Welcome back to blog everyone and to the first of a new ‘series’ of articles, I am planning. As you may know, I have previously written about “life from my ‘gay’ perspective” and of course, I fully intend for that to continue. In an attempt to write more frequently, I am planning to share my thoughts and opinions relating to specific news items in the LGBTQ and wider media. From those items, some subjects will be covered with further detail in their own article. Each week I will try to pick at least three pieces to discuss so without beating around the bush too much, let’s get on with it…
The Homophobic Defamation of Crystal
A familiar and long-standing homophobic trope reared its ugly head again this week when the former actor and aspiring politician Laurence Fox publicly called RuPaul’s Drag Race UK star Crystal a paedophile in retaliation for a disagreement about a new campaign from supermarket Sainsburys celebrating Black History Month. Fox also levied the same accusation, in since-deleted tweets, towards actress Nicola Thorp and the Stonewall deputy chair Simon Blake. Both Blake and Crystal are now filing defamation lawsuits against Fox.If I am totally honest, I am totally baffled by the narrative that homosexuals are also paedophiles and why the two are so frequently linked in this way. Obviously, homophobes often seek to defame and attack the LGBTQ community in any way that they can, making all sorts of accusations. A common and historical incrimination used against us is that being LGBTQ is perverted. From there, homophobes seem to take the jump from perverse to paedophilia.
Sadly, I have experienced this accusation first-hand. In my teens (around 17) I was supposed to be staying at a friend’s house. The friend shared a room with a younger brother so I would be sharing that same room too. I found out shortly before that my friends aunt had questioned his mum on why she was not concerned about my staying overnight, in the room with a younger child. The implication being that because I was gay (although I wasn’t fully out at the time) my friends’ younger brother was in some danger. Needless to say, I was absolutely disgusted and horrified. I was so mortified and upset that I never visited the house again. It was heart-breaking to me that someone would think I was capable of something so monstrously grotesque simply because of my sexuality. I really struggled to deal with that, and it set me back a fair bit in terms of accepting my sexuality.
We can all agree that paedophilia is right up there with the most heinous evils in this world. We are all on the same page with that one so to have it levelled at the gay community so frequently is disgusting. It is nasty homophobic rhetoric and it needs to stop. I truly hope that the lawsuits filed against Fox are successful.
Paul Hollywood’s ‘NHS’ Bagels
Paul Hollywood caused a bit of a stir this week on the British staple TV show, ‘Great British Bake-Off’ when he stated, “I think the rainbow colours for me, although it originated over in the States, I think it represents the NHS.” Naturally, Twitter was ablaze with reactions and honestly, I am not surprised.
There has been a lot of talk about the rainbow this year, with many choosing to use it as a symbol of support for the NHS. Let’s face it, we all support the NHS and the service it provides us, however, there are many that consider this to be an appropriation of a symbol that has represented the LGBTQ community since 1978. Originating in San Francisco and the Gay Freedom Day Parade, it has since become accepted worldwide as the symbol or flag for our community.
Of course, there are many to point out that the LGBTQ community do not ‘own’ the rainbow and that is very true. No one ‘owns’ it. For me though, it does seem that very quickly, many people seem to have forgotten that the symbol and the flag represent us. A community that has spent decades fighting for representation and recognition. Earlier this year many retailers began selling flags which co-opt the Pride Flag design by Gilbert Baker and the words ‘Thank You NHS’. Certain retailers were even selling what would have previously be considered ‘Pride’ merchandise but overwriting that with fundraising and support for the NHS and all of this during the actual Pride month!
I will say that I do think it is very important to differentiate between a rainbow as a symbol and the Pride Flag itself. I see no reason that the people can’t use an image of a rainbow to show their support for the NHS. My objection would be to be using the flag itself. That is our flag. It has represented our community for over 40 years. The NHS has even used that flag themselves to support LGBTQ pride in the form of Pin Badges throughout the service. They were “designed to promote a message of inclusion and are a sign that the wearer is someone you can talk to about issues of sexuality and gender identity. When staff sign up to wear the badge they are provided with information about the challenges people who identify as LGBT+ can face accessing healthcare and what they can do to support them.”
All that being said, for such a prominent TV show and a presenter to completely ignore the fact that the rainbow represents the LGBTQ community comes across as a form of erasure that makes me a little nervous for sure, especially considering the current climate. Nevertheless ‘gay twitter’ did what it does best and served Paul a massive dose of shade for his apparent erasure. Perhaps he should just stick to soggy bottoms and crusty tops.
Children’s Charities United
A judicial review case began in the High Court this week which seeks to prevent young trans people from using puberty blockers. The fall out of this case could potentially undermine the principle of the Gillick competence which enables young people to consent to their own medical treatment. The NSPCC, Barnardo’s, The National Children’s Bureau and The Children’s Society issued a joint statement in support of trans people and against this judicial review.
It is wonderful to see the most prominent charities who have a combined experience of over 450 years working with children, Barnardo’s, the NSPCC and The Children’s Society were all founded in the late 1800s supporting young trans people. With that much experience between them, I think it is safe to say they know what they are doing.
I know that the political landscape over the last five years has shifted somewhat, especially when politicians make statements like “the people in this country have had enough of experts”. It certainly does seem that these days, experts in their respective fields are completely ignored and instead opinions are far more important, regardless of any scientific or evidence-based fact. Why people are so willing to ignore those that actually know what they are talking about is beyond me.
This has all become particularly relevant to the trans community recently, with every Tom, Dick or Harry chiming in with what is essentially their opinion on trans lives. Celebrities are literally lining up to back a particular writer and her opinion of trans people and their experiences in this world. They seek to dictate to trans people what it is they think or feel and that is a real pet hate of mine. You cannot tell someone else what they think or what they feel unless you have substantial training and experience in that field. It frustrates me beyond words when people tell me what I think. No, you are not in my brain, you have no clue what is going on in here! I have real empathy for trans people in that sense. I understand what it is like to be told what you feel. That being said, I am not trans in any way and so I have absolutely no experience or expertise in the area. I have no idea what it must be like to think or feel as trans people do and so any opinions that I might form must be informed by the people it actually affects and those that have spent years studying and learning about it.
It is quite clear this conglomerate of children’s charities believe a move to prevent young trans people having the right to consent to medical treatment will be damaging; “Many trans children and young people feel lonely and isolated due to a lack of support, understanding, and acceptance. Denying them agency has the potential to compound this and can put them at high risk of mental illness and emotional distress, potentially affecting their long-term future”.
Further evidence has been supplied in this case, from John McKendrick QC, barrister for University College London Hospital NHS Trust, that prescribing puberty blockers to those young people experiencing gender dysphoria has been shown to reduce the distress they experience and ultimately reduce suicidal ideation. These puberty blockers can literally save lives. Preventing young trans people from accessing treatment would be a decision to make them continue experiencing the distress they feel. I have to wonder why and what kind of person actually wants someone else to endure all of this? Of course, this is all part of the wider conversation about the stigma and ignorance of mental illness in general and how it is treated. Why force young trans people to potentially suffer when it can be treated? Why is it even a thing that the experts in this field are being ignored?
This judicial review case has been launched by Keira Bell, who once identified as trans, and is being represented by Paul Conrathe. This lawyer has certainly got form when it comes to cases relating to women as well as the LGBTQ community. He has previously brought cases to court in an attempt to restrict abortion access. He was part of a 2001 legal challenge which opposed an equal age of consent for gay sex. He also represented the Christian Institute, who were opposed to the BBC airing Jerry Springer – The Opera and sought an apology for offending Christians. To be fair, the BBC probably should apologise but only for screening such a terrible show (sorry JSTO fans).
This whole case is emblematic of the way in which the trans community and other ‘minority’ communities are so frequently treated. Naturally, we all have our own opinions about things. I certainly do. However, it is a widespread problem in society that people seem to think their opinion should dictate how someone else should be allowed to live their life. All I want to say to those people is, “does it affect you in any way? No? Well, sit down, shut up and listen to those that it does!”
It is quite clear this conglomerate of children’s charities believe a move to prevent young trans people having the right to consent to medical treatment will be damaging; “Many trans children and young people feel lonely and isolated due to a lack of support, understanding, and acceptance. Denying them agency has the potential to compound this and can put them at high risk of mental illness and emotional distress, potentially affecting their long-term future”.
Further evidence has been supplied in this case, from John McKendrick QC, barrister for University College London Hospital NHS Trust, that prescribing puberty blockers to those young people experiencing gender dysphoria has been shown to reduce the distress they experience and ultimately reduce suicidal ideation. These puberty blockers can literally save lives. Preventing young trans people from accessing treatment would be a decision to make them continue experiencing the distress they feel. I have to wonder why and what kind of person actually wants someone else to endure all of this? Of course, this is all part of the wider conversation about the stigma and ignorance of mental illness in general and how it is treated. Why force young trans people to potentially suffer when it can be treated? Why is it even a thing that the experts in this field are being ignored?
This judicial review case has been launched by Keira Bell, who once identified as trans, and is being represented by Paul Conrathe. This lawyer has certainly got form when it comes to cases relating to women as well as the LGBTQ community. He has previously brought cases to court in an attempt to restrict abortion access. He was part of a 2001 legal challenge which opposed an equal age of consent for gay sex. He also represented the Christian Institute, who were opposed to the BBC airing Jerry Springer – The Opera and sought an apology for offending Christians. To be fair, the BBC probably should apologise but only for screening such a terrible show (sorry JSTO fans).
This whole case is emblematic of the way in which the trans community and other ‘minority’ communities are so frequently treated. Naturally, we all have our own opinions about things. I certainly do. However, it is a widespread problem in society that people seem to think their opinion should dictate how someone else should be allowed to live their life. All I want to say to those people is, “does it affect you in any way? No? Well, sit down, shut up and listen to those that it does!”
Meme Of The Week
In addition to sharing my thoughts and opinions on the news, I will also be picking a ‘Meme of the week’. Sometimes fun, sometimes serious, it will be my favourite from what I have seen doing the rounds on social media. Here is my pick for this week…Sourced from the Facebook page Lizzy the Lezzy:
And that is it for this week. If, by any chance, you want to know my thoughts on another piece of LGBTQ news, let me know in the comments or through social media and I will take a look. As always, thank you for stopping by and reading x
Well done, Mark. I hope you can make this a weekly blog.
ReplyDelete