Woman of the Year

What happened there?

We cross-posted, Caravansera. I'm not sure what your point is, which could well be my fault . This appears to be the first time that Attitude has awarded its 'X of the Year' award to a transperson, but nobody is accusing them of doing it every time, or of skewing the odds in favour of men.

It is the way these awards contribute to the zeitgeist that matters, and even one instance of Woman of the Year being won by a man is one too many. Back in 2015, when Caitlin Jenner won Glamour Magazine's Woman if the Year I thought it was an inclusive act that showed acceptance of transpeople. It was the reaction of a (male) student that gave me pause for thought. He was appalled that someone who had lived as a man (and a privileged one at that) could take the award from women, and worse that other women could support this. After a conversation with him I was a bit embarrassed by my initial support, and changed my mind about it. I was lucky to have had a switched-on and articulate young man to explain to me why he disagreed, and that the conversation happened to come up when it did. If not, I would probably have continued to think as I did.

By contrast, as I've said before it was the rude and disrespectful way I was spoken to on here when I started posting a couple of years later that made me look further into the topic and form the views I now hold. I had asked why it wouldn't be better to loosen the stranglehold of gender norms than to encourage children to believe that they were 'in the wrong body', and was told in no uncertain terms that I was a bigot, and that I should 'educate myself', which I did.

Again, if that incident hadn't happened, I don't know what my feelings would be today. At that point, the trans agenda was just starting to make inroads into the workplace, and its impact on women was being talked about more, but it was still a fairly niche area for me. I was interested, which is why one of my first posts was a question on the subject, but I didn't know a lot about it, and probably did feel that it was about the same sorts of issues as the gay rights movement had been - the Stonewall connection saw to that.

I think that a lot of people who don't know a trans or non-binary person, who don't work in a place where Stonewall has an influence, and who haven't had either a respectful student or a disrespectful poster shake them into awareness will either instinctively feel either that transpeople are 'unnatural' or that they are a 'vulnerable minority' in need of support, depending on their outlook - not everyone is as aware of the issues as people are on here.

Personally, I think that 'genuine' transpeople are in need of support, but the political dimension surrounding the way that men are taking over women's spaces and leaving us with nothing of our own is making women more vulnerable. That dimension is finding its way into all aspects of the media, into mainstream politics, into schools and universities, workplaces and anywhere it can, and a lot of it is done by normalisation.

There are trans characters in dramas in far greater numbers than is representative, drag queens on mainstream entertainment shows, politicians trip over themselves not to say anything that could upset the trans lobby, people are coerced into declaring pronouns at work, so it looks as though so-called 'gender' overrides sex. It's everywhere, and this subtle integration of transpeople pushes the violent and repressive side of the movement into the background.

No 'road blocks' here that I can see VS.

Smileless2012

No 'road blocks' here that I can see VS.

No, nor me.

My post was simply to provide some historical facts about the awards, to correct the assumption, from the opening post onward, that giving this award to Dylan Mulvaney was taking it away from someone who was born a woman.

Attitude is an established magazine that was first published in 1994, its target audience predominantly gay men. Owner Darren Styles started the awards in 2012. Interviewed ahead of the 2014 awards, he said:

… we give three icon awards every year, which is a great opportunity to celebrate and say thank you to the people that have influenced our readers’ lives – people like Ian McKellen and Peter Tatchell. Last year we gave them to Paul O’Grady, Marc Almond, and a posthumous one to Alan Turing.

www.attitude.co.uk/awards/attitudes-editor-on-the-importance-of-the-attitude-awards-282156/

There is more about the history of the magazine here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_(magazine)

It says, inter alia that:

In a 2016, Prince William, Duke of Cambridge was photographed exclusively for the cover of Attitude, marking the very first time a member of the British Royal Family had posed for on appeared on or in a gay magazine. Inside, the Prince met nine LGBT people who had experienced homo, bi or transphobic abuse growing up and had suffered mental health problems as a result.

I listed the previous award winners from 2018 in my previous post. These are the earlier ones:

2013 Man of the Year musician John Grant

2014 Man of the Year swimmer Tom Daley

2015 Man of the Year journalist and broadcaster Evan Davies

2016 Man of the Year actor Wentworth Miller

2017 Man of the Year actor, model and deaf activist Nyle diMarco

In other words, past awards have almost always gone to a man who identified as male apart from 2019 when the award was given to singer Sam Smith who identifies as non-binary. This year it has gone to a man who identifies as a woman. The award has not been taken away from anyone born female.

I understand the arguments about women's spaces and the violent side of the movement but this isn’t an example of that nor do these awards, or the award winner in this case, deserve the ill-informed comments that have been made here.

So it's a man of the year award then.

Being a woman is not an identity. It is not a costume. Cant you see how sexist that is. Whoever says it and whatever the demographic of the readership.

You never heard of Attitude magazine before and now you have. That's what it was for. Publicity.

Galaxy

Being a woman is not an identity. It is not a costume. Cant you see how sexist that is. Whoever says it and whatever the demographic of the readership.

I can, absolutely.

I also take your point about it not being taken from a man, Caravansera, but I don't think the objections are ill-informed. The normalising of transwomen as women remains, regardless of the publication and its previous award winners.

As Galaxy says, if the award had been Man of the Year, it would have been different. And my point remains that many gay people are not on board with the trans agenda, as aspects of it are deeply homophobic.

Galaxy

So it's a man of the year award then.

Yes, where are the Woman of the Year awards apart from the one which this thread is about? This whole thing is about men - what a surprise...

Galaxy

So it's a man of the year award then.

I was about to make that point too Galaxy. So amongst all the people they consider each year no female has ever been judged worthy of the award, despite females being 51% of the population. I expect they'd deny any pro male bias though, and claim they're totally inclusive. If I was a betting person I'd bet that if a female ever does win the award if will be a trans identifying female, a transman like Elliot Page.

It’s a magazine aimed predominantly at gay men. It’s for the readers of Attitude to take up with Darren Styles and his team if they are unhappy.

When one looks back at the history of this award, few of the winners have been household names.

John Grant? Wentworth Miller? Nyle diMarco? Edward Enninful? Billy Porter? Josh Cavallo?

I expect few here would have even have been aware of the awards but for the Daily Mail whipping up division and hatred as it loves to do.

Time magazine’s most famous feature throughout its history has been the annual "Person of the Year" (formerly Man of the Year until 2000) cover story, in which Time recognizes the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest impact on news headlines over the past 12 months. The distinction is supposed to go to the person who has most affected the course of the year; it is, therefore, not necessarily an honour or a reward. In the past, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin have been named as have Richard Nixon, George Bush (both), Vladamir Putin, Mark Zuckerberg and Donald Trump.

One would have to ask Attribute why they chose Dylan Mulvaney. Maybe it was to do with the controversy over Bud Light and the consequences for brands that dare to support LGBQT, because it is an important issue.

www.nytimes.com/article/bud-light-boycott.html

Will people who disapprove of this award stop buying Jaguars, Land Rovers and Range Rovers or stop flying Virgin Atlantic. I doubt it.

What on earth are you talking about. I own none of those brands, am well aware of what attitude is without the daily mail. So maybe stop making up accusations about people.

Will people who disapprove of this award stop buying Jaguars, Land Rovers and Range Rovers or stop flying Virgin Atlantic. I doubt it.
I’d have to start doing all of those things before I could stop doing any of them .

Do you see my point about normalising the idea of men being better at womanhood than women? Why call it Woman of the year, given that women haven’t won it before, if not to make a statement. It feels deliberately provocative.

*This year it has gone to a man who identifies as a woman. The award has not been taken away from anyone born female.
*

Previously it has all been Man of the year.

Sam Smith and Dylan Mulvaney were born men too. Hmm.

I was at a meeting recently where someone did a presentation wanting hundreds of thousands of pounds for a project. Way off the figure they should have been asking for.
At the end of the talk, the leader of the group asked them if they truly believed they would get the money.
You could tell by their hesitancy and answers, that they did not.

I will leave people to join up this post with my previous one.

I wonder if a transman will ever win a Man of the Year contest. I somehow doubt it. If it does happen I think natal men would be outraged, and rightly so imo.

NanKate

I wonder if a transman will ever win a Man of the Year contest. I somehow doubt it. If it does happen I think natal men would be outraged, and rightly so imo.

Among the TG community itself there is disagreement about 'identity'.

I don't know the figures - don't know how many this applies to - but there is a 'sub-section' of transwomen who are scornful of transmen. They are inceltranswomen. They've even suggested that transmen should not be allowed to transition. Presumably because they don't want women invading their space as men. That's how perverse their hatred of women is. I assume they're a minority. However, all is not love-and-light in the TG world.

Where did this information come from? My TW friend who has been the victim of these "transmaxxers" for not aligning with the incel-groupthink.

This is all news to me Dickens. I find the world a strange and unsettling place to be.

NanKate

This is all news to me Dickens. I find the world a strange and unsettling place to be.

It was news to me, too. It's another world.

Google "transmaxxing"... it's quite alarming.

My TW friend and the transmaxxers appear not to get along. I don't know the details. But it seems transmaxxers can be deeply misogynistic.

Absolutely agree with you. Not sure why so many people are getting so concerned about Trans men / women. Live and let live. Too much prejudice in the world 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️

Agree with who?

Too much prejudice in the world
Oh yes, the prejudice against women who just want single sex spaces, to be able to have same sex intimate care when they are vulnerable, not to have men cheating them at sports or out of women's awards, scholarships etc ........yep hard to bear, but women fight on against the prejudicial bullies.

All will become clear if you read the thread, MG55

Doodledog

All will become clear if you read the thread, MG55

I don't think there's any genuine lack of understanding about why we're 'concerned' .

I agree Dickens it's quite obvious what our concerns are based on.