Dropping the 'T' in LGBT

[afleitch]

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/11/07/outrageous-petition-to-drop-t-from-lgbt-slammed-by-campaigners

'A petition to drop the ‘T’ from ‘LGBT’ has been heavily criticised by LGBT rights organisations.
The Change.org petition, which has been signed by a thousand people, calls for ‘T’ to be removed from ‘LGBT’. It was created by a group of gay, bisexual and lesbian women who want trans people to be “disassociated” with the term LGBT.

The petition reads: “In essence, we ask that organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, Lambda Legal and media outlets such as The Advocate, Out, Huff Post Gay Voices, etc., stop representing the transgender community as we feel their ideology is not only completely different from that promoted by the LGB community (LGB is about sexual orientation, trans is about gender identity), but is ultimately regressive and actually hostile to the goals of women and gay men.”

-----

Thoughts?

[DavidB.]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Largely historic reasons - people of different sexualities and gender identities have historically been classified together and most T have people have self-classified on the LGB group at some stage in their life.

Of course this petition is a laughable case of throwing a more vulnerable members of a group under the bus for Realpolitik's sake. Pretty grim stuff, but I suppose it's one of humanity's more unsavoury aspects.

[afleitch]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Which is one of the issues. There is a bubbling undercurrent of misogyny within many trans activist groups who are fixated on adopting a singular gender identity and associated outward characteristics which is counter to many arguments made in feminist and queer theory. It is rarely addressed. For many long standing activists, it's very strange to find yourself or your fight for equality being 'marginalised' because you are a gay male (which is considered a 'privileged' position (!) by some within LGBT circles), or being accused of being 'transphobic' if your sexual attraction doesn't extend to trans individuals. Some of the rhetoric is becoming self destructive.

I'm not as involved in such things as much as I used to be, but those I know who are still very much involved seem to be treading on eggshells despite being some of the most supportive people when it comes to trans issues.

[ingemann]

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/11/07/outrageous-petition-to-drop-t-from-lgbt-slammed-by-campaigners

'A petition to drop the ‘T’ from ‘LGBT’ has been heavily criticised by LGBT rights organisations.
The Change.org petition, which has been signed by a thousand people, calls for ‘T’ to be removed from ‘LGBT’. It was created by a group of gay, bisexual and lesbian women who want trans people to be “disassociated” with the term LGBT.

The petition reads: “In essence, we ask that organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, Lambda Legal and media outlets such as The Advocate, Out, Huff Post Gay Voices, etc., stop representing the transgender community as we feel their ideology is not only completely different from that promoted by the LGB community (LGB is about sexual orientation, trans is about gender identity), but is ultimately regressive and actually hostile to the goals of women and gay men.”

-----

Thoughts?

I think it's the LGBs choice, if they think transsexuals goal runs counter to their own, it make little sense to be a unified movement. Of course it smell of LGBs being accepted now and such they don't see a reason to continue the alliances with the transsexuals, on the other hand if the obnoxious SJW behaviour is common or just expressed by a very loud minority, I get why the LGBs decides to end the alliance like it was a toxic relationship.

[DavidB.]

Thanks for reflecting on this from your personal perspective, afleitch

As for ingemann's answer, I think we should be careful in concluding that LGBs are "accepted now" only because of the fact that many countries have implemented same-sex marriage laws. If it were up to me, I would advise LGBs to focus less on equality by law (even if this is, indeed, important) and more in everyday life, even if this is of course much harder to achieve. I think too much value is derived from equal laws, whereas people sometimes ignore the fact that reality can be very different. A gay friend of mine told me last week that he was insulted on the street that day -- probably by people who, ironically, support same-sex marriage -- and that this happens regularly, and he was not the first person to tell me this. This seems much more problematic to me than, for instance, the fact that men who have had sex with men cannot donate blood in the Netherlands, something LGBT organizations focus on. (To be sure, I am of course not saying LGBT organizations would not find this problematic, but people's behavior in everyday life seems to be something on which there is less focus.) But, again, this is for the community to decide on. (This might be slightly off-topic, btw, sorry for that.)

[Crumpets]

Interesting. When I saw the thread title, I assumed it would be trans activists pushing to make the case that LGB law has progressed massively in recent years, and people should not assume that trans law has made the same progress and that little more needs to be done.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Which is one of the issues. There is a bubbling undercurrent of misogyny within many trans activist groups who are fixated on adopting a singular gender identity and associated outward characteristics which is counter to many arguments made in feminist and queer theory. It is rarely addressed. For many long standing activists, it's very strange to find yourself or your fight for equality being 'marginalised' because you are a gay male (which is considered a 'privileged' position (!) by some within LGBT circles), or being accused of being 'transphobic' if your sexual attraction doesn't extend to trans individuals. Some of the rhetoric is becoming self destructive.

I'm not as involved in such things as much as I used to be, but those I know who are still very much involved seem to be treading on eggshells despite being some of the most supportive people when it comes to trans issues.

I think a lot of people seem to take the term "privilege" as abuse or something. It's not, just a statement of fact - that some people through the reality of their personal situation have a struggle that others do not. I'm not going to say that the bAttle for LGB acceptance has won or anything, but they are in a much more privileged position in contemporary Western society than transgender people.

Also, this petitition utilising classic soccon dog whistles does not bode well for the "negative T" movement.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I have to admit that I can sort of understand the desire to disassociate oneself from trans politics and trans talking points. And I say that as a trans person. But basically just throwing people to the wolves doesn't strike me as a substantive solution.

[ingemann]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Which is one of the issues. There is a bubbling undercurrent of misogyny within many trans activist groups who are fixated on adopting a singular gender identity and associated outward characteristics which is counter to many arguments made in feminist and queer theory. It is rarely addressed. For many long standing activists, it's very strange to find yourself or your fight for equality being 'marginalised' because you are a gay male (which is considered a 'privileged' position (!) by some within LGBT circles), or being accused of being 'transphobic' if your sexual attraction doesn't extend to trans individuals. Some of the rhetoric is becoming self destructive.

I'm not as involved in such things as much as I used to be, but those I know who are still very much involved seem to be treading on eggshells despite being some of the most supportive people when it comes to trans issues.

I think a lot of people seem to take the term "privilege" as abuse or something. It's not, just a statement of fact - that some people through the reality of their personal situation have a struggle that others do not. I'm not going to say that the bAttle for LGB acceptance has won or anything, but they are in a much more privileged position in contemporary Western society than transgender people.

Also, this petitition utilising classic soccon dog whistles does not bode well for the "negative T" movement.

Check your privilege.

[ingemann]

I have to admit that I can sort of understand the desire to disassociate oneself from trans politics and trans talking points. And I say that as a trans person. But basically just throwing people to the wolves doesn't strike me as a substantive solution.

Well if the politics and talking points of one subculture in the movement are destructive for the movement as a whole, you have little choice but saying; goodbye and thank you for the years together. In fact it may be healthy for the subculture as they may suddenly find out how self-destructive their behaviour are.

[tpfkaw]

LGB law has progressed massively in recent years

Has it?

And that's the thing, as the HERO vote showed, it's setting back our fight for protection against discrimination in employment, public accommodations and housing (for LGB and trans people) back 20 years to say it has to be tied to the trans bathroom thing. Imagine if black and women's groups in 1964 had opposed passing any anti-discrimination bill that didn't include the trans bathroom thing - there would never have been any protections for anyone.

If it were up to LGB people, trans groups would have every law they want, but it's not up to LGB people. It's absurd to demand that LGB people must suffer for the sins of straight homophobes, and accomplishes nothing - in fact it hurts trans people. It reminds me of how crabs act inside the bucket, pulling the other crabs down as soon as they are about to escape.

[DavidB.]

Well if the politics and talking points of one subculture in the movement are destructive for the movement as a whole, you have little choice but saying; goodbye and thank you for the years together. In fact it may be healthy for the subculture as they may suddenly find out how self-destructive their behaviour are.

I think 秋と修羅 (how would you like to be addressed? I know people call you Madeleine but your username is Nathan so I'm unsure) actually agrees with this, the problem more being the tone of the petition rather than its content.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Which is one of the issues. There is a bubbling undercurrent of misogyny within many trans activist groups who are fixated on adopting a singular gender identity and associated outward characteristics which is counter to many arguments made in feminist and queer theory. It is rarely addressed. For many long standing activists, it's very strange to find yourself or your fight for equality being 'marginalised' because you are a gay male (which is considered a 'privileged' position (!) by some within LGBT circles), or being accused of being 'transphobic' if your sexual attraction doesn't extend to trans individuals. Some of the rhetoric is becoming self destructive.

I'm not as involved in such things as much as I used to be, but those I know who are still very much involved seem to be treading on eggshells despite being some of the most supportive people when it comes to trans issues.

I think a lot of people seem to take the term "privilege" as abuse or something. It's not, just a statement of fact - that some people through the reality of their personal situation have a struggle that others do not. I'm not going to say that the bAttle for LGB acceptance has won or anything, but they are in a much more privileged position in contemporary Western society than transgender people.

Also, this petitition utilising classic soccon dog whistles does not bode well for the "negative T" movement.

Check your privilege.

k

[ingemann]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Which is one of the issues. There is a bubbling undercurrent of misogyny within many trans activist groups who are fixated on adopting a singular gender identity and associated outward characteristics which is counter to many arguments made in feminist and queer theory. It is rarely addressed. For many long standing activists, it's very strange to find yourself or your fight for equality being 'marginalised' because you are a gay male (which is considered a 'privileged' position (!) by some within LGBT circles), or being accused of being 'transphobic' if your sexual attraction doesn't extend to trans individuals. Some of the rhetoric is becoming self destructive.

I'm not as involved in such things as much as I used to be, but those I know who are still very much involved seem to be treading on eggshells despite being some of the most supportive people when it comes to trans issues.

I think a lot of people seem to take the term "privilege" as abuse or something. It's not, just a statement of fact - that some people through the reality of their personal situation have a struggle that others do not. I'm not going to say that the bAttle for LGB acceptance has won or anything, but they are in a much more privileged position in contemporary Western society than transgender people.

Also, this petitition utilising classic soccon dog whistles does not bode well for the "negative T" movement.

Check your privilege.

k

Yes that's the reaction any normal human have when being asked to "check your privilege", which is in fact why it's incredible stupid to use and not just a "statement of fact". It's not constructive and it's in fact quite insulting, because we really don't know other people's life and don't know their history, but we think they're priviliged based on some superficial visual traits and sometimes not even that.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

what a stunningly stupid petition (if for no other reason: petitioning to change a word is not how it works at all)

[Hydera]

what a stunningly stupid petition (if for no other reason: petitioning to change a word is not how it works at all)

Its stupid because it was a small petition that gained signatures because of it being spread around rightwing websites due to breitbart.com editor Milo Yiannopoulos tweeting about it.

Plus it was featured on 4chan's /pol/ board which has a notorious reputation for baiting people.

http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/55097523/#q55097523

http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/55147450/#q55147450

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

what a stunningly stupid petition (if for no other reason: petitioning to change a word is not how it works at all)

breitbart.com editor Milo Yiannopoulos

hhhha well that would explain that

[afleitch]

I have to admit that I can sort of understand the desire to disassociate oneself from trans politics and trans talking points. And I say that as a trans person. But basically just throwing people to the wolves doesn't strike me as a substantive solution.

I don't agree with the petition. But I can understand that the LGBT movement is starting to 'fray' a little as a result of unspoken tensions that are existing.

Bringing in language of the need to 'change' (some trans activists have even used the word 'correct' when talking about gender) into the LGBT sphere doesn't sit well with those who find that rhetoric uncomfortable. I also agree that some trans activists in many ways are re-inforcing gender, not subverting it or allowing it to be fluid and to allow women (in particular) to define it for themselves after generations of it being defined for them. They are only one step removed from so-cons on this matter.

[bagelman]

Trans people belong in the LGBT community and are worthy of protection and support, SJW bullies do not. Simple as that.

This petition seems to be confusing real transgender people with SJW nutcases. Transgender people are victims of injustice in our society, they shouldn't be excluded from the GLBT community.

[ingemann]

Trans people belong in the LGBT community and are worthy of protection and support, SJW bullies do not. Simple as that.

This petition seems to be confusing real transgender people with SJW nutcases. Transgender people are victims of injustice in our society, they shouldn't be excluded from the GLBT community.

The problem are that if you say you're a group and you're unable or unwilling to weed out the worst assholes out of some internal solidarity, you de facto support and enable them, while at the same time letting them represent your group, now I don't know even internal Danish LGBT politics to say nothing about Anglo-Saxon one, but if what afleitch tells are universal, transsexuals are either unwilling or unable to weed these people out, which leave the rest of the LGBT movement a choice between letting these people be part of the representants of the whole movement or simply to split the movement up and letting the transsexual either weed these people out or letting them represent them.

[DavidB.]

This petition seems to be confusing real transgender people with SJW nutcases. Transgender people are victims of injustice in our society, they shouldn't be excluded from the GLBT community.

Well, I could think of many more groups that are victims of justice in society, but that doesn't automatically render their preferences, values, and priorities similar (or even compatible). Of course trans people and LGB people are historically more "connected" to each other than any random group that suffers injustice, but the point remains the same: suffering injustice doesn't automatically render groups connected. In fact, it sometimes makes them even more skeptical of one another. This is what some "intersectionalists" fail to understand and others unsuccessfully try to resolve.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Which is one of the issues. There is a bubbling undercurrent of misogyny within many trans activist groups who are fixated on adopting a singular gender identity and associated outward characteristics which is counter to many arguments made in feminist and queer theory. It is rarely addressed. For many long standing activists, it's very strange to find yourself or your fight for equality being 'marginalised' because you are a gay male (which is considered a 'privileged' position (!) by some within LGBT circles), or being accused of being 'transphobic' if your sexual attraction doesn't extend to trans individuals. Some of the rhetoric is becoming self destructive.

I'm not as involved in such things as much as I used to be, but those I know who are still very much involved seem to be treading on eggshells despite being some of the most supportive people when it comes to trans issues.

I think a lot of people seem to take the term "privilege" as abuse or something. It's not, just a statement of fact - that some people through the reality of their personal situation have a struggle that others do not. I'm not going to say that the bAttle for LGB acceptance has won or anything, but they are in a much more privileged position in contemporary Western society than transgender people.

Also, this petitition utilising classic soccon dog whistles does not bode well for the "negative T" movement.

Check your privilege.

k

Yes that's the reaction any normal human have when being asked to "check your privilege", which is in fact why it's incredible stupid to use and not just a "statement of fact". It's not constructive and it's in fact quite insulting, because we really don't know other people's life and don't know their history, but we think they're priviliged based on some superficial visual traits and sometimes not even that.

I have literally never asked anyone to check their privilege, so quit tilting at windmills.

[ingemann]

This petition seems to be confusing real transgender people with SJW nutcases. Transgender people are victims of injustice in our society, they shouldn't be excluded from the GLBT community.

Well, I could think of many more groups that are victims of justice in society, but that doesn't automatically render their preferences, values, and priorities similar (or even compatible). Of course trans people and LGB people are historically more "connected" to each other than any random group that suffers injustice, but the point remains the same: suffering injustice doesn't automatically render groups connected. In fact, it sometimes makes them even more skeptical of one another. This is what some "intersectionalists" fail to understand and others unsuccessfully try to resolve.

Yes it should be obvious.

While transsexuals don't have it easy, but it's not why LGBs have allied with them, they allied with each other because they had some common interest, but such a alliance will not survive in the long term if transsexuals interests begin to run counter to the interests of LGBs or if they begin to sabotage their goals. That people need to understand is that there's nothing wrong with that, we don't demand that LGB should represent the interest of ACLU, neither should we demand they represent the interest of transsexuals (or vice versa) unless they see a greater purpose in it.

[ingemann]

Well, this is for L, G, B, and T individuals to decide on. I have always considered rather strange the combination of LGB on the one hand and T on the other hand, since there is a difference between one's sexual orientation and one's gender identity.

Which is one of the issues. There is a bubbling undercurrent of misogyny within many trans activist groups who are fixated on adopting a singular gender identity and associated outward characteristics which is counter to many arguments made in feminist and queer theory. It is rarely addressed. For many long standing activists, it's very strange to find yourself or your fight for equality being 'marginalised' because you are a gay male (which is considered a 'privileged' position (!) by some within LGBT circles), or being accused of being 'transphobic' if your sexual attraction doesn't extend to trans individuals. Some of the rhetoric is becoming self destructive.

I'm not as involved in such things as much as I used to be, but those I know who are still very much involved seem to be treading on eggshells despite being some of the most supportive people when it comes to trans issues.

I think a lot of people seem to take the term "privilege" as abuse or something. It's not, just a statement of fact - that some people through the reality of their personal situation have a struggle that others do not. I'm not going to say that the bAttle for LGB acceptance has won or anything, but they are in a much more privileged position in contemporary Western society than transgender people.

Also, this petitition utilising classic soccon dog whistles does not bode well for the "negative T" movement.

Check your privilege.

k

Yes that's the reaction any normal human have when being asked to "check your privilege", which is in fact why it's incredible stupid to use and not just a "statement of fact". It's not constructive and it's in fact quite insulting, because we really don't know other people's life and don't know their history, but we think they're priviliged based on some superficial visual traits and sometimes not even that.

I have literally never asked anyone to check their privilege, so quit tilting at windmills.

I didn't write it, because I saw you as a privilige crusader, I said because you indicated that it wasn't "abuse", the problem are that I have never seen a discussion where people have been called out for privilege, which haven't ended as a complete disaster, whether it was true or not. So whether it's "abuse" or not, doesn't matter, because it's as useful in a discussion as someone calling another person a idiot (which sometimes are also true, but it's not healthy for a debate climate), and the use of the term are also a example of unfortunal narcissistic victim culture, where being the bigger victim give some kind of moral authority.