From what I can tell, they don’t have “a line”. They are generally supportive of trans right and folks and they also acknowledge that there is debate over how some vulnerable women would still like spaces free both from men and from women who transitioned and were previously men. This is a difficult subject and I don’t think the paper is transphobic to carry the discussion. It’s what happens when the rights of two vulnerable communities collide.
I’m not going to “debate you bro”. Build your own opinion, read the articles I linked, try to find an argument.
Try to find good faith. Then maybe there can be a conversation.
What OP described is exactly how TERFs phrase their fight against trans people in public. I’m not going to engage with those arguments, because they either come from ignorance (which I’m not energetic enough to combat today) or from a place of bad faith “discussions”.
I think my position on that was made clear enough by my original post and my reply.
You might have been asking in entirely good faith, but the issue is that this “oh, can you please explain your point of view to me” approach is so extremely frequently presented in bad faith and costs so much energy from those who care about topics like this.
Ok. Your first linked article is taking issue with the Guardian for saying “If a lesbian only desires same-sex dates that’s not bigotry, it’s her right”.
Your position is that you disagree with the Guardian here?
They actually have a lot more positive articles for trans rights (by headlines, I didn’t read them all) than I realized, but they also write stuff that is just so insulting. The constant “just because we have the belief that sex might still be relevant” is downplaying things a really disingenuous level.
While the article talks about lesbians, it mentions that this is all backed up legally, because the UK doesn’t allow trans women (I wonder if they allow trans men who’ve undergone medical transition) to access rape services, but they don’t criticize that or mention that trans people are twice as likely to be victims of sex crimes as cis people are.
They take a hard look at mermaids, which they should, mermaids seems sketchy. They don’t, however, address that LGB Alliance wants to set up a helpline for children (except to mention they need money, because of the evil trans maniacs). What happens when a confused trans kid calls them?
Additionally, calling a binder medically unsafe is a stretch. If you wear one that’s too small 24 hours a day, ignoring any feeling of over compression, it can fuck you up. Otherwise, they can be as safe as things like 10 cm heels, which children aren’t restricted from buying, afaik
Many thanks for your reply. I’m a Guardian subscriber so I have a vested interest in knowing they have an appropriate stance on this.
I haven’t noticed a transphobic attitude in their journalism (International edition). Not to say it doesn’t exist, but I haven’t yet encountered it.
I would be a bit hesitant about forming an opinion based on “opinion” pieces, in the Guardian or any publication. They’re as worthless as the bytes they’re printed on, and in the main rambling and painful to read. My take on opinion pieces (in any paper) is that they’re not necessarily representative of the views of the publication, and are frequently more negatively emotive than what an actual article would be.
I wanted to know your perspective, and you told me to read the articles as they contained your perspective.
If you’d rather give me your perspective on HeartyBeast’s comment than make me guess by playing 20 questions, it would really help things. I would much prefer that.
If you don’t agree with the article, then why tell me to read them to get your perspective 😖
I’m doing my best based on the information you’ve given me.
I read the articles you linked, and that was the conclusion I drew. I’m not sure its helpful to accuse me of reaching them through either ‘ignorance’ or ‘bad faith’. I have empathy for the difficulties of the trans community, but I also have empathy for women who have suffered abuse.
I’m honestly not sure how to square that circle yet. But I don’t think shutting down a conversation with ‘the paper is transphobic, full stop’ is great.
With your self-righteous attitude and allergy to contradiction you are literally proving the arguments of the far right. You are part of the reason the left cannot win elections any more. You are not helping anyone or anything.
From what I can tell, they don’t have “a line”. They are generally supportive of trans right and folks and they also acknowledge that there is debate over how some vulnerable women would still like spaces free both from men and from women who transitioned and were previously men. This is a difficult subject and I don’t think the paper is transphobic to carry the discussion. It’s what happens when the rights of two vulnerable communities collide.
Feel free to have that opinion.
Is their opinion incorrect? I’d be interested to hear a counterpoint.
No.
I’m not going to “debate you bro”. Build your own opinion, read the articles I linked, try to find an argument.
Try to find good faith. Then maybe there can be a conversation.
What OP described is exactly how TERFs phrase their fight against trans people in public. I’m not going to engage with those arguments, because they either come from ignorance (which I’m not energetic enough to combat today) or from a place of bad faith “discussions”.
Oof. Wasn’t asking for a debate, simply asked your perspective.
You know I’m not “HeartyBeast”, right?
I think my position on that was made clear enough by my original post and my reply.
You might have been asking in entirely good faith, but the issue is that this “oh, can you please explain your point of view to me” approach is so extremely frequently presented in bad faith and costs so much energy from those who care about topics like this.
Ok. Your first linked article is taking issue with the Guardian for saying “If a lesbian only desires same-sex dates that’s not bigotry, it’s her right”.
Your position is that you disagree with the Guardian here?
They actually have a lot more positive articles for trans rights (by headlines, I didn’t read them all) than I realized, but they also write stuff that is just so insulting. The constant “just because we have the belief that sex might still be relevant” is downplaying things a really disingenuous level.
While the article talks about lesbians, it mentions that this is all backed up legally, because the UK doesn’t allow trans women (I wonder if they allow trans men who’ve undergone medical transition) to access rape services, but they don’t criticize that or mention that trans people are twice as likely to be victims of sex crimes as cis people are.
They take a hard look at mermaids, which they should, mermaids seems sketchy. They don’t, however, address that LGB Alliance wants to set up a helpline for children (except to mention they need money, because of the evil trans maniacs). What happens when a confused trans kid calls them?
Additionally, calling a binder medically unsafe is a stretch. If you wear one that’s too small 24 hours a day, ignoring any feeling of over compression, it can fuck you up. Otherwise, they can be as safe as things like 10 cm heels, which children aren’t restricted from buying, afaik
Many thanks for your reply. I’m a Guardian subscriber so I have a vested interest in knowing they have an appropriate stance on this.
I haven’t noticed a transphobic attitude in their journalism (International edition). Not to say it doesn’t exist, but I haven’t yet encountered it.
I would be a bit hesitant about forming an opinion based on “opinion” pieces, in the Guardian or any publication. They’re as worthless as the bytes they’re printed on, and in the main rambling and painful to read. My take on opinion pieces (in any paper) is that they’re not necessarily representative of the views of the publication, and are frequently more negatively emotive than what an actual article would be.
Thank you for your reply, it is appreciated.
And your position is that I have to materially agree with every single sentence in any content that I link to to explain a situation?
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but it seems you’re a debate-me-bro after all.
I wanted to know your perspective, and you told me to read the articles as they contained your perspective.
If you’d rather give me your perspective on HeartyBeast’s comment than make me guess by playing 20 questions, it would really help things. I would much prefer that.
If you don’t agree with the article, then why tell me to read them to get your perspective 😖
I’m doing my best based on the information you’ve given me.
I read the articles you linked, and that was the conclusion I drew. I’m not sure its helpful to accuse me of reaching them through either ‘ignorance’ or ‘bad faith’. I have empathy for the difficulties of the trans community, but I also have empathy for women who have suffered abuse.
I’m honestly not sure how to square that circle yet. But I don’t think shutting down a conversation with ‘the paper is transphobic, full stop’ is great.
With your self-righteous attitude and allergy to contradiction you are literally proving the arguments of the far right. You are part of the reason the left cannot win elections any more. You are not helping anyone or anything.