• idiomaddict@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    They actually have a lot more positive articles for trans rights (by headlines, I didn’t read them all) than I realized, but they also write stuff that is just so insulting. The constant “just because we have the belief that sex might still be relevant” is downplaying things a really disingenuous level.

    While the article talks about lesbians, it mentions that this is all backed up legally, because the UK doesn’t allow trans women (I wonder if they allow trans men who’ve undergone medical transition) to access rape services, but they don’t criticize that or mention that trans people are twice as likely to be victims of sex crimes as cis people are.

    They take a hard look at mermaids, which they should, mermaids seems sketchy. They don’t, however, address that LGB Alliance wants to set up a helpline for children (except to mention they need money, because of the evil trans maniacs). What happens when a confused trans kid calls them?

    Additionally, calling a binder medically unsafe is a stretch. If you wear one that’s too small 24 hours a day, ignoring any feeling of over compression, it can fuck you up. Otherwise, they can be as safe as things like 10 cm heels, which children aren’t restricted from buying, afaik

    • asap@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Many thanks for your reply. I’m a Guardian subscriber so I have a vested interest in knowing they have an appropriate stance on this.

      I haven’t noticed a transphobic attitude in their journalism (International edition). Not to say it doesn’t exist, but I haven’t yet encountered it.

      I would be a bit hesitant about forming an opinion based on “opinion” pieces, in the Guardian or any publication. They’re as worthless as the bytes they’re printed on, and in the main rambling and painful to read. My take on opinion pieces (in any paper) is that they’re not necessarily representative of the views of the publication, and are frequently more negatively emotive than what an actual article would be.

      Thank you for your reply, it is appreciated.