Incredibly diverse and incredibly intersectional
AR: moving on. You complained about a tweet by Bev Jackson who observed that female lesbians are being driven off lesbian dating apps. If you are told by the people running the site that you cannot specify that you only want to meet female bodied people you are being denied service by the dating site based on your sexual orientation.
PR – I’m not on these sites and not a woman.
He’s not a trans woman, either, but that certainly doesn’t stop him advocating for their purported rights to the detriment of other people’s rights.
AR – you complained about this tweet, so I hope you can answer some questions.
PR – yes
AR – Do you agree that those lesbians are being denied service based on sexuality?
PR – I believe that dating site is interpreting the Equality Act in the same way as I do, to be inclusive of trans women.
AR – let go back to the Stonewall definitions. Is it reasonable that a woman could be kicked off a lesbian dating site for that preference?
PR – The service is inclusive of transwomen.AR – the definition of trans includes cross dressers. Does a lesbian have the right to exclude male cross dressers from her dating pool?
PR – if the service is inclusive, then a transwoman should be able to use that service.
AR – you are not focusing on the question. A woman is kicked off a dating site for specifying that she is only interested in female bodies. Is that reasonable?
PR – trans women should be able to access that service.
AR – we are not talking about trans women. We are talking about is it reasonable for lesbians to exclude men from their dating pool.
PR – back to trans women.
AR – it is clear that this is an example of a conflict between the rights of LGB people and trans people.
PR – there is no such conflict.
AR – We are talking about lesbians being excluded from lesbian dating services.
PR – back to trans women, they have a right to use those services and not be excluded. This is trans exclusion.
No, it’s men exclusion from lesbian dating sites. It’s staggeringly rapey to keep insisting “trans women” have a right to use lesbian dating services.
AR – what I am putting to you is that it is reasonable for you to hold that trans women are women and for LGBA to say that they are not.
PR – they are transphobic and focus on trans phobic activities.
AR – gender critical views are transphobic views?
PR – yes.
AR – you don’t think that anyone that has gender critical views should be running a charity in the LGBT sector?R – I don’t believe that any charity that is campaigning to remove the rights of trans people to live their lives safely and fully, should be allowed to exist.
AR – despite the fact that gender critical views are protected under the Equality Act.
PR – I’m not an expert.But I understand that there is a difference between expressing those beliefs and holding those beliefs. And trying to remove the rights of trans people to live their lives.
What about the rights of lesbian people to live their lives?
AR – I will put it to you that you have created an echo chamber with no diversity of thought.
PR – I absolutely disagree, our sector is incredibly diverse and incredibly intersectional.
AR – no further questions.
The whole thing is incredible.
Okay, so we have “lesbians indicate they are only interested in female bodied people” coupled with “transwomen have a right to access those sites”.
So the transwomen access the sites, but that doesn’t mean individual women need to date them. That doesn’t happen on any site. Women (and men) are allowed to reject someone who likes their profile. That’s part of the whole dating scene – not everyone is going to go out with you.
So even if not one single lesbian selects them as a potential partner, they can access the site. They can use the site. They can post their stuff. The problem is, they tend to be deceptive about who they are, claiming to be women, and probably don’t always note they have a penis.
The reality is, the dating world is not inclusive. It is exclusive. You based it on your own preferences. I like men in suits. Does that mean I’m exclusive of men in sweatshirts? Maybe. So what? It’s what I prefer. If someone doesn’t like fat men, or prefers blonde men, or wants a man with a job, we don’t refer to them as being exclusive. If they don’t want to date minorities, we do, but even that comes down to their right to date who they want, and why would anyone WANT to date someone who hates whatever group they belong to? I was open to a lot of things when I was in the dating world, but there were some things I insisted on. The individual had to be educated. They had to bathe regularly. They needed to have a dating approach that didn’t demean women or degrade me. That’s not inclusive. That leaves a lot of men out. But it is the way dating works.
Once again, trans ‘women’ want to change the rules, and of course, in a way that violates women’s boundaries.
Trans Activists walk a very fine line. On the one hand, it’s okay for a lesbian to turn down a trans-lesbian. On the other hand, it’s NOT okay for her to turn them down “because they’re not lesbians” This is where they’re constantly vigilant. Choose and prefer what you will, date whoever you want, reject whoever you want, but do not do so in a way that suggests, implies, or OMG comes right out and SAYS that transwomen are not women. That’s the LGBA’s crime.
Here’s the explanation for the disconnect:
https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/156982/section-of-current-court-transcribing-by-tribunal-tweets/5a866baf-42a8-418a-aadc-1ec1ca52a97d#comment-5a866baf-42a8-418a-aadc-1ec1ca52a97d
That and ‘people have the right to exercise their own sexual choices’, but women aren’t people.
Reading that I suddenly realize it’s not QC any more, it’s KC. Feels much less elegant somehow.
BOOM!.. as he runs at full speed into the Forestater decision.
I think the crux of the matter is going to be the need to demonstrate how not including trans in LGBA is somehow “campaigning to remove the rights of trans people to live their lives safely and fully.” How does simply not including trans issues in their remit harm trans people? If being lesbian, gay, or bisexual is completely different from being trans, then there is no reason that trans “inclusion” should be a requirement. Even if it was not completely different, is it not permitted for lesbian, gay and bisexual people to have organizations of their own? Trans activists seem to to think that they are a conjoined twin of the LGB “community”, and that somehow “excluding” them from everything that LGB people do is inherently unjust, cruel, and hurtful. Does that mean that each and every charity, whatever the cause, are “harming” trans people if they do not specifically include trans people in their mission statements? They’re going to be suing a lot of charities.
Trans activists aren’t very good at explaining their position at all. They’re more accustomed to compelling obedience than justifying their actions, and they are taken aback when they have to support their own position. Like all the online activists unable to quote instances of JKR’s “obvious” transphobia, when put to the test in situations they can’t avoid, the weakness and illogicality of the genderist position is painfully obvious. A skilled lawyer can get them to lay bare the inconsistencies and incoherence of trans claims for them. One might almost feel sorry for them as you read the transcripts, the pointed questions zeroing in on the empty ideas defended by empty rhetoric.
The initial success of the “NO DEBATE” strategy allowed for the swift capture of key institutions and organizations, but left them ill-prepared to defend their conquests once people woke up to what had happened. Having not needed to argue their case, they are now unable to do so. Like hormone blockers, “NO DEBATE” stunted the movement’s reasoning and argumentation, leaving it with nothing but bullying and intimidation with which to respond. Combine this with the forced teaming with LGB, and you get the effects of both authoritarian inflexibility and intransigence, along with a dependency which has prevented them from arguing their corner and growing the fuck up to stand on their own.
[…] a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Incredibly diverse and incredibly […]