I think my position on that was made clear enough by my original post and my reply.
You might have been asking in entirely good faith, but the issue is that this "oh, can you please explain your point of view to me" approach is so extremely frequently presented in bad faith and costs so much energy from those who care about topics like this.
Ok. Your first linked article is taking issue with the Guardian for saying "If a lesbian only desires same-sex dates that’s not bigotry, it’s her right".
Your position is that you disagree with the Guardian here?
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
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.
I wanted to know your perspective, and you told me to read the articles as they contained your perspective.
If you'd rather give me your perspective on HeartyBeast's comment than make me guess by playing 20 questions, it would really help things. I would much prefer that.
If you don't agree with the article, then why tell me to read them to get your perspective 😖
I'm doing my best based on the information you've given me.