In particular
Open Labour is a group or organization or faction or ______ that aims to make the Labour Party more wonderful. Or something. What they stand for:
We represent Labour’s open Left: a practical, open-minded and tolerant type of democratic socialism. Our ideas and campaigns are based on a simple strategy: creating broad and diverse alliances behind policies which transform society.
We are realistic about public opinion, but we believe that Labour’s democratic left must seek to lead it. This will only happen if our party is vibrant and democratic – if it can include a wide variety of views and groups without intolerance or bigotry keeping members away.
So I guess the rest of Labour is impractical, closed-minded, and intolerant? And they don’t aim to create broad and diverse alliances behind policies which transform society?
I don’t know. It all seems quite vague to me, but I’d never heard of them before. I heard of them just now because they issued a statement on Twitter. It’s not on their website, just on Twitter – I don’t know if that makes it more official or less or if there is no difference.
Sadly, we need to clarify our position around transphobia. Our National Committee have decided unanimously to issue the below statement. pic.twitter.com/c4yAmBREnc
— Open Labour (@OpenLabour) July 29, 2019
The reason it caught my attention, along with the fastidiously prurient denunciation of “one of our committee members,” is the unmarked oddity of the first sentence.
At Open Labour we seek to stand in solidarity with LGBTQ+ people, and with trans people in particular in the struggle for respect and equal rights.
The unmarked oddity is “and with trans people in particular.” Why with trans people in particular? Seriously, why? That’s constantly implied and occasionally spelled out like that but it’s never (that I see) explained. Why are we endlessly told, implicitly or explicitly, that trans people are due particular, extra, emphatic, special solidarity?
If we understood that we would have a better grip on why it’s seen as acceptable and even admirable to single out women for threats and abuse if we fail in this duty to give particular solidarity. We would have a better grip on what they think they mean and why they think it, so then we might be able to make a dent in this idiotic claim.
Of course there is nothing at all in the statement itself that would help with that. It’s pathetic how this whole branch of activism relies on empty slogans endlessly repeated and just utterly fails to ground any of it in comprehensible reasons.
A petty thought struck me a few moments ago–trans activist are reminiscent of militant vegans, except they’re apparently taking over all progressive spaces. If you can’t see why trans activism is so obnoxious, imagine being led by capital-vee Vegans, having their opinions and their most histrionic—a term used advisedly—claims about the world enforced by the echelons of the academy and the press.
They are reminiscent of vegans. Though I sound like a broken record, I believe the common denominator is Cluster B personality disorder tactics. Narcissism, in other words. This type doesn’t have “a cause”. No matter how fervently they preach animal liberation, or the deification of trans people, or the evils of this or that, those issues are not their *actual issues*.
Their goal is social power and control. They will contradict themselves, lie habitually, and turn on their closest supporters in a heart beat if that’s what’s necessary to maintain narcissistic control.
trans people are so oppressed they are priviledged.
or they are so priviledged, they are oppressed.
(that’s supposed to be something like sarcasm. not exactly sure WHAT it is, but something like sarcasm is what it feels like).
(I’ve been a committed vegan for almost 25 years. I’m not interested in controlling you or anyone else.)
Ben, that is very nice, but I have known a lot of vegans who are not so considerate. I’ve seen hordes of vegans attack another vegan because they felt he was not pure enough. He had just embraced being a vegan, and was writing about why and how, and they descended on his blog to rip him a new one for daring to do it wrong.
I refuse to eat meals with anyone I know is a vegan. No matter what you do, it will not be right. If I do not know they are a vegan, they are probably not out to change anyone, and I have no problems sharing a table with them.
Dogmatists of any stripe are difficult to take, even when you share their core beliefs.
I had a boss for about a year who was a vegan, and we knew it from the first day he arrived, and nearly every day from then on. There was a strong self-righteous streak.
I find a similar pattern in trans. Many of them are no problem, just wanting to live in their own manner. But the ones that aren’t…
There was a British punk rock band in the 1980s-90s called Conflict. The singer-songwriter, a bloke named Colin, was a very preachy vegan, writing references about the evil of exploiting animals into a lot of their songs, launching into violent rhetoric about slaughterhouse workers, butchers, scientists, etc. in the middle of gigs, and so-on.
He wore leather Doc Martens and a leather jacket. He excused it by saying they were bought second-hand and it would have been doubly insulting to the dead cows to let the leather go to waste. The band was shit, too.
I had a friend once who was a vegan. She fed her cat vegan cat food, which does not give them adequate protein. Cats are obligate carnivores.
She said she would never consider giving a baby milk.
I feel compelled to reference The Simpsons.
In a way it’s nice of them to at last state openly that LGB have been subordinated to T.
Because they’ll vandalize your library, troll you on the interwebz, come after you with baseball bats wrapped in barbed wire?
Another comparison with vegans: there are actual vegans who’s dietary decisions are personal and individual, NOT expressions of permanent grievance against everyone who dares to disagree with them.
There really is a vein of vicious transphobia out there. The tear-jerking stories of trans teenagers banished from their families and surviving on high-risk sex work are not fairy tales. BUT: working to help these real people should never be mistaken for granting power and authority to professional creeps like Yaniv.
Perhaps a better parallel is the contrast between real concern for the threat of jihadist Islam, and rabid anti-immigrant racism.
Yes, but this is true of many other marginalized people, including many women who find there is no alternative for them. In fact, there are almost certainly more women in sex work than any other group of people. And their stories are often as tear jerking.
Same with the remainder of the LGBTQ+ letter array. And much of what the T portion of that grouping is doing is hurting the LGB portion. Especially the L. Much of it with the assistance of gay males.
Certainly. I wish people wouldn’t pretend that parents who do nothing more than refuse to go along with a child’s identity claims are the same as parents who beat or banish their children.