I don’t discriminate, but ….

MT62

That ok Cossy but what happens if I say I don’t want all these blokes coming on to our shores. Am a racist?
Are the whole of Piddington racist because they don’t want a migrant camp there?
It doesn’t bother me that they are black, brown, yellow or whatever but it’s their values that bother me they aren’t the same as ours & that is my only concern.

You can say that, others will draw their own conclusions.

Personally, I don’t judge all men arriving on small boats as all being trouble making people simply because they “don’t share our values”, (not entirely sure what you actually mean by that?)

Four years ago myself and a good friend of mine decided to do a road trip, on our own, across parts of Turkey we hadn’t seen.

We were two white women in our sixties, never having driven in Turkey before, and not speaking the language.

We drove right up into the mountains and through villages, only spending one night in each place.

Were we a little nervous? Yes. Did we experience any issues? No, not even one, even though most of the places we stayed the night in were tiny B&B’s, mainly run by men. Turkish, Muslim men.

The places we stopped for lunch and “comfort” breaks were tiny little road cafes, full of Turkish men.

Their culture couldn’t be more different from ours, but we were treated with deference and respect in every single place we went.

Sometimes these feelings we have spring from fear, often that fear is unfounded.

Good and bad people exist in all cultures. In my experience, the good outway the bad by a large margin.

Mollygo 16.54- I thought I was clear in my earlier post but I'll have another go- just for you 😊. If this post setting out my understanding of the law is still not sufficiently clear for you, I invite you to provide your own preferred form of words that would be clearer- I would read with interest not be offended.

My understanding is that the UK law has now determined sex is immutable and defines womanhood and protects gender critical views as a philosophical belief under equality legislation. There have also been landmark rulings on protecting safe spaces for women.

At the same time the law prohibits homophobic and transphobic discrimination and harassment.

So sex is immutable and defines womanhood. However at the same time transgender people have the right to identify their preferred gender and are also protected by law from discrimination and harassment and must be treated equally.

A transgender woman identifies as female, has a legal right to do so and can obtain a legal Gender Recognition Certificate. They can also update their names and gender markers on passports, driving licences and medical records also without a GRC.

The landmark court rulings established sex based legal definition under equality legislation refers to biological sex. So for example service providers and employers etc can lawfully treat 'woman' as biological sex for single sex exemptions, and woman only spaces.

At the same time, transgender individuals retain separate legal protections against direct or indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation under the protected characteristic of 'gender reassignment".

I don't "allude' to the law as you suggest, I set out my understanding of it.

You ask *Do you feel that the transgender women’s rights you allude to should impact detrimentally on the rights of women?
NB I’m not demanding that you answer, as that’s likely to get a report, just asking for clarification of your statements, which you are equally not obliged to give*

My statements are my understanding of the law. The law is the law - so not for me to say whether the law should detrimentally impact on the rights of women or on the rights of transgender women. Both have legal protections.

In an ideal world men, women of all nationalities and transgender women and transgender men can live alongside each other, all with dignity and respect and not be harassed, victimised or discriminated against.

In my part of the country hundreds of houses have been built in villages with hundreds more planned. However. Most of these are very high priced and even the so called ‘affordable’ properties are beyond the needs of first time buyers. Also many people would never have the means to buy a house. What is needed is more new social housing at affordable rents.
As for the homeless community. Many will not accept offers of accommodation as they would not be allowed to drink or take drugs there . Therefore, accommodation to cater for those with addictions needs to be considered where help can be offered if possible.

Doodledog

There is a difference between saying 'I'm not racist, but I don't want people with brown skin living next door' and 'I'm not transphobic but I don't want men in women's spaces'.

The former is a clear contradiction - only a racist would care about their neighbour's skin colour. The latter means that the speaker is not afraid of transpeople or wants to discriminate against them, but is afraid of (or otherwise objects to) men using women's changing rooms or whatever - transgender or not. Those things are perfectly compatible.

Exactly- I agree Doodledog.

He could start by addressing those houses in every county, up and down Britain, currently left empty.

Excellent post, Graphite. Thanks for the link, I often wonder whether empty houses are taken into account when talking about the 'housing crisis'.

I'm not racist, but I don't want people with brown skin living next door sounds racist to me,
but saying,
I'm not racist, but I'm concerned about shifting population numbers with all these migrants doesn't sound racist to me.

Yet, often people are wrongly accused of racism just by others wanting to read that into the tone of the comment, as in example 2.

Thank you Doodledog now why didn't I think of putting it like that .

Possibly Doodledog, but there is plenty of evidence of those who think saying you don’t want males in women’s spaces is transphobic even if you think it’s not the same (and actually I agree.)

There is a difference between saying 'I'm not racist, but I don't want people with brown skin living next door' and 'I'm not transphobic but I don't want men in women's spaces'.

The former is a clear contradiction - only a racist would care about their neighbour's skin colour. The latter means that the speaker is not afraid of transpeople or wants to discriminate against them, but is afraid of (or otherwise objects to) men using women's changing rooms or whatever - transgender or not. Those things are perfectly compatible.

Lemonjam
I have no problem with protecting same sex spaces.
That’s almost clear, but I’ve heard TW saying the same thing whilst translating same sex as including them as women, which as males, they’re obviously not.

I also believe transgender women have the same rights as biological women and should not be discriminated against or harassed in that or any other context.

Both can be true and both allowed for.

Would you mind clarifying/exemplifying those last two statements?

What are the rights that transgender women should have, that they don’t currently have?

Do you feel that the transgender women’s rights you allude to should impact detrimentally on the rights of women?

NB I’m not demanding that you answer, as that’s likely to get a report, just asking for clarification of your statements, which you are equally not obliged to give.

I do challenge it when it happens LemonJam. I'm simply saying that someone declaring they're not transphobic, homophobic or antisemitic isn't necessarily because they're not prepared to admit they are, it's because they're not and don't want to be accused of being so.

I thought I'd made that plain; perhaps not.

Smileless2012

Yes LemonJam I'm aware that homophobia targets same sex attraction and that the law protects gender critical views, that does not however stop some from making 'phobia' accusations when gender critical views are being discussed in relation to for example, the protection of same sex spaces.

There are numerous examples of posters feeling the need to state that they're not antisemitic when criticising the actions of the Israeli state, and not Hamas supporters when they comment on the plight of those in Gaza.

This IMO is not because they're discriminating, it's because they fear they may well be accused of doing so.

Good. What I said was:

"UK law has determined sex is immutable and defines woman hood so protects gender critical views as a philosophical belief under equality legislation. Simultaneously the law prohibits homophobic and transphobic discrimination and harassment.

Therein lies a tension. You can fervently believe and have the right to do so that sex is immutable and defines womanhood. However at the same time transgender people have the right to identify their preferred gender and are also protected by law from discrimination and harassment and must be treated equally".

If you feel that the law protects gender critical views, that does not however stop some from making 'phobia' accusations when gender critical views are being discussed in relation to for example, the protection of same sex spaces I would suggest taking it up yourself with that person.

I have no problem with protecting same sex spaces. I also believe transgender women have the same rights as biological women and should not be discriminated against or harassed in that or any other context. Both can be true and both allowed for.

I would suggest you take the same approach with any posters discussing any issues in Gaza which I have not mentioned.

MT62

That ok Cossy but what happens if I say I don’t want all these blokes coming on to our shores. Am a racist?
Are the whole of Piddington racist because they don’t want a migrant camp there?
It doesn’t bother me that they are black, brown, yellow or whatever but it’s their values that bother me they aren’t the same as ours & that is my only concern.

You cant seriously think the government or Border Control cant control or pick and choose whether its a 'bloke', female or child that arrives in the UK to make an asylum seeker claim?

Good to know though that the colour of asylum seekers' skin makes no difference. Just like the any other group of UK population a group of asylum seekers will be made up of a number of individuals who hold differing values and personalities.

Thankyou Cossy for your post. My feelings exactly. I live on the coast and the number of second homes round here is appalling when people are homeless for whatever reason!

As a person who has had relationships with women the worst homophobia I have seen is from those justifying men in women's spaces.

Yes LemonJam I'm aware that homophobia targets same sex attraction and that the law protects gender critical views, that does not however stop some from making 'phobia' accusations when gender critical views are being discussed in relation to for example, the protection of same sex spaces.

There are numerous examples of posters feeling the need to state that they're not antisemitic when criticising the actions of the Israeli state, and not Hamas supporters when they comment on the plight of those in Gaza.

This IMO is not because they're discriminating, it's because they fear they may well be accused of doing so.

I live in London alongside immigrants who have been here a long time and those newly arrived and I have to say that none of them have struck me as not having the same values, most of them love their families and want to make a decent living so that their children will do well in life, in fact many of them are very aspirational. Of course there will always be bad eggs but have seen this in every group in society.
Is a sweeping statement to say ‘they’ don’t have the same values.

As for the rough sleepers some are too far gone to get the help they need.
They are more my concern than the people landing on our shores.

That ok Cossy but what happens if I say I don’t want all these blokes coming on to our shores. Am a racist?
Are the whole of Piddington racist because they don’t want a migrant camp there?
It doesn’t bother me that they are black, brown, yellow or whatever but it’s their values that bother me they aren’t the same as ours & that is my only concern.

Sorry, note to self, use preview!

Of course that should read “I’m not discriminatory …..”

Thanks good old auto-correct and no edit button

nanna8

What I really don’t like is virtue signalling. I always think that these are the worst as regards racism, being judgemental and looking for faults that don’t exist.

I’m not entirely sure if you are accusing those “calling out” discrimination as “virtue signaling”, (sorry loathe that expression and some of the intention some put behind it), or if you using it in context with the “I’m not distributors, but….” Or if it’s aimed at those actually openly discriminating?

Homophobia targets same sex attraction.

Gender critical views can target the conceptualisation of gender identity and transgender rights.

UK law has determined sex is immutable and defines woman hood so protects gender critical views as a philosophical belief under equality legislation. Simultaneously the law prohibits homophobic and transphobic discrimination and harassment.

Therein lies a tension. You can fervently believe and have the right to do so that sex is immutable and defines womanhood. However at the same time transgender people have the right to identify their preferred gender and are also protected by law from discrimination and harassment and must be treated equally.

The principle remains the same I guess, someone can say "I am not homophobic but" or "I am not transgender phobic but" and then discriminate by their words that follow.

Cossy's principle can apply to any discrimination issue I would think.

I think sometimes there are declarations of not being racist and/or homophobic because for example people criticising the Israeli regime are accused of being antisemitic and criticism of transgender issues can result in accusations of homophobia.

Lizzies

I saw someone the other day say that getting planning permission for the spaces above retail premises to be used for accommodation is really difficult. If councils want more accommodation in towns then surely this would solve some problems. People would be near places to work and wouldn’t need to travel, they would use the shops nearby and keep them more viable, etc.

The problem is insurance. The premiums are very high for the shopkeepers if a flat above a shop is rented out.

In my book it's a positive thing to call out racism, misogyny or homophobia as it can stop immediate harm and breaks the cycle of prejudice. Speaking up shatters the comfort that lets prejudice grow.

Remaining silent can make harmful behaviour seem normal whilst speaking up supports targets of discrimination and prevents escalation. We've seen racist remarks by some on social media escalating and whipping up into severe harassment and physical violence on our streets. We've seen examples where misogyny has resulted in great harm towards women.

Calling out racism or misogyny is not inherently virtue signalling, it can be a genuine stand against prejudice and harm, though some people I guess may do it publicly not because of their personal beliefs or values but to look good to others.