Lesbian must be vouched for by two men
If this is true…
So lesbians can’t be in LGBT Labour, because of being lesbian. If they want to be in LGBT Labour they have to promise they’re not lesbian, and get two men to vouch for them.
SERIOUSLY?
And does this rule apply, mutatis mutandis, to gay men? Hello? Are we still connected?
So, it’s GBTLabour, then?
Or TGB really. Our trans siblings must be first.
LGTFO Labor
So the lesbians have to have two bloody MEN to vouch for them! We are certainly going backwards, aren’t we? Into some sort of parody of Victorian society, or a sort of ‘Handmaid’s Tale’. And what kind of men? How would men know, anyway? Would two trans-men be acceptable? Or two trans-women??? Or two splendidly heterosexual men in whom no lesbian would be interested anyway?
I have to say that I’m feeling increasingly politically homeless. I loathe Libertarianism. Right-wingers are just not my speed at all and the progressive left seems to have taken a sharp right-turn into regressive social stereotypes while kidding themselves they’re the most progressive types on earth – all while telling women to fuck off, preferably after choking on lady dick.
All I want is to live a peaceful and rational life while we try and avoid extinction. Is it too much to ask?
Tim,
I had a similar thought. It would be fun to see a large number of women suddenly identify as trans to get into the group, then each vouch for a large number of lesbians so that they can join.
Ideally, of course, when literally every lesbian had become a member, they should all performatively leave on the same day.
I’d also like to see two trans women vouching for a lesbian on the grounds that they are male. I admit this might cause the universe to implode, but it would be totally worth it.
I’m having trouble understanding the demand, and I can’t find any clarification online. Two specific men (such as the party leaders)? Any two men? Two male members of the party? Two trans-identified males? Why men as opposed to party members? The premise is outlandish and vague. What happened, a lesbian asked to join and someone said, “Well, if you can get a couple of transwomen to vouch that you aren’t transphobic, sure”? Total guess, but is that it? The whole situation sounds like extrapolation from an off-the-cuff remark, not policy.
Why would any self respecting lesbian even WANT to join such a parodical organization?
This truly seems to be a Peak Trans moment, no?
In the US, there are two parties with anything resembling political clout. Party membership is mostly fictional, there is little if anything that comes with being registered as a party member, but those are the choices.
I could easily be wrong, but it is my understanding that there are essentially two similar choices in the UK, and that party membership actually means something more substantial. That would be a reason a self-respecting lesbian might want to join such an organization.
Even if there are other choices, it’s not clear that any of them are any better overall. I think many people feel politically homeless, as it’s been expressed aptly in comments here.
Has it been verified yet?
It’s hard to believe it’s actually real.
I am a very long way from having the world’s most hair-triggered bullshit detector but mine did emit a modest glow on this one. It was the “islamophobic” resonance which led me to suspect mischief-making… I’m still open to evidence if any turns up.