DiscussionLGB Alliance UK, and the transgender-identified people who want to support LGB - What are your opinions?

submitted by reluctant_commenter from self.LGBDropTheT

TLDR How should we approach AGP men who self-describe as being transgender but who also say they want to support LGB rights? And should LGB Alliance amplify these men's opinions?

Motivation for this post is below.

The LGB Alliance UK tweeted today about an article in The Spectator (UK pub) that criticizes gender identity ideology: link (archived version)

The article was written by Debbie Hayton, a transwoman and self-identified autogynephile (abbreviated as AGP) who supports the LGB Alliance. I'm a little mixed on the article, for reasons I'll get to in a moment.

Quick summary of some points from the article:

  1. "LGBT+ history month" is largely an exercise in virtue-signalling.

  2. No one is looking to bar transgender people from participating in sports; the concern is over "biological males elbowing their way into categories that had hitherto been reserved for females" (a quote from the article).

  3. Stonewall was not started by "trans women of color" such as Marsha P. Johnson, this is revisionism.

I do want to acknowledge: One, it's great to see a trans-identified male being frank about the reality of biological sex, and the misinformation surrounding Stonewall (the event in NY, that is). Two, I believe it must be extremely tough being openly AGP in today's climate-- trans rights activists target, threaten, harass, shame, and silence people who even discuss autogynephilia, let alone claim to have it.

...But. I still have some concerns. These are kind of unorganized and I'd love to hear people's thoughts on them.

  • My biggest concern: The very concept of "transitioning" has homophobic origins and has been used to convince same-sex-attracted people that they are actually "straight". AGP men who self-describe as being "transgender women" are still perpetuating a homophobic (and sexist) belief system.

Other concerns:

  • This author neglects to mention that transitioning has little to no positive benefit for many people who transition, and has many unhealthy negative effects (e.g. bone density concerns brought up in the Tavistock data).

  • The author fails to acknowledge other possible solutions for gender dysphoria, such as evidence-based psychotherapy.

  • The very concept of being "transgender" or "transitioning" is ultimately misleading-- you cannot change sexes, you can only pretend to be the opposite sex. We ought to stop hiding the phenomena of AGP and HSTS behind the word "transition" and talk about them openly. (I would sooner accept "LGBA" with"A" for autogynephile than "LGBT" with "T" for transgender. And I don't think there should be a "LGBA" either, ignoring asexuals for a moment.)

  • Transgender ideology perpetuates sexist stereotypes. The idea that you ought to pretend to be a man if you are a woman who does not conform to stereotypes about women, and vice versa, reinforces power of those stereotypes and they shame they cause people.

  • There are two distinct belief systems here: transgender ideology, in which people pretend they are the opposite sex for various reasons, and gender identity ideology, in which people believe in the pseudoscientific ideas of "gender identity" and "sex is a spectrum," etc. I think both of these belief systems are harmful, and the author of the article that was tweeted by LGB Alliance clearly believes in the first, even if he does not believe in the second.

  • Heterosexual AGP allies are allies, not LGB themselves. This man is AGP and heterosexual; I am bothered by the idea that he is able to speak for "LGBT+ people" when he really is not a member of the LGB community, he is straight. I think it is great that some AGP men are trying to support LGB people but, we should be the ones to tell our own story, and again, I don't think there should be a "LGBT" in the first place, Q or not.

I feel bad for being harsh towards this guy, I do appreciate the fact that he speaks out about autogynephilia, and acknowledges his biological sex (lol, I know, it's a low bar, but still). At the same time... I am struggling to celebrate this as a victory. It's some progress, I guess.

General thoughts? I have a few questions I'm wondering about, as well:

  • What are your opinions on people who acknowledge that they have AGP but still identify as transgender, who want to support LGB people (edit: another example-- Schrodinger's Transcat)?

  • What about AGP men who don't identify as trans, but still want to support LGB people and women (e.g. never mind, I can't think of a good example off the top of my head)?

  • Do you think LGB Alliance should share more articles like this, or not?

Thanks in advance.

edit: inevitable typo

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]motss-pb 17 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

I approach gender ideology in the same way I approach religion. Religious beliefs can also be sexist and homophobic. And I don't agree with that, but I still believe in freedom of religion and that we should practice tolerance. So, even though I don't respect their beliefs, I can tolerate transwomen who say they want to "live as women" whatever that means. As long as they don't expect me or the law to pretend that TWAW, I'm glad to let them live their lives. Once their ideology starts affecting policy in a way that infringes on the rights of others, the gloves come off.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So, even though I don't respect their beliefs, I can tolerate transwomen who say they want to "live as women" whatever that means. As long as they don't expect me or the law to pretend that TWAW, I'm glad to let them live their lives.

Curious: Would you say that "expecting you or the law to pretend that TWAW" includes the pronoun debate? Like, would you call a transwoman "she" out of courtesy, or you would refuse to and still respect that person's right to self-describe as "trans"?

If I had to name a parallel in religion, I guess I would say, for example, how some Christian sects expect their priests to be called "Father ___." I would refuse to call such a person "father" because I don't subscribe to that belief system and have no desire to reinforce it, just as I would not call a transwoman "she" and have no desire to reinforce the beliefs of gender identity ideology.

[–]motss-pb 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree. I already had the "referring to priests as father" example in mind. I think a non-religious person can choose whether or not they want to refer to a priest as father. If not, there's always the secular "Mister" option. As a gender "atheist" I don't think I should be forced to change my language to enable an ideology I don't hold. So no, I would not call a transwoman "she" out of courtesy. If I were to use pronouns for a transwoman, I think would default to the gender neutral "they/them" out of courtesy. That's my compromise at the moment, but I'm still debating it. Certainly, "he/him" is not incorrect.

[–]haveanicedaytoo💗💜💙 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I think trans people like Blaire White and Rose of Dawn, and even this AGP man are very useful for us because they show that "transgender" is not a monolith. The 99% of the world who has no idea what's going on and just wants to stay out of trouble and not be accused of transphobia and lose their jobs/reputations can at least see content like this and think "okay, so all trans people don't think the same?" Because we are so neck-deep in this trans-shit, we forget that the huge majority of the world really has no clue what's going on, and the little they hear, they immediately blame "The LGBT" rather than just the T.

But beyond that, how can I trust any man who views women, especially lesbians and the concept of lesbianism as a fetish? As a fetish so strong that it becomes a public lifestyle that everybody has to know about? This shit needs to stay in the bedroom, and honestly, it shouldn't even be in the bedroom, because I pity the woman who would end up getting surprised by this after getting into a relationship with this man. I understand that when teenagers are hormonal, life becomes SEXSEXSEXOMGSEEEEXXXX for a while, but we're all supposed to grow out of that phase eventually. When sex hijacks your life and makes you think and do weird shit just for an orgasm, this is not somebody I can trust.

LGB and the fetish community need to part ways completely. I'm so sick of us being viewed as creepy perverts. We're just normal people trying to live normal lives, and oh by the way we happen to like same-sex. It's not that serious. It's a tiny fraction of our lives.

And to sort of answer your questions, I feel suspicious of anyone who wants to "support" LGB nowadays, unless they are a friend, family member, or a closeted "straight ally" who can't come out due to whatever reason. Of course well meaning, openminded strangers exist too, but they're different. Anyone else screeching about "supporting" us while doing absa-fucking-lutely nothing, just wants the woke-points and the attention. AGP who "support" lesbians just want to be close to and have access to lesbians.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The 99% of the world who has no idea what's going on and just wants to stay out of trouble and not be accused of transphobia and lose their jobs/reputations can at least see content like this and think "okay, so all trans people don't think the same?" Because we are so neck-deep in this trans-shit, we forget that the huge majority of the world really has no clue what's going on, and the little they hear, they immediately blame "The LGBT" rather than just the T.

That's a great point. And I agree, generally speaking, more nuance is better than less.

But beyond that, how can I trust any man who views women, especially lesbians and the concept of lesbianism as a fetish? As a fetish so strong that it becomes a public lifestyle that everybody has to know about?

Yeahhhh... I just, I can't get around that. I have slowly become more and more sure that we ought to be open about the fact that AGP exists, perhaps study the health risks of AGP as a group in its own right, and not shame people for having the impulses that they do (creepy perverts aside, there does appear to be some sizeable genetic component involved in paraphilias, and in AGP).

But-- calling AGP transwomen by female pronouns and suggesting they're women, that's a lie. It has harmful ramifications for LGB rights and women's rights. And "transitioning" even seems harmful for many autogynephiles, themselves, according to r/askAGP. And, I shouldn't be forced to participate in their sexual fantasy, lol.

AGP who "support" lesbians just want to be close to and have access to lesbians.

You're right, we ought to be careful about this. The idea of someone being AGP and denouncing transgenderism, but then using their AGP identity to get closer to women anyway, sickens me, but it is possible. I'm still trying to mull all of this over.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[–]linda_senora 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Here are my 2 cents on this issue:

  • Self-preservation: Trans identified individuals who can see the many issues with the Trans lobby (the ones who criticize the strategy LGBTQIA++ organizations have undertaken, who warn people about the more outrageous trans identified individuals and TRAs) serve a purpose. They let straight people like me know that not every trans person shares the same insane views. It is extremely important to have trans identified females (who admit being female) and trans identified males (who admit they are males) express support for women, children, gay men and lesbians.

Some trans identified individuals can reach a segment of the population unwilling to interact with GCs.

  • Self-preservation: trans identified individuals like Buck Angel and Rose of Dawn also realize that the more insane Ts are going to make trans identified people's lives much more difficult. I cannot offer citation, but apparently LGBT acceptance is at a low.

B.A. and RoD have noticed that if they don't speak up, Ts are going to be much worse off. The trick is to convince more people to listen to the likes of B. Angel and R. Dawn, and to ignore or be critical of people like K. Montgomerie (sp.), Chase Strangio et al.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Gotcha, yeah that makes sense. Strategically, it does seem like a good thing. And there definitely does seem to be a notable element of self-preservation incentive in these trans people's stances, lol.

I don't believe it's sustainable longterm, for the reasons I outlined, but that makes a lot of sense, at least for the shorter-term view.

For what it's worth, I really struggle to dislike some of these individuals, even though I disagree with them. I wonder if any will detransition eventually.

[–]linda_senora 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It does motivate them to come out in favor of a more reasonable approach.

I don't think Buck Angel is going to detransition and RoD has admitted to having mental health issues, but he has gotten every surgery imaginable (including inverting his penis) so detransitioning might not be an option.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Have you seen Arty Morty’s interview of Debbie Hayton? https://youtu.be/DFXyHBT0-jY

Overall, I see Debbie’s contributions to the discourse to be a net positive.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I have not, thanks for the link. I'll take a look. Hope you're doing well :)