4 ms·

But they're not against LGB, just T. So they're anti-T. When every letter in the acronym is literally representing a different group, lumping them together the

But they're not against LGB, just T. So they're anti-T. When every letter in the acronym is literally representing a different group, lumping them together the way you are is dishonest.

mock-possum 4y ago
that's exactly the kind of divide-and-conquer approach that queer solidarity is a bulwark against though - whether you're gay, straight, bisexual, or trans, we all face a very particular kind of oppression having to do with sex and gender, and our best bet for countering that oppression is to have eachother's backs: if you're coming after trans people you're going to have to get through the rest of us first. That's not dishonest, that's a strategic show of strength.
- jaywalk 4y ago
  I'm not saying there's anything dishonest about LGBT people all banding together to show strength. I'm saying that it's dishonest to say that an LGB person who doesn't want to be lumped in with the T people is "anti-LGBT." I'm not LGBT, but I do personally know LGB people who don't like the Ts being lumped in with them. They aren't anti-trans by any means, but they see it as a different thing that tends to distract from the LGB and causes more strife. I also know LGB people who share your philosophy and are perfectly happy to have the Ts onboard. I'm just explaining my POV as an outsider.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
nisegami 4y ago
In a literal sense, you're right. But the ideas and values that underpins the LGBT movement and many of the people who identify with it are not compatible with accepting just part of that group.
notahacker 4y ago
LGBT people bundled themselves together, decades ago. This particular group was formed to combat the notion of LGBT identity. So it isn't unreasonable to class it as anti-LGBT, in addition to also holding more specifically anti-T positions.

4 ms·

But they're not against LGB, just T. So they're anti-T. When every letter in the acronym is literally representing a different group, lumping them together the

by jaywalk 4y ago

But they're not against LGB, just T. So they're anti-T. When every letter in the acronym is literally representing a different group, lumping them together the way you are is dishonest.

mock-possum 4y ago
that's exactly the kind of divide-and-conquer approach that queer solidarity is a bulwark against though - whether you're gay, straight, bisexual, or trans, we all face a very particular kind of oppression having to do with sex and gender, and our best bet for countering that oppression is to have eachother's backs: if you're coming after trans people you're going to have to get through the rest of us first. That's not dishonest, that's a strategic show of strength.
- jaywalk 4y ago
  I'm not saying there's anything dishonest about LGBT people all banding together to show strength. I'm saying that it's dishonest to say that an LGB person who doesn't want to be lumped in with the T people is "anti-LGBT." I'm not LGBT, but I do personally know LGB people who don't like the Ts being lumped in with them. They aren't anti-trans by any means, but they see it as a different thing that tends to distract from the LGB and causes more strife. I also know LGB people who share your philosophy and are perfectly happy to have the Ts onboard. I'm just explaining my POV as an outsider.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
nisegami 4y ago
In a literal sense, you're right. But the ideas and values that underpins the LGBT movement and many of the people who identify with it are not compatible with accepting just part of that group.
notahacker 4y ago
LGBT people bundled themselves together, decades ago. This particular group was formed to combat the notion of LGBT identity. So it isn't unreasonable to class it as anti-LGBT, in addition to also holding more specifically anti-T positions.