A much tougher line
This very young MP is a piece of work.
That might sound reasonable if you didn’t know what zealots like this novice mean by “transphobia.” She doesn’t mean cruelty or persecution of trans people, she doesn’t mean inciting hatred of trans people (although she probably thinks she does), she means not agreeing that men are women if they say they are, and arguing that men cannot become women just by saying so (or any other way).
In other words she’s calling an entirely ordinary and obvious truth claim “phobic.” If we can’t tell ordinary obvious truths what can we tell? Nothing but lies?
But what about women? What about women who face higher violence rates, homelessness, rape, murder? What about women?
And I’ve read that those homelessness stats are for the entirety of LGBT, most of them young gay men. They don’t have stats that suit them, so they coopt others, and few check them out. Checking out claims is uncivil.
At a guess, I would call ‘transphobia’ the bastard offspring of ‘Islamophobia,’ which latter has been an attempt at a conflation of criticism of a philosophy (ie Islam) with hostility to those who have been raised within its confines (Muslims.) I am all for defence of the transexual minority from physical attack, but I am against any attempts on their part to muzzle criticism of any rights claims they might make on the basis of their sexual orientation.
What exactly is the “T” being liberated from? The constraints imposed by material reality? The terrible burden of having to respect women’s boundaries? I wonder how much the intractability of the former “obstacle” fuels the rage against the latter.
I see it more as an attempt to glom onto the concept of “homophobia” as a shield to hide behind. There’s safety in numbers. Having tacked themselves onto the LGB, why not appropriate the struggles of gays and lesbians for legal rights and acceptance? Doubts or criticism of trans demands are portrayed as “attacks” on the entire LGBTQetc. “community. “That was why I was asking about the meaning of trans “liberation.” Homosexual people were in actual need of a liberation and rights movement. The “rights” that trans activists are now demanding, as has been noted here many times, aren’t really rights at all, but special treatment and privileges that come at the expense of others, most of whom are women. It’s just horribly ironic that so much of trans activism is actually homophobic and counter to the well being of gays and lesbians. Those who try to extricate themselves from the T’s limpet-like embrace in order to organize independently (as they did before the T) get branded as “transphobic”.
Ah well, doesn’t matter much, she is Labour. Even leaving aside their systematic driving away of women as members, their deep love of self-immolation means they have no real hope of forming government anytime soon.
YNnB @#4:
What the trans mob want, as men who wish they could be women, is the right to enter womens’ rest rooms as they please. Also to engage in womens’ sports as ‘women’ and other presently women-only activites, (like maybe the right to .join the Country Womens’ Association and put an entry or two into the odd baking competition.)
Their purported psychological comfort can only come at the expense of all genuine women who use those female rest room facilities; with the possible exception of those women who go around armed with pepper spray and are trained in its use, and sundry females who hold serious dan grades in martial arts. Oh, and also women who are the proud owners of loyal and devoted guard dogs. (My breed recommendation would a Rottweiler; a female one of course, as it has to do duty in a female rest room.)
Naif @# 5:
In other words, they behave politically as agents provocateurs.
‘I am dismayed that trans members are quitting because they don’t feel safe or supported by our party.’
That’s nice. Too bad you’re not dismayed that women members are quitting in much larger numbers. Which should really be considered alarming not only because a) women deserve political representation, b) there are a lot more women in the UK than trans people, but also c) something a lot of people forget, or just don’t notice, which is that women do the bulk of the volunteer ‘grunt work’ of any organisation, including political parties. Even if there were enough to physically replace women, TIMs are not noticeably keen on taking on the ‘traditional’ women’s role of performing unpaid and unacknowledged work that keeps the wheels turning. When women leave your group, you will suddenly discover that nothing seems to be happening any more. The ‘magic coffee table’ just mysteriously stops working.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_kXIGvB1uU
@guest – I have heard that about various political groups, that they are losing their women. They’re losing their fund-raisers, envelope stuffers, door-knockers, literature deliverers, stall holders, event organisers – all the donkey work that is done in campaigning.
@9 yes exactly, and because women’s work is invisible the ones who are left will have no idea what hit them. They won’t realise what a huge mistake they’ve made until far too late.
They would be spending all their time demanding “validation” from all and sundry. No envelopes would get licked, no doors would be knocked on.