Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

LGB Alliance

Options
  • 27-10-2019 9:46pm
    #1
    Dante7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭


    Hi, straight guy here, but just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on the new LGB Alliance group that has been set up in the UK.

    "Welcome to our page, which has been set up a group of women and men who understand that homosexuality is same-sex attraction, and that gender is a social construct which reinforces stereotypes. We are not anti-trans. We are pro-LGB. We are advocating for LGB rights. Our profile picture shows Stormé DeLarverie, the butch lesbian whose scuffle with police in Greenwich Village was widely credited (by those who were actually there) with sparking the Stonewall uprising. She died in 2014, and she is our Rosa Parks. Thank you for your support. Remember we are officially launching in January so we don’t even exist yet! Please bear with us as we develop our website and mailing list."

    https://www.facebook.com/LGB-Alliance-UK-114018070020816/


«13

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Goodshape
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Seems unnecessarily exclusionary and hurtful. Not a fan.


  • Options
    #3
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Transphobic hatred and bigotry only designed for exclusion and trans bashing. Its basically a trans hate group.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #4
    Dante7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭Dante7


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Transphobic hatred and bigotry only designed for exclusion and trans bashing. Its basically a trans hate group.

    That's pretty much the reaction I expected, but just wanted to be sure.


  • Options
    #5
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Dante7 wrote: »
    That's pretty much the reaction I expected, but just wanted to be sure.

    Sure of what?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #6
    Dante7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭Dante7


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Sure of what?

    Sure that you would brand it as transphobic and bigotted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Ten of Swords
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,283 CMod ✭✭✭✭Ten of Swords


    How would you brand it?

    Moderator: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender, Vegan & Vegetarian

    Category Moderator: Social & Fun



  • Options
    #8
    Padre_Pio
    Registered Users Posts: 4,909 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    Goodshape wrote: »
    Seems unnecessarily exclusionary and hurtful. Not a fan.

    Are they?

    It seems that sexual attraction and gender identity are two separate issues that are often lumped together.


  • Options
    #9
    Dante7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭Dante7


    Ten of Swords wrote: »
    How would you brand it?

    I would brand it as a group of mainly lesbians who have been told by Stonewall that they are not welcome because they refuse to accept that they now have to suck male dicks.

    Stonewall told them that they are no longer welcome for holding such views, so they decided to set up a new group for themselves. Go girls.


  • Options
    #10
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Padre_Pio wrote: »
    Are they?

    It seems that sexual attraction and gender identity are two separate issues that are often lumped together.

    Noone claimed they are not separate. They are interlinked to be fair. Whether they are separate or not doesnt change the fact the lgb alliance is an anti trans group.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #11
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Dante7 wrote: »
    I would brand it as a group of mainly lesbians who have been told by Stonewall that they are not welcome because they refuse to accept that they now have to suck male dicks.

    Stonewall told them that they are no longer welcome for holding such views, so they decided to set up a new group for themselves. Go girls.

    :rolleyes:

    A group to do what?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Goodshape
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Padre_Pio wrote: »
    Are they?

    It seems that sexual attraction and gender identity are two separate issues that are often lumped together.

    You can split things up a myriad of ways if you choose to but doing so often, and certainly in this case, seems unnecessarily exclusionary and hurtful.

    I'm not lesbian, female, bisexual, or trans. We're lucky to have each others support and attempting to exclude people due to some imagined set of rules or criteria is daft. I don't see what anybody gains.


  • Options
    #13
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Goodshape wrote: »
    You can split things up a myriad of ways if you choose to but doing so often, and certainly in this case, seems unnecessarily exclusionary and hurtful.

    I'm not lesbian, female, bisexual, or trans. We're lucky to have each others support and attempting to exclude people due to some imagined set of rules or criteria is daft. I don't see what anybody gains.

    The way I see it the only gain is rabid hateful opposition of trans rights. Its not even promoting LGB rights at all.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #14
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    You can't say you're in support of peoples rights while at the same time deliberately excluding one of the most discriminated groups in society.


  • Options
    #15
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    Pretty sure one of it's founders also founded Stonewall.


  • Options
    #16
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Already some level of female bi exclusion by some of the figureheads on twitter; so its probably going to be the "LG Alliance" imminently.

    There is probably dodgy money behind this.


  • Options
    #17
    isohon
    Registered Users Posts: 109 ✭✭isohon


    Dante7 wrote: »
    I would brand it as a group of mainly lesbians who have been told by Stonewall that they are not welcome because they refuse to accept that they now have to suck male dicks.

    Please provide a link to Stonewall issuing an edict that lesbians need 'to suck male dicks'.

    Dante7 wrote: »

    Stonewall told them that they are no longer welcome for holding such views, so they decided to set up a new group for themselves. Go girls.



    Such views as what? Again a link is required.

    As far as I was aware this was an B and G alliance also? 'Go girls' seems to ignore at least all of the G, and some of the B?


  • Options
    #18
    Manion
    Registered Users Posts: 1,505 ✭✭✭Manion


    They seem to be all about being anti-trans as opposed to pro LGB.


  • Options
    #19
    baby and crumble
    Registered Users Posts: 8,512 ✭✭✭baby and crumble


    No lesbian group that I am aware of has ever been told that they must find a certain type of woman to be attractive.

    Ergo I find it hard to believe that any lesbians have been told to suck dicks.

    Also, like someone else has said some queer women would quite like to do so, regardless of the body it’s attached to.

    I am 100% opposed to any group that focuses on one set of advances and/or rights which is dependent on the lessening of another groups rights. So like, I’ve no issue with a gay men’s group setting up, but I’d object to one that says that women are subordinate to men.

    So it is with this. I would never support a purposefully exclusively queer group that includes every single queer group except trans folks. And saying “we’re not transphobic” doesn’t make that true.


  • Options
    #20
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    DanDan6592 wrote: »
    Pretty sure one of it's founders also founded Stonewall.

    Doesnt make it any less of a trans hate group.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #21
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Doesnt make it any less of a trans hate group.

    Did I say it did? It's just sort of amusing watching the "let's all get along and be inclusive far left brigade" fall apart and hate each other.

    I mean who knew that the LGBT+ community were such racists and bigots... I guess we can add transphobic to the list aswell

    "research conducted by Stonewall in 2018 revealed that 51% of LGBT+ people of colour (POC) have experienced racism and discrimination from withing the LGBT+ community".


    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/uk-black-pride-lgbt-racism-people-colour-stonewall-a8991976.html

    Ps: I believe those stats are complete bollocks ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    baby and crumble
    Registered Users Posts: 8,512 ✭✭✭baby and crumble


    DanDan6592 wrote: »
    Did I say it did? It's just sort of amusing watching the "let's all get along and be inclusive far left brigade" fall apart and hate each other.

    I mean who knew that the LGBT+ community were such racists and bigots... I guess we can add transphobic to the list aswell

    "research conducted by Stonewall in 2018 revealed that 51% of LGBT+ people of colour (POC) have experienced racism and discrimination from withing the LGBT+ community".


    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/uk-black-pride-lgbt-racism-people-colour-stonewall-a8991976.html

    Ps: I believe those stats are complete bollocks ;)

    Stonewall was formed in 1989. Societies attitudes have moved on but not necessarily everyone else has. I don’t know what founder you’re talking about but it’s unlikely they were younger than 19, at the lower end. So say they were born in 1970, that’d put the youngest possible founder member of Stonewall at pushing 50.

    Also, for my 2c some of the most insidious transphobic attitudes I and my friends have heard or seen have come from within the community. Likewise biphobic attitudes too, which this new group reeks of also. So it doesn’t surprise me at all. The community is notorious for splintering. All you have to do is look at the Irish example of the spilt in campaigning from civil partnership vs equal marriage.


  • Options
    #23
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    baby and crumble wrote: »
    Stonewall was formed in 1989. Societies attitudes have moved on but not necessarily everyone else has. I don’t know what founder you’re talking about but it’s unlikely they were younger than 19, at the lower end. So say they were born in 1970, that’d put the youngest possible founder member of Stonewall at pushing 50.

    Also, for my 2c some of the most insidious transphobic attitudes I and my friends have heard or seen have come from within the community. Likewise biphobic attitudes too, which this new group reeks of also. So it doesn’t surprise me at all. The community is notorious for splintering. All you have to do is look at the Irish example of the spilt in campaigning from civil partnership vs equal marriage.

    Simon fanshawe I believe. I've heard of the biphobia being a problem, but racism too?


  • Options
    #24
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    DanDan6592 wrote: »
    Simon fanshawe I believe. I've heard of the biphobia being a problem, but racism too?

    And transphobia...

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #25
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    And transphobia...

    Sure anything that doesn't fit your narrow view of the world is transphobic!


  • Options
    #26
    baby and crumble
    Registered Users Posts: 8,512 ✭✭✭baby and crumble


    Racism is a problem everywhere. They way I look at it, if you aren’t the focus of the abuse (ie if you’re white in a predominately white society, or cisgender and a not trans) then you don’t get to say racism or transphobia or whatever doesn’t exist. Same as straight people who are like “well I’ve never experienced homophobia so it can’t exist”.

    I have many friends who aren’t white in the community and yeah, it’s a problem according to them. Perhaps less so here than the UK but it’s still something they talk about. Why would you refuse to believe what people are telling you they’ve experienced?


  • Options
    #27
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    baby and crumble wrote: »
    Racism is a problem everywhere. They way I look at it, if you aren’t the focus of the abuse (ie if you’re white in a predominately white society, or cisgender and a not trans) then you don’t get to say racism or transphobia or whatever doesn’t exist. Same as straight people who are like “well I’ve never experienced homophobia so it can’t exist”.

    How inclusive of you. If I, a straight white male, say that I am the focus of abuse in large amounts of leftist media*, you thus cannot say I am not unless you are the focus of that abuse: Straight white and male. That is your (lack of) logic.
    baby and crumble wrote: »
    I have many friends who aren’t white in the community and yeah, it’s a problem according to them. Perhaps less so here than the UK but it’s still something they talk about. Why would you refuse to believe what people are telling you they’ve experienced?

    I don't refuse to believe anything. I find it hard to believe that more than 1 in 2 LGBT "POC" have been racially abused or discriminated against by other LGBT people. I'm always skeptical of studies by any interest group. Racism is a problem in all communities, the question is how big a problem.

    *I don't believe this btw.


  • Options
    #28
    Goodshape
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    DanDan6592 wrote: »
    How inclusive of you. If I, a straight white male, say that I am the focus of abuse in large amounts of leftist media*

    *I don't believe this btw.

    *Yeah, neither do I. Soooo.... *shrug*.

    I don't refuse to believe anything. I find it hard to believe that more than 1 in 2 LGBT "POC" have been racially abused or discriminated against by other LGBT people. I'm always skeptical of studies by any interest group. Racism is a problem in all communities

    You find it hard to believe that POC are discriminated against yet you state that racism is a problem in all communities. You're talking in circles here.
    the question is how big a problem.
    Who's question? Why?



    I'm not sure where race or skin colour has crept into this discussion anyway but "LGB Alliance" is exclusionary. I don't think that's debatable. It's literally their reason for existing. The only question is whether you're okay with that. And I don't see what there possibly is to gain from it.


  • Options
    #29
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    Goodshape wrote: »
    *Yeah, neither do I. Soooo.... *shrug*.

    Did you read what I was responding to?

    Goodshape wrote: »
    You find it hard to believe that POC are discriminated against yet you state that racism is a problem in all communities. You're talking in circles here.

    Nope. Not what I said. Maybe have a re-read of it.
    Goodshape wrote: »
    Who's question? Why?

    Societies question.

    Goodshape wrote: »
    I'm not sure where race or skin colour has crept into this discussion anyway but "LGB Alliance" is exclusionary. I don't think that's debatable. It's literally there reason for existing. The only question is whether you're okay with that. And I don't see what there possibly is to gain from it.

    I brought it up as it seems, if Stonewalls stats are to believed, that the LGBT+ community is very exclusionary in general.

    Anyway, I'm off boards for a bit. Good luck :)


  • Options
    #30
    Goodshape
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    DanDan6592 wrote: »
    Did you read what I was responding to?

    You were responding to B&C's assertion that if you are not the focus of abuse or discrimination then you don't really get to say how much or how little of it occurs.

    You came back with a hypothetical which even you don't believe. So.. blah. I don't know. It's... irrelevant?

    Nope. Not what I said. Maybe have a re-read of it.

    Okay, so you're perfectly willing to accept that it happens and you're just concerned that "1 in 2" might not be the right figure.

    Again.. so what? Maybe it's 1 in 3? 2 in 5? What number would be enough for you?

    (please don't answer that)

    I brought it up as it seems, if Stonewalls stats are to believed, that the LGBT+ community is very exclusionary in general.

    The "LGBT+ community" isn't a single easily defined entity though. I'm not sure that an "in general" really exists.

    Groups like the "LGB Alliance" evidently do exist.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    Goodshape wrote: »
    You were responding to B&C's assertion that if you are not the focus of abuse or discrimination then you don't really get to say how much or how little of it occurs.

    You came back with a hypothetical which even you don't believe. So.. blah. I don't know. It's... irrelevant?

    It's not irrelevant. It's to point out the absurdity of the position that no gay person could object to me saying that my gender and sexuality are undergoing a witch hunt by the media, or that straight men are highly discriminated against in society, solely because that person is gay. Because that follows from B&C's own logic.

    It's not a clever position to hold when it gets turned against you.
    Goodshape wrote: »
    Okay, so you're perfectly willing to accept that it happens and you're just concerned that "1 in 2" might not be the right figure.

    Yes. I'd be very surprised if it was, but it ofcourse could be.
    Goodshape wrote: »
    Again.. so what? Maybe it's 1 in 3? 2 in 5?

    What's the point in obtaining accurate statistics. That's what your asking me... seriously.

    80% of trans-sexuals are sex offenders. This statistic may not be true, but sure so what? Let's just have people believe it anyway.
    Goodshape wrote: »
    What number would be enough for you?

    (please don't answer that)

    Enough for what? I'm highly suspicious of that figure, would like accurate statistics, and don't believe they are.

    Goodshape wrote: »
    The "LGBT+ community" isn't a single easily defined entity though. I'm not sure that an "in general" really exists.

    Groups like the "LGB Alliance" evidently do exist.

    Oh I fully agree. The idea of a LGBT+ community to me is a bit ridiculous, but that's the position that gets pushed by the likes of Stonewall. And when they produce suspicious statistics that suggest the LGBT+ community is racist and discriminatory you thus all get tarred with the same brush.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement