Campaigners attack ‘outrageous’ petition to drop ‘T’ from ‘LGBT’

[Willowicious]

Campaigners attack 'outrageous' petition to drop 'T' from 'LGBT'

Joseph Patrick McCormick 
Pink News
7th November 2015, 4:49 PM

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/11/07/outrageous-petition-to-drop-t-from-lgbt-slammed-by-campaigners/?utm_source=PNFB&utm_medium=socialFB&utm_campaign=PNFacebook

"A petition to drop the 'T' from 'LGBT' has been heavily criticised by LGBT rights organisations."

[Tristyn]

In a way, this move would really make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean we go on and on about how being transgender has absolutely nothing at all to do with sexual orientation.

I think what's upsetting about this is not the decision itself to drop the "T" but the reasons behind it.
To say that LGB cis people wanna dissociate themselves from us kinda implies that we are either stayin in the same spot or even goin' backwards.

And what about LGB trans people? Where do they 'fit?'
That's the issue right there. Its the stupidity of The Human Condition that wants to compartmentalize every damn body on the globe.

If all labels were eradicated none of this crap would be happening right now. Humans cause they own suffering. And humans will cause their own destruction.

~Nixy~

[stephaniec]

thanks for posting. Its a dangerous thing to start happing. One segment of the LGBT is condemning the Transgender population for being transgender and adopting the same rationale the defeated the Texas Bill. This is very disconcerting .

[suzifrommd]

We're in everyone's crosshairs.

Everyone's.

[kira21 ♡♡♡]

Its my guess that this is a veiled terf attack, trying to gain support from phobic members of the LGB community.

Seriously look at it, there are clues all over the place; the mentioning of germain greer, protection of women spaces,  even the positioning of the word lesbian in the title.

Its an attempt to use perceived public opinion following trans being used as a leverage issue, to turn tides on us. It should die if its paid no attention. I hope it doesn't face an aggressive backlash which will only serve to prove their point.

[Catherine Sarah]

Wouldn't be such a bad idea. After all sex has nothing to do with gender and gender has nothing to do with sex.

Bit like forcing blacksmiths to join the motor vehicle union. Well? They both deal with transportation don't they?

Speak to you as soon as I clear the table

Huggs
Catherine

[suzifrommd]

Wouldn't be such a bad idea. After all sex has nothing to do with gender and gender has nothing to do with sex.

Bit like forcing blacksmiths to join the motor vehicle union. Well? They both deal with transportation don't they?

Speak to you as soon as I clear the table

Huggs
Catherine

Sorry, can't agree. With our (lack of) numbers, we need allies. Our alliance with the LGB folks has helped us more than it has helped them.

[Peep]

Wouldn't be such a bad idea. After all sex has nothing to do with gender and gender has nothing to do with sex.

But what if you're gay and trans? You're saying no LGB transperson would be booted from LGB spaces if the T was separate? Is one gay first, trans second or the other way around?

[Catherine Sarah]

But what if you're gay and trans? You're saying no LGB transperson would be booted from LGB spaces if the T was separate? Is one gay first, trans second or the other way around?

Fix the T problem first then you can LGB as much as you want. Don't confuse the issues.

[suzifrommd]

I'm concerned this is drifting into territory of advocating exclusion. Not an appropriate discussion for this site. Thread locked.

[Devlyn]

Specifically:

10. Bashing or flaming of an individual or group is not acceptable behavior on this website and will not be tolerated in the slightest for any reason.  This includes but is not limited to:◾Advocating the separation or exclusion of one or more group from under the Transgender umbrella term. The same restriction applies to advocating the removal of the T from GLBT.
◾Suggesting or claiming that one segment or sub-segment of our community is more or less legitimate, deserving, or real than any others
◾Posting any messages that engages in personal attacks and/or is actively or passively aggressive no matter the provocation.

[Wynternight]

The news article is news, just news and nothing more. News needs to be discussed, the community needs to be informed. That's the job of the news staff.

It's the commentary that follows that causes issues. We can report the news but then we need to be aware of the discussion and make sure it follows the TOS. We don't shy away from posting controversial news stories here or on the front page but controversy is no excuse for people forgetting the terms of service during the discussions that follow.

So now we come to the issue of 'how can we discuss a controversial topic without violating the TOS?'

Very delicately.

That's when the mods and admins keep watch and make sure that delicate balance is maintained. We have to objectively review subjective discussion, and not allow our own personal feelings on the matter to sway us. In the end all we do is follow the TOS.

We will continue to post topics of interest to the community and this is certainly one of them (some of the comments in various sites are absolutely vicious and make it look like the trans community is tearing itself apart), be they controversial or not. We, membership and staff will discuss said topics but, when the TOS gets violated, we'll do what we have to do. It's a thankless job but it's one we took on.

Help us do it by remembering the Terms of Service before hitting the Post button.