I wish there were other ways for them to gain support.
The UK Government are really revelling in the “anti-trans is the new socially acceptable bigoted stance”, it’s infuriating.
Very much not helped by Murdoch and his papers – The Times turns into full-on mouth frothing when it gets to Trans rights, and that’s the *better* one of his conglomerate…
Using gay men and lesbians as a kind of boogeyman didn’t have any basis in fact and was just a means to frighten people in order to attain political power. The sudden interest in aggressively excluding transpeople is the same political game.
It isn’t about which bits you have or what name a person chooses to use. It’s about artificially creating a wedge issue which one can use to get people worked up.
We saw through it in relation to gay men and lesbians, can we please recognise the parallels and skip to the end?
What’s the purpose of the EHRC again?
What harm does self-identification cause anti-trans activists? It might upset their worldview but transphobia does so much more damage. It takes so much effort to hate but none to live and let live. Trans people exist, trying to deny they do and deny them basic rights changes nothing about that.
more like ‘no equalities’ minister amirite
Friendly reminder that 17 countries already have self ID with very little problems.
But I’ll let certain people keep doing their storm in a teacup frothing against trans people.
Labour should introduce a motion to restrict the rights of males (or females) aged 50+ who own more than £1million in assets – they’re no longer allowed to go to the pub.
The reason we’ll give is a single incident where an old rich guy went to the pub and was hugely racist – as that was distressing for the people who witnessed it.
And on these grounds, we’re banning them all. No discussion – because we’re protecting the rights of others.
Wonder how many will suddenly remember that they have rights, and targeting a very specific minority in the grounds of pseudo-moralising is wrong? That it isn’t cool to wake up every day and wonder which of your rights will be threatened by *elected politicians*? That maybe, just maybe, picking minority targets for political gain is immoral and should disqualify you from office?
I’m not holding my fucking breath.
Yet another big transphobic reaction that seems to completely ignore the fact trans men exist.
Newsflash transphobes, there’s a roughly equal number of trans women to trans men so self id shouldn’t fucking change anything apart from reducing the dysphoria of trans people, god damn morons….
9 comments
I wish there were other ways for them to gain support.
The UK Government are really revelling in the “anti-trans is the new socially acceptable bigoted stance”, it’s infuriating.
Very much not helped by Murdoch and his papers – The Times turns into full-on mouth frothing when it gets to Trans rights, and that’s the *better* one of his conglomerate…
Using gay men and lesbians as a kind of boogeyman didn’t have any basis in fact and was just a means to frighten people in order to attain political power. The sudden interest in aggressively excluding transpeople is the same political game.
It isn’t about which bits you have or what name a person chooses to use. It’s about artificially creating a wedge issue which one can use to get people worked up.
We saw through it in relation to gay men and lesbians, can we please recognise the parallels and skip to the end?
What’s the purpose of the EHRC again?
What harm does self-identification cause anti-trans activists? It might upset their worldview but transphobia does so much more damage. It takes so much effort to hate but none to live and let live. Trans people exist, trying to deny they do and deny them basic rights changes nothing about that.
more like ‘no equalities’ minister amirite
Friendly reminder that 17 countries already have self ID with very little problems.
But I’ll let certain people keep doing their storm in a teacup frothing against trans people.
Labour should introduce a motion to restrict the rights of males (or females) aged 50+ who own more than £1million in assets – they’re no longer allowed to go to the pub.
The reason we’ll give is a single incident where an old rich guy went to the pub and was hugely racist – as that was distressing for the people who witnessed it.
And on these grounds, we’re banning them all. No discussion – because we’re protecting the rights of others.
Wonder how many will suddenly remember that they have rights, and targeting a very specific minority in the grounds of pseudo-moralising is wrong? That it isn’t cool to wake up every day and wonder which of your rights will be threatened by *elected politicians*? That maybe, just maybe, picking minority targets for political gain is immoral and should disqualify you from office?
I’m not holding my fucking breath.
Yet another big transphobic reaction that seems to completely ignore the fact trans men exist.
Newsflash transphobes, there’s a roughly equal number of trans women to trans men so self id shouldn’t fucking change anything apart from reducing the dysphoria of trans people, god damn morons….