supporting Man City.

splinter65

P_1 wrote: »

What? So people are taking issue with what other people do when it has no material effect on them whatsoever?

I'm sorry but how does that make any sense? Its skin to suggesting that somebody who supports Man Utd would have a valid objection to their neighbour supporting Man City.

It's quite straightforward. Lesbians are being labelled by some transactivists as transphobic for not wanting to date a transwoman and being wary about allowing transwomen free reign in safe spaces they have created for themselves.
Some of these lesbians have had terrible experiences of men abusing them throughout their lives.

One eyed Jack

P_1 wrote: »

What? So people are taking issue with what other people do when it has no material effect on them whatsoever?

I'm sorry but how does that make any sense? Its skin to suggesting that somebody who supports Man Utd would have a valid objection to their neighbour supporting Man City.

The football analogy is lost on me P, no clue about football

Their point is that another section of the community’s political aims is in direct conflict with their political aims. Both political positions are rooted in feminist theories and intersect with lesbian and transgender politics. That’s why there is unlikely to be any compromise or agreement between both competing political positions. It’s much less about individuals and their genitalia, and more about a question of conflicting political aims and ideologies regarding representation within the mainstream LGBT community and indeed their representation and position in wider society.

Smegging hell

P_1 wrote: »

Something that I haven't seen discussed here yet. What are people's opinions on this.

Sadly it seems Graham Linehan has gone fully to bat on the side of those who disgraced themselves at London Pride.

A bit of digging seems to indicate that this movement is being funded by the same types that fund Iona and the likes.

To me this is dangerous and quite worrying seeing some of the stunts are being pulled. Is it a little englander thing a la Brexit or is it part of a wider schism within the LGBTQ+ movement?

IIRC this line of thinking dates back to second wave feminism in the 70s, see Janice Raymond's 'The Transsexual Empire'.

It seems quite prominent in British feminism but has never been influential in Ireland, AFAIK. There are certainly Irish people who advocate it but they have little influence within feminist campaigns, groups like the Abortion Rights Campaign have always been trans-inclusive and have been criticised heavily by some UK feminists online as a consequence.

Linehan seems obsessed. Tweets about little else these days.

P_1

splinter65 wrote: »

It's quite straightforward. Lesbians are being labelled by some transactivists as transphobic for not wanting to date a transwoman and being wary about allowing transwomen free reign in safe spaces they have created for themselves.
Some of these lesbians have had terrible experiences of men abusing them throughout their lives.

It does still strike me as odd. So we have a few oddballs on the side of trans people making a ludicrous claim on the one hand and we then have some lesbians who have had valid negative experiences painting all trans people with the one brush on the other. Caught in the crossfire are normal decent trans people.

I must point out that we are talking about trans people in the abstract here which is wrong. I'm sure many of us have friends who are going through this or have gone through this. I dont know about others but the thought of my friends being predatory in any way is so absurd its laughable.

I mean take the bathroom argument. Most normal people use bathrooms for a number 1 or number 2. Or changing facilities for that matter. Now eyebrows would certainly be raised if one were to go for a 1 or 2 in one of those but most normal people simply use them to get changed in.

Trans people are normal people who have to go through an extraordinary struggle. Seeing people who you would expect to be their allies turn against with so much vitriol is somewhat heartbreaking.

P_1

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The football analogy is lost on me P, no clue about football

Their point is that another section of the community’s political aims is in direct conflict with their political aims. Both political positions are rooted in feminist theories and intersect with lesbian and transgender politics. That’s why there is unlikely to be any compromise or agreement between both competing political positions. It’s much less about individuals and their genitalia, and more about a question of conflicting political aims and ideologies regarding representation within the mainstream LGBT community and indeed their representation and position in wider society.

You're not missing much not knowing about football

Ah ideology, such a force for good at times and a source of strife at other times. I suppose we should be glad it hasn't taken hold here. I wonder if it's down to us generally being sound as people or if it's down to the more relaxed pace of life we'd have here over say the likes of London. Or even if it's down to our smaller population. One for the sociologists to mull over I guess.

suicide_circus

I'm also not sure that if one cannot force oneself to believe that a trans person is really and truly their preferred gender in every sense of the word that this constitutes a "phobia". It is a social and intellectual leap that maybe nothing to do with fear or hatred.

baby and crumble

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You can’t see the assertion that there is an attempt being made by a minority of transgender advocates to coerce and humiliate women into including individuals they have no wish to include in their sexual spaces as having any real life merit, but you’ll still maintain they’re transphobic if they refuse. That’s coercion - knowing that someone has no wish to regard other people as potential sexual partners, and condemning them as transphobic on that basis.

You're really twisting my words. I specifically said that if the only reason you blankly refuse to see trasnwomen as viable sexual/romantic partners because you see them as actually being men, then yeah - that's transphobic. I don't see how it's not, frankly. But calling someone out on their transphobic ideas isn't coercion, for heavens sake.

I could equally say "You can't see that there is an attempt being made by a minority of radical lesbian feminists to make people believe that transwomen are men".

it's also not all about sexual spaces. There are lots of TERFs that don't want transwomen in ladies bathrooms, womens bars, womens networking events... it's insidious.

One eyed Jack

baby and crumble wrote: »

You're really twisting my words. I specifically said that if the only reason you blankly refuse to see trasnwomen as viable sexual/romantic partners because you see them as actually being men, then yeah - that's transphobic. I don't see how it's not, frankly. But calling someone out on their transphobic ideas isn't coercion, for heavens sake.

I could equally say "You can't see that there is an attempt being made by a minority of radical lesbian feminists to make people believe that transwomen are men".

it's also not all about sexual spaces. There are lots of TERFs that don't want transwomen in ladies bathrooms, womens bars, womens networking events... it's insidious.

I’m not twisting your words. I agree with you, it’s the definition of transphobia. I’m just not sure it actually matters to those people who disagree with your opinion is all. That’s exactly why I used the examples of me suggesting to a lesbian that if only she were more open minded she would consider me as a potential sexual partner. That’s about as likely to fly as someone suggesting I’m homophobic because I do not consider men as potential sexual partners. They’re absolutely correct of course. It’s just not going to make any difference though because in just the same way I wouldn’t expect a lesbian should take my assertion seriously, I’m not going to take the suggestion that I’m homophobic seriously either. It’s wishful thinking to assume that strategy would actually work on someone over the age of 12 tbh.

I’d also agree with you that it’s not just about sexual spaces, but it’s about women’s spaces, and who is or indeed isn’t or should or shouldn’t be entitled to enter that space. I just don’t get hung up on the bathrooms issue though as neither I nor any woman I’ve ever known as made an issue of it. I just use whichever is the first door I come to, never had any problems, although I understand that for some women they would absolutely have an issue with me entering a space which has been designated for women only. I don’t consider their point of view insidious as I can understand where they’re coming from and why they object to the presence of people they feel are not entitled to enter their space.

baby and crumble

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m not twisting your words. I agree with you, it’s the definition of transphobia. I’m just not sure it actually matters to those people who disagree with your opinion is all.

Well that doesn't mean stop pushing people to reflect on their opinions. If I didn't have my wife to push me about my biphobia when we first got together I'd still have awful opinions, probably.

QUOTE=One eyed Jack;107935699]I just don’t get hung up on the bathrooms issue though as neither I nor any woman I’ve ever known as made an issue of it. I just use whichever is the first door I come to, never had any problems, although I understand that for some women they would absolutely have an issue with me entering a space which has been designated for women only. I don’t consider their point of view insidious as I can understand where they’re coming from and why they object to the presence of people they feel are not entitled to enter their space.[/QUOTE]

The bathroom and changing room issue is a thorny one for me because I have been asked to leave ladies bathrooms and dressing rooms, and gotten dogs abuse because some women assume I'm a guy. Trust me, a lot of women will freak out about someone they think shouldn't be somewhere being there. Even if literally all would happen even if I was a guy would be that they'd wash their hand next to me at a sink.

One eyed Jack

baby and crumble wrote: »

Well that doesn't mean stop pushing people to reflect on their opinions. If I didn't have my wife to push me about my biphobia when we first got together I'd still have awful opinions, probably.

I think though you can appreciate the difference between your wife pushing you to question your biphobia, and an ideology which suggests that you should question your whole identity as a lesbian, implying that you’re somehow missing out because you’re not sexually attracted to people you don’t find sexually attractive. I’ve experienced being told I should be more open minded by people who have wanted to have sex with me and they have refused to accept that it’s just not something I’m into. It came across as they considered their sexuality was somehow worthy of greater consideration than my absolute refusal to consider them as potential sexual partners. That person is entitled to think I’m a homophobic bigot, and if I were already in a position where I felt that my sexual identity was being ignored or being deigned as a less than legitimate sexual identity, then I know I wouldn’t take too kindly to an ideology which ignores my sexual identity and makes that assertion either. Personally, having someone question their sexuality and hope they come to a conclusion which is to my advantage, is not something I’d do as I find it disrespectful to that person. I accept that they’re just not into it, and that’s fine. The issue is mine to deal with, not theirs.

The bathroom and changing room issue is a thorny one for me because I have been asked to leave ladies bathrooms and dressing rooms, and gotten dogs abuse because some women assume I'm a guy. Trust me, a lot of women will freak out about someone they think shouldn't be somewhere being there. Even if literally all would happen even if I was a guy would be that they'd wash their hand next to me at a sink.

I can imagine that, and undoubtedly it’s unfortunate when it happens. On the other hand I can also appreciate exactly why women are uncomfortable with the idea that they must now share a space with people who they didn’t previously have to share a space with. I can appreciate that they are entitled to feel safe and comfortable and having worked with women who have experienced horrific ordeals at the hands of men, I’m acutely conscious of the fact that they as individuals may consider my presence in their space a threat to their safety. It’s not an entirely irrational or unfounded fear as I know it’s based upon their experiences, but being aware of that I consider their feelings more important than my ego. I don’t take it personally as I know it’s not coming from a place where they object to me personally. I know it takes time for them to get to a point where they don’t consider me a threat to their safety. I’m not going to push them as that would simply be counterproductive. I know some women are actually more comfortable opening up to me because I’m a man, but I don’t assume that every woman feels that way, and certainly I’m not going to condemn women who don’t, or suggest that their “hang-ups” about men are irrelevant or less important than my ‘entitlement’ to be regarded as someone who isn’t a threat to their safety. Immediately I am understandably perceived as a threat to their safety if they perceive that I consider myself more important than their right to feel safe in a space in which they have an expectation of being able to feel safe. It’s just basic consideration for other people on my part and acknowledging the fact that they may not feel the same way I do is all, and being ok with that. I understand that some people find that unacceptable, but at the same time I don’t support anyone trying to force other people to accept them. I find that rather than generating acceptance, their actions as individuals fuel and foster resentment of people that person claims to represent.

JupiterKid

To be honest I’m frankly getting sick to my back teeth of all this guff about TERFs, cis, non-binary and such. We are really bogging ourselves down into rather pedantic and extremist ideology directly imported from American universities.

What about LGBT and just leave it at that?

Also I believe that the LGBT “community” is perhaps more fractured than ever in the West than ever before, as we gain widespread societal acceptance. In fact, I doubt there really was ever a fully cohesive community in a complete sense ever.

Many gay men and lesbian women hold some very right wing views politically, and many don’t. And transgender people face an uphill battle for societal acceptance that will take decades to fully achieve, if ever.

LegacyUser

P_1 wrote: »

Jesus that's horrific. Was this in Ireland? Honestly I thought we were better than that

I'm in Dublin and I was essentially excommunicated for saying similar by all my queer friends. People I've known for years - suddenly I was untouchable because I challenged the idea that lesbians should be encouraged to 'reevaluate' their preferences. It's homophobia, plain and simple. Nobody goes after gay men for only wanting to sleep with other gay men

JackTaylorFan

Adrian Few Medicine wrote: »

I was told I was scum and 'I should just die already' when I was pressured into answering a question about genital preference that was nobody's business. This was at a gathering for queer women...

...

I worry about the two extreme voices shouting the loudest and vulnerable people, trans or cis, getting caught up in it when I think most people aren't so filled with bile.

This might come as a shock to many here, but in the trans discussion groups I am in, I would be seen as quite the moderate. For someone to call you scum for not being attracted to a certain type of genitalia is extreme and, in my opinion, wrong. And why someone would be asking those questions in the first place baffles me, to be quite honest. It seems highly inappropriate.

On the second, point. You are talking about a very marginalised group of people when you talk trans people, and when you give a platform for extremists who want nothing more than to see us stripped of the very few rights our community has been struggling for years to obtain, you run the risk of marginalizing us even further - which will only lead to more extreme views.

You can't have a civilized discussion with TERFs, as demonstrated so perfectly by Channel 4's most recent Genderquake "debate" - https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/genderquake-channel-4-debate-genderqueer-transgender-caitlin-jenner-munroe-bergdorg-sarah-ditum-a8342771.html - where TERFs basically turned any semblance of a discussion into a schoolyard bullying campaign - which BTW many prominent trans activists in the UK knew would happen and declined the offer of appearing for that very reason.

And yes, the "debate" was reduced to a slagging match with unhinged cis women screaming insults from the audience, and repeating the word "penis" over and over again. And that is the level of TERFs. And perhaps, one reason why when you reduce a transperson's identity to the genitals they were born with, you might get less than an hospitable reaction.

Yet, people with transphobic agendas will still try hold-up transpeople (and in particular transwomen) as the aggressors merely for defending themselves n these situations.

JackTaylorFan

One eyed Jack wrote: »

This just shows for all your talk about the “LGBT community”, when you boil it down quite frankly it appears your concerns are only for yourself and those people who already agree with you. Of course you’re not interested in hearing the concerns of others within the community who’s interests conflict with your own. Can’t say I blame you, but that still doesn’t give you any right to refer to anyone as trash.

I called you out as a TERF sympathizer long before this thread. You are so transparently transphobic, it's ridiculous you are still allowed post in here. Quite frankly, posting articles from extreme right wing organisations where pseudoscience is intermingled with "faith" blogs, and which claim transwomen are subjecting cis women to "conversion therapy" and "rape culture" is poisonous in the extreme. And I hope the mods here take a longer look at your actions. Because it's disgusting.

As for the above statement. It's laughable. Your whole Alex Jones like obsession with transwomen is laughable.

JackTaylorFan

P_1 wrote: »

Ok that's frankly bizarre.

Is there any chance of the middle ground telling both extremes to cop on and maybe just maybe trans people will get the rights that they deserve

Your query is an oxymoron. You seem to be asking transpeople, yet again, to hear out the other side of the "argument", which is, essentially, you don't exist and you don't deserve rights. Where do you expect the conversation goes from there?

Well, I'll tell you: If someone is telling me as a transwoman that I should hear a TERF out, I will in no uncertain terms tell them to "**** right off".