LadyEllen
Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006 From: Stourport-England Status: offline
|
This could go in "news" or "casual", but it has equal claim to "politics and religion" I guess. Nikki Sinclaire was elected a member of the European Parliament last night for the UK Independence Party (UKIP). She proclaims herself a lesbian - no problem with that, but from what I've found on the web so far refuses to admit being transsexual. Now it may be she isnt transsexual of course, but at 6'4'' and knowing some stuff about the differences between male and female physiology (especially the facial physiology), I'd say she was - and thats no problem either. Neither is it a problem for her to lay claim to a private life and have her personal circumstances respected as private. At the same time though, if she is transsexual then it would be good if she'd proclaim it - even if we disagree with her views on Europe, it would be good for "us" to have someone in a position of influence, however small, as well as helping in the general push for acceptance and the general inspiration to those like me who might not be as successful in life as me (or Nikki). Also to consider though is that UKIP - whilst its consitution and official position is neither pro nor anti LGBT in general or specific - is populated in its membership with many who are staunchly anti-LGBT, whether on "religious" grounds or simply because theyre white supremacists who being upper class dont fit into the BNP scheme. Nikki is in enough hot water with these types without coming out as transsexual too - even with a 5 year mandate. And lastly - is it that big a deal that she is/might be transsexual? Is it not more a measure of general public acceptance of this condition if she chooses to keep it private and concentrates on the politics for which she was elected - as if it were simply an irrelevant factor? Thoughts? Comments? E
_____________________________
In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.
|