Potential LGBT+ Liberation Group Convener, Robbie Travers.

The LGBT+ Liberation  Group is a group designed to represent students who self-define as LGBT+, and a space for them to work together and organize around these issues. This is understandable, and even obvious, right? Maybe not, seeing as some people fund it so hard to grasp the need for women-only spaces and BME liberation groups.

Robbie Travers believes we should open up liberation groups to anybody, whether they define into them or not. He wishes for a “meritocratic” view of liberation, that the quality of the point and not the lived experience is what makes a good advocate for, say, BME rights or LGBT+ rights. He believes that he is fit for the job, and I don’t know nor would I say what his sexuality is on a public forum, but he suggests straight people could run for LGBT+ Liberation Group Convener.

Basically, a candidate for a liberation group does not believe in the autonomy of liberation groups, and would like to put into place this “meritocratic” system of voting in leadership to liberation groups. This doesn’t make any sense to me, I am baffled. He would have to up-haul not only EUSA’s liberation structures, but NUS’s too, which seems ridiculous and pretty much impossible. I define into that section group and there is no way I would allow a representative of my issues open up this space to straight people. I’m sure many others would agree with me.

I had a lil look at his blog too, and under in his article “The Decay of the Left and the Need to Reaffirm Liberalism” he echoes much of what is said in articles by Sp!ked and the absolutist free-speech crowd. He believes that people bandy around the “insidious ideology” that is “identity politics” too much and use it to silence rational discourse. He believes that “privileging the views of group of people above another” is censorious, which I find pretty funny, as he’s basically saying that the voices of oppressed minorities calling out bigotry are privileged… like, seriously?? He also questions the need for safe spaces and mental well-being of students, saying that “mental safety” is “speciously defined”, and is used simply to block out any form of conflict. In a way, yes, that’s true Robbie. Safe space policies are there to block out abusive and triggering language, to protect the mental health of those affected by it. What is wrong with that? I don’t trust a person who believes that putting in structures to protect students’ mental health is supporting some kind of neo-fascist agenda.

Robbie also claims that he has been the victim of transphobic bullying, by way of him being “more feminine”, while admitting that he is in fact not transgender or even “transsexual” (jfc like at least try and learn the right terms and not offensive alternatives)… How is this guy going to represent trans issues when he doesn’t even get trans politics?

HAHAHA he also believes you can be racially prejudiced against white people.

Oh, God. Make of him what you will, but as a person who defines into the LGBT+ liberation group, I’m certain he wouldn’t be very good at representing us, with his strange opinions of allies and representation, and his downright awful views of transphobia.

Advertisements

About medeusa

glaring at Edinburgh student politics
This entry was posted in blogs, elections, eusa and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Potential LGBT+ Liberation Group Convener, Robbie Travers.

  1. No Thanks says:

    So you can’t be racially prejudiced against white people…why? ‘White’ fell under the category of race the last time I checked.

  2. this is total ad hominem nonsense

  3. medeusa says:

    Thanks for the feedback.

  4. medeusa says:

    Thanks for the feedback.

  5. Heather says:

    @LGBritainsGotTalent+-123:
    *reads article on how a candidate for an election is running on the basis of an unimplementable policy loathed by the group he claims to want to represent*

    “TOTAL AD HOMINEM NONSENSE”

    great job well done a+ reading comprehension

  6. dmtarnold says:

    Just read this blog post and Robbie’s responses to it on Facebook and twitter.

    His main criticism revolves around a claim that this post states that he is “neo-fascist”. A proper read of this article demonstrates that no such claim was made. What was actually conveyed was along the lines of: it seems to be that Robbie thinks safe-space policy is neo-fascist. Robbie’s Twitter post claimed that the medeusa author did not know the meaning of ‘neo-fascist’, implying that Robbie thinks that safe-space policies are not indeed neo-fascist, which is nice.

  7. Hkvnj says:

    Its so extremely simplistic to say you cant discriminate against white people, see how many jokes there are about eastern europeans. Phrases like ‘fuck you white person’ alienate eastern europeans dont you think? Or are their views less important/less discriminated against than fatimas because of the colour of their skin?

  8. X says:

    You can discriminate against white people, but you can’t be racist towards them because systematic, historical oppression doesn’t back up their experience of race (unlike POC). And being prejudiced against Eastern Europeans isn’t racist; they’re not a race. It’s xenophobic if anything, or perhaps a matter of class.

  9. Jenkyn says:

    “Privilege” has more than one meaning. When he refers to “privileging certain opinions” what he means is “treating favourably”.

    Peoples’ disagreement with the safe-space thing is that it’s treating people as fragile little creatures who all have PTSD and can’t bear to be offended. They see “safe space” policies as being a convenient way of avoiding criticism or dissent, by labeling those things as “triggering” or “problematic”.

    Feel free to pick me up on this one, but “transgender” can’t exist, since gender is something we are born with and do not possess the science to change. It’s a product of brain chemistry, and a transperson cannot simply “change” who they are inside.

    If I hold prejudice against white people because they are white, then by definition I am racially prejudiced against them. Sneering at people won’t get you far in the real world outside of your safe spaces.

  10. medeusa says:

    You are wrong. Thanks for the feedback. I’m not sneering I’m laughing and deconstructing their bad policies.

  11. Jenkyn says:

    Do you not see the profound arrogance in your attitude? I’m not trying to have have a go at you, but you have to see that that’s not how people act in the real world.

  12. medeusa says:

    Safe spaces ARE there to represent more vulnerable people, not to state that everyone in them has mental health problems. They’re a space of relief from the constant barrage of offensive and triggering stuff everywhere else in the world. What is wrong with having that one space designed for people to cope and organise?

  13. medeusa says:

    Transgender people DO exist. I have transgender friends and follow trans people on Twitter etc. Definitely not some weird myth I promise you. To equate their gender identity with mental illness is pretty abhorrent in my opinion. Google is there for a reason.

  14. medeusa says:

    What I see is that this is actually how people act in the “real world”. Please explain to me how university is part of some kind of alternate universe. I act like this and so do some of my friends and many many people all over the very real world. To say that people don’t is just false and erases what’s actually happening with people who need these spaces. Its nothing to talk about in such a derisive way.

  15. Jenkyn says:

    I’m not necessarily opposed to safe spaces. I was only pointing out why some people are opposed to them, since you said you didn’t understand that mentality.

    No one’s equating transpeople with mental disorders, but I don’t see how anyone can “change” their gender. How does that happen? If I’m a girl inside, I can hardly just “become” a boy. Transpeople can’t help who they are, any more than gay people can stop being gay.

    University isn’t the “real” world because student politics bears very little resemblance to the real thing. Universities have their own rules and “courts”, their own authorities and standards of behaviour. I can’t try to ban lad culture off-campus. I will never get elected if I sneer and laugh at people who disagree with me. I will not have safe spaces where people can’t offend me. People actually vote en masse in the real world, so I can’t control the political process with my small minority. People will not take me seriously if I talk about “rape culture” and try to ban pop music, etc.

    In the real world you have to engage with those who disagree with you, you have to be open-minded and you have to be able to change other people’s minds. In boardrooms and council meetings and party conferences and union meetings this is how people behave.
    For me to assume that I must be right, and that others must therefore be wrong – no explanations needed or provided – would be fairly…headstrong of me.

  16. medeusa says:

    None of your trans stuff makes sense.

  17. topkek says:

    This blog fucking sucks

  18. medeusa says:

    Thanks for the feedback, idiot.

  19. Jenkyn says:

    You’re regressing. You need to realise that acting like a literal 12 year old isn’t helping you or anyone else. The Comments Policy welcomes debate, but you’re refusing to accept any kind of criticism or disagreement. And I’m not just insulting you either: I’ve put forward some fairly reasonable arguments. I’m more than willing to hear your input.

    I kind of think this a pretty good example of why people are against “safe spaces”…

  20. medeusa says:

    Okay thanks. If you want to email you can at eusafishes@gmail.com

  21. Jenkyn says:

    Fair enough, I’ll give it a shot.

  22. Nathan Hood says:

    In the article you assert you wouldn’t want liberation groups opened up to those who are not represented by them. I was wondering if you could please explain why you think/feel this way, as this seems to be the crux of the matter.

  23. medeusa says:

    Because liberation groups are for the people who identify into them. As a white woman, I would have nothing substantial or of use to say about racism. Just like cis men have no idea what it’s like to experience the oppression women experience. Or straight people don’t know what experiencing homophobia is like. Like people with no mental or physical disabilities don’t know what it’s like to experience those disabilities. Its one place in the whole of society for these separate liberation groups to organise and use for themselves without input from people who simply don’t know what it’s like to feel those particular oppressions and probably won’t have the best or correct solutions.

  24. Nathan Hood says:

    Thanks, that clears things up. 🙂

Leave a comment (there's one rule - don't be a dick)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s