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

splinter65

P_1 wrote: »

Has anybody been following the shambolic situation currently unfolding within the UK Green Party?

I have. Aimee Challenor has resigned totally from the Green Party today in a ludicrous display of faux outrage.
She seems to think that the Green Party has gone from proposing her (a 20 year old trans woman with no political experience) for deputy leader, to TOTAL transphobia.
The fact that she appointed her father as her campaign manager AFTER she knew that he had been charged with the most horrifying and appalling paedophilia, and while they were both constructing a twitter site dedicated to silencing any transgender opponents is completely ignored.
She asked the Green Party to accept that she lived in a tiny house with just her parents but didn’t know that he was sexually abusing a 10 year old girl who was suspended from the beams in the attic ( incidentally the father was dressed as a baby at the time, wearing a nappy). It’s telling of the mess that is the Green Party that they continued to support her until, apparently, today.
She’s resigned, partially because she claims that another party member dead named her.
You couldn’t make it up.

splinter65

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Is this what you’re referring to P?


Aimee Channelor’s statement on her No Fault Suspension from the Green Party of England and Wales.

I’m aware of it alright, wasn’t following it particularly closely though tbh. I don’t see how it’s relevant here though as it has nothing to do with her being transgender and everything to do with her being yet another example of a corrupt politician.

At one stage when we lived in the UK I would have been a Green Party voter. They’ve lost their way in recent years. The drive to embrace “diversity” and “be inclusive” meant that any other political aims were completely lost.
The Aimee Challenor saga is typical example of this. They were willing to ignore even till today, disgusting details just to have someone from the fringes of society on the ticket.

One eyed Jack

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

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.

It doesn’t come as a shock to me at all because this conversation has never been just about you, I’ve met people who are far more obnoxious, condescending and patronising than even you could ever hope to be.

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.

Well seeing as you have me painted as transphobic you’re obviously going to assume that it’s because you are transgender that I don’t particularly care for your attitude towards other people. It has nothing to do with you being transgender, it’s entirely about your attitude towards other people, and the reason I will point out to you again and again that you aren’t representative of people who are transgender, nor do you represent them, is because you don’t. The reason I know for a fact that you don’t is because I know far more people who are transgender who aren’t at all obvious, condescending, patronising and self-absorbed. They genuinely care about other people and would have nothing to do with your divisive nonsense about terfs and terf sympathisers and all the rest of it. They see people as people, and they treat people accordingly, with the respect every human being deserves, regardless of their politics.

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

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.

You did. I didn’t care then, and I don’t care now, because your idea of transphobic is the same as the gay guy I mentioned earlier in the thread calling me homophobic because I wouldn’t let him perform fellatio on me. I’m still not letting him perform fellatio on me no matter how homophobic he thinks that makes me. You’re doing the same with lesbian women who don’t want to have sex with people who are transgender - trying to shame them and coerce them into submission by referring to them as terfs. Yet you’ll still berate another poster as “pulling the ladder up after them” while you’re in a position to shame women who don’t want to have sex with people who are transgender, who don’t want to share a space with people who are transgender, because like I said - it’s understandable that you couldn’t give a damn about other people once your own needs are met.

That’s exactly why some lesbian women feel that the mainstream LGBT community no longer represents them or their interests, because they don’t. It’s also why some people who are transgender feel that the mainstream LGBT community has never represented them or their interests, because it hasn’t. The so-called “LGBT community” was only ever an idealistic and fanciful notion of a tiny minority of people who appointed themselves representatives of the community they aspired to be, and that’s why more and more they’re being called out for giving an inaccurate representation of people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, intersex, asexual and a whole plethora of minorities of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Ten of Swords

Mod
Thread is being reopened but with a warning to all posters to continue the discussion in a civil tone and to report any posts you feel require mod attention.

JackTaylorFan, please stop making personal remarks, please attack the post not the poster if you feel transphobic statements are being made and as always report posts you feel are inappropriate

One Eyed Jack, your more recent posts in this thread are trolling and baiting other users, if you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion please refrain from posting.

Splinter65 do not post in this thread again

Feedback on moderation should be by pm, not discussed on thread.

JackTaylorFan

With all due respects to mods, I feel a need to reply to both these accusations

Rennaws wrote: »

Of course I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then phobic I am.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You’re doing the same with lesbian women who don’t want to have sex with people who are transgender - trying to shame them and coerce them into submission by referring to them as terfs.

You can back check all my comments on Boards, becuase I have literally, never once, uttered such sentiments. Not once. Just people trying to put words in my mouth.

Furthermore, if I call someone a transphobic bigot, it is becuase they are generally displaying an attitude that is transphobic. You don't have to be beating transpeople over the head with a metal rod, to be considered as such, you know.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They genuinely care about other people and would have nothing to do with your divisive nonsense about terfs and terf sympathisers and all the rest of it. They see people as people, and they treat people accordingly, with the respect every human being deserves, regardless of their politics.

As for the above statement: well, I simply reject everything you claim on here, as we've established already, and if you think any self-respecting transperson wouldn't hold the same opinion as me concerning TERF's poisonous bile, then my friend, you are completely out of touch with the reality of the situation. <SNIP>

Mod: Final warning, no more personal jabs. Cards for the next one - this applies to all posters

JackTaylorFan

Since I'm here, may as well share the latest bit of TERF related garbage I've found:




https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/09/04/caroline-lucas-green-party-legitimise-hate-groups/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Buffer&utm_campaign=PN

Woman's Place is an organisation known for holding discussions around the Gender Recognition Act and what it could mean "for biological women"

People who’ve attended these events have spoken about how one-sided the discussion is, and have even said that misinformation is being shared to encourage an atmosphere of fear and outright transphobia in these discussions.

That last part in bold? Yeah, kinda sounds like exactly what is being allowed happen right here, to be honest.

Thanks, Mods

P_1

Jtf I say this with the greatest of respect. People here have the intelligence to recognise misinformation and outright horseshiit arguments for what they are.

Calling for censorship of this and throwing sly digs at mods is ineffective.

I completely understand why you would be justified in lashing out at those who wish to debate or deny your right to exist but sometimes this can manifest itself in ways that cause more grief.

By stooping to their level you let them win

The Bishop Basher

I said that I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then I must be phobic

To which you replied..

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

You can back check all my comments on Boards, becuase I have literally, never once, uttered such sentiments. Not once. Just people trying to put words in my mouth.

Yet a few comments previous you said..

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.

And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone.

So you very much did utter those sentiments as according to you that makes me transphobic.

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

I said that I have no issue whatsoever with trans people but if not wanting to sleep with them makes me phobic then I must be phobic

To which you replied..



Yet a few comments previous you said..



And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone.

So you very much did utter those sentiments as according to you that makes me transphobic.

Rennaws you are being completely disingenuous in that argument. You are attempting to spin something here that was never claimed in the first place. JTF never argued that if you as a cis man or generally cis men that do not want to have sex with trans women are transphobic. This is just complete disingenuous strawmanning.

The Bishop Basher

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Rennaws you are being completely disingenuous in that argument. You are attempting to spin something here that was never claimed in the first place. JTF never argued that if you as a cis man or generally cis men that do not want to have sex with trans women are transphobic. This is just complete disingenuous strawmanning.

So why not let JTF answer..

Would they consider me transphobic ?

If I’m wrong and misunderstood the original post then I’m happy to put my hands up but let’s see how JTF interprets it first..

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

So why not let JTF answer..

Would they consider me transphobic ?

If I’m wrong and misunderstood the original post then I’m happy to put my hands up but let’s see how JTF interprets it first..

I dont know whether she does or not. I dont know what her thoughts are. I didnt say she can't answer. I am highlighting that you are completely strawmanning this by creating an argument that was never made. You are putting words in peoples mouths that they never uttered. And then comparing apples and oranges to back up your point.

The Bishop Basher

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

It's quite straighforward comparing transwomen to men (abusive or not) is transphobic.

I’m challenging the OP on this statement.

I’ve presented a situation where I would be comparing a trans woman to a man.

Even though in every other situation I may treat them as a women if they asked me to.

You call it straw manning..

I call it asking a question and challenging OP on their statement..

Goodshape

Rennaws wrote:

And yet if a trans woman was to make an advance on me I would 100% regard that person as male for the purpose of that interaction and I would reject any advances on that basis alone.

But surely there's a countless reasons everyday why you might turn down an advance from any woman. You can't equate "woman" with "person I want to have sex with" exclusively.

Trans or cis, the person is no less of a woman just because you don't want to sleep with them.

One eyed Jack

Goodshape wrote: »

But surely there's a countless reasons everyday why you might turn down an advance from any woman. You can't equate "woman" with "person I want to have sex with" exclusively.

Anyone is entitled to do just that.

Trans or cis, the person is no less of a woman just because you don't want to sleep with them.

The argument isn’t whether they are or aren’t any “less” of a woman. The argument is that they aren’t women in the first place.



MOD:: One eyed Jack banned for 3 days for breaching forum charter. This is not the place to argue "that they aren’t women in the first place"

The Bishop Basher

Edited post as I see that OEJ has been banned for debating a point and I was arguing a similar point.

I’m not into thread bans and so will leave this topic.

The things we’re allowed debate with regard to this movement are getting fewer and fewer which is good for no one.

Slutmonkey57b

I've been reading linehan and the terf saga, and I think there are a number of interesting things (from an outsiders perspective).

1. Arguing that "biology isn't important" or "self-identified gender trumps biology" or "women have penises" is counter-productive. One is a physical, scientific reality and the other is a personal, internal thing. It will only seem, to someone from the outside, that one side of the argument is actively denying reality, whether that's the intention or not. "Because I say so" is not a counter argument to physical reality.
2. Women's concerns about single-sex spaces are not in any way unfounded. There need to be boundaries. Where those boundaries reasonably need to sit is a different question to whether boundaries should exist at all.
3. Unquestioned self-id opens the door for malicious people to leverage it for their own purposes. It's not a matter of "smearing" or "bigotry". Anyone who knows anything about gamergate or the chan boards can see a lot of the same ideas being tacked onto the trans movement. Malicious people have already started to leverage it. Attempting to pretend that won't happen, or hasn't happened, isn't a useful stance to take.
4. A "terf" (which is clearly a slur at this point) gets treated totally differently whether they're a woman or a man. Men get a tut-tut. Women get assaulted, and threatened with rape, stalking, violence and bomb threats. If you can't see this as plain old fashioned misogynistic behaviour then i wonder what you think you're looking at.
5. Dismissing genuine, factually based concerns with "It's not up for debate, get over it" isn't going to be a winning strategy. The Challenor family sued people who questioned them and used trans movements to silence others. Demanding that no dissent is allowed allows others to do the same. That's going to very negatively affect trans people in the short-medium term.

None of the above points mean that trans people aren't people or don't have rights, or don't need protection. But I think this "terf" business is going to backfire, and not in the way people who coined the term might assume.

P_1

So it is Twitter so best taken with a pinch of salt but seemingly there are reports of anti trans stickers being put up in train stations in Manchester with razor blades behind them. For context people have been removed these stickers when they see them.

If this is true then the phrase wtf seems woefully inadequate.

JackTaylorFan

P_1 wrote: »

So it is Twitter so best taken with a pinch of salt but seemingly there are reports of anti trans stickers being put up in train stations in Manchester with razor blades behind them. For context people have been removed these stickers when they see them.

If this is true then the phrase wtf seems woefully inadequate.

Well. What do you expect? TERFs are violent thugs. And, yet. you expect trans people to listen to "both sides of the argument".

(Note: I have been informed by Mods I am not thread banned)

JackTaylorFan

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

1. Arguing that "biology isn't important" or "self-identified gender trumps biology" or "women have penises" is counter-productive. One is a physical, scientific reality and the other is a personal, internal thing. It will only seem, to someone from the outside, that one side of the argument is actively denying reality, whether that's the intention or not. "Because I say so" is not a counter argument to physical reality.
2. Women's concerns about single-sex spaces are not in any way unfounded. There need to be boundaries. Where those boundaries reasonably need to sit is a different question to whether boundaries should exist at all.
3. Unquestioned self-id opens the door for malicious people to leverage it for their own purposes. It's not a matter of "smearing" or "bigotry". Anyone who knows anything about gamergate or the chan boards can see a lot of the same ideas being tacked onto the trans movement. Malicious people have already started to leverage it. Attempting to pretend that won't happen, or hasn't happened, isn't a useful stance to take.
4. A "terf" (which is clearly a slur at this point) gets treated totally differently whether they're a woman or a man. Men get a tut-tut. Women get assaulted, and threatened with rape, stalking, violence and bomb threats. If you can't see this as plain old fashioned misogynistic behaviour then i wonder what you think you're looking at.
5. Dismissing genuine, factually based concerns with "It's not up for debate, get over it" isn't going to be a winning strategy. The Challenor family sued people who questioned them and used trans movements to silence others. Demanding that no dissent is allowed allows others to do the same. That's going to very negatively affect trans people in the short-medium term.

None of the above points mean that trans people aren't people or don't have rights, or don't need protection. But I think this "terf" business is going to backfire, and not in the way people who coined the term might assume.

1. You are essentially trying to argue that trans women are not women again. Using a junior cert level of biology to back your points up.

2. Agreed : women's rights to safe spaces from sexual predators is not an unfounded necessity. However claiming transwomen are somehow more likely to attack a cis woman in these spaces is very much unfounded.

3. You are again, like so many on here, trying to compare and conflate transwomen to male sexual predators.

4. TERF is no more a slur than NAZI is.

P_1

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Well. What do you expect? TERFs are violent thugs. And, yet. you expect trans people to listen to "both sides of the argument".

(Note: I have been informed by Mods I am not thread banned)

Listen yes, tear to shreds if it is transphobic horseshiite yes, do something positive rather than just shout back yes

The Bishop Basher

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

1. You are essentially trying to argue that trans women are not women again. Using a junior cert level of biology to back your points up.

Why is it that this topic is continuously brought up by JTF and other posters as if it's fact, which it's not, and gets ignored by mods on every occasion, yet if anyone else attempts to debate the concept using scientific FACT backed up by scientific evidence, they get thread banned

LLMMLL

Rennaws wrote: »

Why is it that this topic is continuously brought up by JTF and other posters as if it's fact, which it's not, and gets ignored by mods on every occasion, yet if anyone else attempts to debate the concept using scientific FACT backed up by scientific evidence, they get thread banned

Unfortunately you seem to have no concept of what science can and can’t tell us and how it’s misused in debates.

Take for example abortion debates. A major issue in these debates is when does life begin. Science can tell us things like when conception takes place, when a nervous system is present in the foetus, when the foetus can survive outside the womb etc. But science can not tell us when life begins. Which is at least part of the reason the abortion debate will never be truly resolved.

What has happened with the so called “it’s just science” people on other forums such as after hours is they start off by saying “women have breasts and vagina, men have no breasts and penis. Simple”, and when the issues with those simplistic, not simple, definitions are highlighted they always fall back on “chromosomes”.

If “chromosomes” were the defining factor, how come people were capable of making Male/female distinctions for millions of years whereas the knowledge of chromosomes have been around less than 100 years?

This pretends of just being a noble scientist armed with facts is pure nonsense.

JackTaylorFan

I'm not even going to dignify the deeply flawed and outdated bioessentialism arguments now being put forward on here, which are essentially being used to deny trans identities (with a particular focus on the vilification of transwomen as sexual predators).

Point by point barguments don't work anymore - not with TERFs and not with anyone who supports TERFS. It's clear to me, the people with prejudice commenting here will continue to be prejudiced no matter what you show them as evidence.

But for those who are genuinely interested, I'm just gonna leave this here - https://www.iflscience.com/brain/born-this-way-transgender-brains-show-similarity-to-those-of-their-desired-gender-from-a-young-age/ - all these groundbreaking studies are all showing the same thing - biological influence is at play in gender

wexie

LLMMLL wrote: »

If “chromosomes” were the defining factor, how come people were capable of making Male/female distinctions for millions of years whereas the knowledge of chromosomes have been around less than 100 years?

......I'm sure this isn't the point you're trying to make but it was a lot easier back in the days when assuming someone with an adamsapple and winky was male didn't somehow make you a bigoted a**hole

LLMMLL wrote: »

This pretends of just being a noble scientist armed with facts is pure nonsense.

Out of curiosity where does science stand on gender dysphoria?

I presume a lot of research has been and is being done but has it lead to any conclusions / explanations?

EDIT : just spotted link in previous post I'll have a read.

And btw this is coming from a genuine curiosity and trying to understand. I tend not to post here because quite frankly I think there are some disgusting attitudes on both sides of the argument and generally I prefer not to get caught up in it.

JackTaylorFan

wexie wrote: »

......I'm sure this isn't the point you're trying to make but it was a lot easier back in the days when assuming someone with an adamsapple and winky was male didn't somehow make you a bigoted a**hole

To assume someone's gender is not really what makes someone a "bigoted asshole", I often assume people's gender (daily), if I'm ever wrong, and misgender someone I will apologise and accept however they identify within the gender spectrum. No, what makes people "bigoted assholes" is the continued denialism and refusal to even try and understand.

_____________

And just as a PSA let me break down some numbers: Percentage of people who say things like "Did you just assume my gender":

99%: Cis people being transphobic

1%: Trans people making fun of transphobic cis people making "assuming my gender" jokes

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

Why is it that this topic is continuously brought up by JTF and other posters as if it's fact, which it's not, and gets ignored by mods on every occasion, yet if anyone else attempts to debate the concept using scientific FACT backed up by scientific evidence, they get thread banned

Mod

It is in the forum charter. Thats why. And we wont be changing the forum charter. Also this is a discussion on terfs in the UK so please keep on topic and dont veer off into a discussion on the lgbt forum or its charter or if trans women are women at all. Thats a general thread warning.

lgbt forum charter wrote:

Saying that transgender is a choice, saying that trans surgeries are cosmetic, or calling trans people "a man/woman who thinks they are a woman/man ", will result in an immediate infraction and/or ban, as these things aren't "opinions", they are falsehoods rooted in transphobia.

EdgeCase

I think this has to be seen in modern British political context too. There's an alarmingly rapid building of bunkers going on in the UK and everyone being out to get everyone else.

It's symptomatic of a society in a bit of a mess at the moment and I don't think the rise of so called 'TERFs' can be seen outside of that context.

What I'm noticing in the UK is a general growing inability to put oneself into someone else's shoes. It's something that had been a hallmark of the post Thatcher society that developed into all of the 'cool Britannia' era of tolerance and open-mindedness, that's suddenly gone away and there's an oozing toxicity now getting into lots of aspects of society on both the right and left.

The only solution I can see is for trans people to keep talking about their experience and lives and trying to bring people on-board. You'll be very unlikely to ever change the minds of hardliners on any topic, but you can win over the hearts and minds of the general public, as has been clearly demonstrated in both recent Irish referenda, by telling real human stories about real lives in a way that people can relate to them.

I guess what I'm trying to say is bunkers cause wars and sometimes, recognising that they're being built is all important to preventing conflicts.

I'm not trying to say that there's nothing can be done, I just think it's probably better off not to be sucked into a troll war with extremists and far better to spend energy communicating with people who are open minded enough to listen.

P_1

EdgeCase wrote: »

I think this has to be seen in modern British political context too. There's an alarmingly rapid building of bunkers going on in the UK and everyone being out to get everyone else.

It's symptomatic of a society in a bit of a mess at the moment and I don't think the rise of so called 'TERFs' can be seen outside of that context.

What I'm noticing in the UK is a general growing inability to put oneself into someone else's shoes. It's something that had been a hallmark of the post Thatcher society that developed into all of the 'cool Britannia' era of tolerance and open-mindedness, that's suddenly gone away and there's an oozing toxicity now getting into lots of aspects of society on both the right and left.

The only solution I can see is for trans people to keep talking about their experience and lives and trying to bring people on-board. You'll be very unlikely to ever change the minds of hardliners on any topic, but you can win over the hearts and minds of the general public, as has been clearly demonstrated in both recent Irish referenda, by telling real human stories about real lives in a way that people can relate to them.

I guess what I'm trying to say is bunkers cause wars and sometimes, recognising that they're being built is all important to preventing conflicts.

I'm not trying to say that there's nothing can be done, I just think it's probably better off not to be sucked into a troll war with extremists and far better to spend energy communicating with people who are open minded enough to listen.

Agreed. Perhaps this is only why were seeing stuff like this happen in the UK and the US. Arguably both societies are a mess at the moment

bodice ripper

Any evidence of these stickers?

P_1

bodice ripper wrote: »

Any evidence of these stickers?

Only seems to be tweets. Asked some manc friends but they haven't been around the city centre today or yesterday