The labour movement and the fight for LGBTQ+ rights have long been intertwined. Standing in solidarity with workers demanding fair wages and better working conditions is a cornerstone of leftist ideology. When journalists at The Guardian go on strike, it seems natural to support them. The Guardian is often seen as progressive. But is this always the right move? In the case of The Guardian, its recent history includes transphobic content. The answer might be more complicated than a simple “yes.”
It’s no secret that The Guardian has published articles and opinions that have caused significant harm to the trans community. The paper has published pieces that platform anti-trans voices. Some articles also question the very validity of trans identities. At times, the paper has felt more like an adversary than an ally. The US edition of The Guardian publicly called out the transphobia of its UK counterpart. This happened after trans people chose not to engage with them. This raises a crucial question. How can we, as trans people and allies, reconcile our commitment to worker solidarity? We must also fight against transphobia, especially when it is so deeply ingrained within the publication itself.
One could argue that supporting the strike, regardless of published content, is essential. After all, journalists deserve fair treatment, and a successful strike could set a precedent for workers across the industry. However, blindly supporting any strike feels like a betrayal of our values. This is true even if it involves a publication that has actively harmed our community. It’s like buying a product from a company with unethical labour practices. Your money still supports a system that causes harm.
So, what’s the alternative? Silence? Not necessarily. Instead of active support, we can use this opportunity to make our message clear: transphobia is not tolerated. We actively withhold our support. This sends a powerful signal. Publications cannot expect solidarity from the trans community while simultaneously publishing content that harms us. This isn’t about punishing the journalists themselves, but about holding the institution accountable.
Think of it as a boycott. When consumers boycott a company, they’re not necessarily against the individual workers; they’re protesting the company’s policies. In this case, withholding support from The Guardian’s strike is a way to protest the publication’s transphobic content. It’s a form of leverage, a way to say, “We stand with workers, but we will not stand with transphobia.”
Some might argue that this approach is counterproductive, that it alienates potential allies within the journalism industry. However, true allyship requires accountability. We clearly state our expectations. We refuse to support institutions that perpetuate harm. This forces those institutions to confront their own biases and make meaningful changes. The fact that the US Guardian had to denounce the UK paper’s transphobia shows that this strategy can work.
Of course, this isn’t a black-and-white issue. There are nuances and complexities to consider. Some individual journalists at The Guardian may be strong allies to the trans community. The strike itself might focus on legitimate labour concerns. However, it’s crucial to remember that our primary responsibility is to protect and support our community.
In conclusion, while supporting workers’ rights is important, it shouldn’t come at the expense of our own values. By withholding support from The Guardian journalists’ strike, we send a clear message that transphobia has consequences. It’s a way to hold the publication accountable and demand better treatment for the trans community. True solidarity means standing up for what’s right, even when it’s difficult. Standing up for trans rights involves taking a stand. We must act against a publication that has repeatedly failed us.
Leave a Reply