Isle of Pride

[Ghost Ship]

2 hours ago, HeliX said:

Are you going to disagree with what I said, or what you wanted to imagine I said?

I think @MrGarrison was distracted by your somewhat equivocal answer to my earlier post.

My question was whether it was transphobic for a lesbian woman not to want to have a sexual relationship with a transwoman with a biologically male body and male genitals.

Your answer - if I've understood you correctly - is an unequivocal "No", that that is not transphobic.

However, you confusingly also went on to answer a different question of your own choosing referring only to "trans" people and excluding any reference to their biology, body shape, body size or genitalia.  You appeared to suggest that in that context*, that if a lesbian did not want a sexual relationship with a transwoman that that "... could be transphobic."

I think @MrGarrison understandably mistook this response to a question I never asked as your answer to the question I did ask.

I'm sure @MrGarrison will be happy to accept that it is in fact your unequivocal view that it is not transphobic for lesbian women to decline to enter into sexual relationships with fully male bodied trans women.

 

*Whether it is transphobic for lesbian women not to want to enter into sexual relationships with transwomen simply because they are trans is not a question anybody has asked yet...

 

[HeliX]

8 hours ago, Ghost Ship said:

choosing referring only to "trans" people and excluding any reference to their biology, body shape, body size or genitalia

I did refer to genitalia - "and they have the appendages or lack thereof that are compatible with your sexual preference".

Otherwise I don't have a disagreement with your summary.

[hissingsid]

I don’t think this poster waving, whether it is justified or not, and the objections to a police presence is going to help to engage the support of Companies and Businesses next year.   The search for drugs and knives which was only done on half the people that were there left a nasty taste in my mouth and although I enjoyed this year’s festival  I will not be going next year nor will other people I have spoken to.     The Agricultural Show  with no aggravation attached would on reflection been a much more pleasant experience.   Too much unnecessary drama it should have just been fun.

[BriT]

8 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

I don’t think this poster waving, whether it is justified or not, and the objections to a police presence is going to help to engage the support of Companies and Businesses next year.   

But the point Shea was making referred to above is that it isn’t about adding corporate sponsors. It’s an LGBT event about protest. Personally I think it looks embarrassing to have Lloyds Bank or KPMG waving their Pride flags around with their rainbow make up on in some sad corporate shot on Facebook to make their community engagement policy look good. The same for everyone else who wants to be seen to have a day out with the gays instead of going to the Agricultural Show as they want to appear inclusive.

[forestboy]

1 hour ago, BriT said:

But the point Shea was making referred to above is that it isn’t about adding corporate sponsors. It’s an LGBT event about protest. Personally I think it looks embarrassing to have Lloyds Bank or KPMG waving their Pride flags around with their rainbow make up on in some sad corporate shot on Facebook to make their community engagement policy look good. The same for everyone else who wants to be seen to have a day out with the gays instead of going to the Agricultural Show as they want to appear inclusive.

Gawd this is a boring topic. 

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I've had a good read of the posts about the protests and I think that John Wright and Helix are bang on with their assessment of it.

A few posters here though seem to commenting on the public perceptions of this protest and how it doesn't do the cause any good.  I am not sure what cause they are referring to but it seems to be implied that this is a cause involving support or acceptance from community.   I may be wrong in understanding those comments in that way but that's not what Pride is about

I don't think those two protesters were attention seekers at all.  I only know one of them but I can't think that that's the case.  He seems to have more understanding and interest in LGBT politics than most people do.  

Most LGBT people don't really understand the whole problem with Police being at Pride.  Neither do they see a problem with corporations advertising themselves at what is supposed to be a political event.  LGBT politics has, for a long time, focused very heavily on equality politics so this is not surprising.  People don't really know much about the history of LGBT politics.   

For most people Pride does mean important things such as visibility and maybe some thought to celebrating where history has taken us but most people don't know much about the radical politics that used to drive Pride.  

In the UK, there are Prides that have the Police and corporations as part of the parade.  This is still controversial despite it happening and it's why there are alternative pride events arranged by people who feel that Pride is nothing more than corporate and State advertising.  Yet the police are only on a float or walking in the parade and not walking amongst everyone. 

 

 

 

[John Wright]

11 hours ago, La_Dolce_Vita said:

I've had a good read of the posts about the protests and I think that John Wright and Helix are bang on with their assessment of it.

A few posters here though seem to commenting on the public perceptions of this protest and how it doesn't do the cause any good.  I am not sure what cause they are referring to but it seems to be implied that this is a cause involving support or acceptance from community.   I may be wrong in understanding those comments in that way but that's not what Pride is about

I don't think those two protesters were attention seekers at all.  I only know one of them but I can't think that that's the case.  He seems to have more understanding and interest in LGBT politics than most people do.  

Most LGBT people don't really understand the whole problem with Police being at Pride.  Neither do they see a problem with corporations advertising themselves at what is supposed to be a political event.  LGBT politics has, for a long time, focused very heavily on equality politics so this is not surprising.  People don't really know much about the history of LGBT politics.   

For most people Pride does mean important things such as visibility and maybe some thought to celebrating where history has taken us but most people don't know much about the radical politics that used to drive Pride.  

In the UK, there are Prides that have the Police and corporations as part of the parade.  This is still controversial despite it happening and it's why there are alternative pride events arranged by people who feel that Pride is nothing more than corporate and State advertising.  Yet the police are only on a float or walking in the parade and not walking amongst everyone. 

 

 

 

Quite. Pride continues to be a protest, as well as a celebration. Our equalities are hard won and fragile. We don’t just celebrate ourselves, friends and allies but also express support for those in large parts of the world, including a lot of former Eastern Europe where pride is banned, or parades attacked, or organising offices of LGBT organisations burned out or trashed by far right para military youth.

Wonder if Isle of Pride is a member of the Euro Pride Organisers  Association. I haven’t seen a supporting statement from them about the current threat to Euro Pride 2022 in Belgrade.

Euro Pride moves from country to country every year. What about bringing it to the IoM? 10,000 tourists. Fun week of events. I remember Dominic & Julia Delaney warning of the evils of gay tourism.

 

 

[Chie]

On 8/27/2022 at 10:33 PM, MrGarrison said:

 It would seem to many that the trans lobby have the easiest time of the lot.

As a trans person, what a stupid, misinformed and ignorant comment. There is a huge, growing anti trans rhetoric that has been building for the last few years.

Numerous media outlets have ran hundreds of anti trans articles. The U.K. government banned conversion therapy for all except trans people. There has been a steady rise in LGBTQIA, with a specific focus on trans people, hate crime, due to misinformed berks buying into the nonsense that is being spread and allowing it to justify their hate. Numerous hate groups have formed with the specific purpose of attacking trans people and normalising trans hate. The most prominent of which is the LGB Alliance, an organisation that has yet to do one single thing for LGB people. The ban on trans people, based on very wooly and misunderstood evidence, from sports categories that align with their identity. Numerous well known public faces pumping out anti trans rhetoric on a daily basis. In the U.K., a prime minister has just been appointed who is very anti trans and is planning to put individuals into cabinet positions who have plans to introduce a very Russian style ban on teaching anything LGBTQIA+ in schools and stopping trans kids from living their best life. A re write of the rights act that conveniently leaves out gender identity.

Rather than shouting “urghhh trans lobby urghh”, maybe you could try reading up on the issue and educating yourself a little bit on what is actually happening before commenting?.

Edited September 6, 2022 by Chie

[MrGarrison]

4 minutes ago, Chie said:

As a trans person, what a stupid, misinformed and ignorant comment. There is a huge, growing anti trans rhetoric that has been building for the last few years.

It’s an opinion. Grow up. You trying to get this thread taken down as well by constant woke bleating?

[forestboy]

Wish it is taken down. 

[WTF]

25 minutes ago, MrGarrison said:

It’s an opinion. Grow up. You trying to get this thread taken down as well by constant woke bleating?

i'm guessing that's what happened to the 'oh dear' thread then ?

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, WTF said:

i'm guessing that's what happened to the 'oh dear' thread then ?

It wasn't the "woke" who were trying to get that thread removed. It was snowflakes who can't just not click on something they don't want to read because they have zero willpower and want to make it someone else's problem.

[MrGarrison]

17 minutes ago, HeliX said:

It wasn't the "woke" who were trying to get that thread removed. It was snowflakes who can't just not click on something they don't want to read because they have zero willpower and want to make it someone else's problem.

Facebook & Twitter are the place for woke shit. I’d suggest it was the wokes who had that thread taken down as after all the crying they had done they hadn’t really got anywhere. No doubt someone told the Mods they felt “unsafe” having to read it all.

[HeliX]

3 minutes ago, MrGarrison said:

Facebook & Twitter are the place for woke shit. I’d suggest it was the wokes who had that thread taken down as after all the crying they had done they hadn’t really got anywhere. No doubt someone told the Mods they felt “unsafe” having to read it all.

Yet the people who wanted the thread taken down were from the "trans activists are stifling debate" camp. Very funny stuff, were it not quite so predictable.

[Chie]

1 hour ago, MrGarrison said:

It’s an opinion. Grow up. You trying to get this thread taken down as well by constant woke bleating?

So that’s a no to educating yourself then? I bet you don’t even know what woke means.

Also no, I don’t want the thread taken down. I am happy for people to voice their opinions, I am happy for people to even say they don’t like something, I am a supporter of freedom of speech and always have been. However, I also reserve my right to freedom of speech to challenge the things you say. Learn to be better.