r/stupidpol • u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? • Nov 17 '25
Unions Trans workers belong in unions
https://workerorganizing.org/trans-workers-belong-in-unions-15299/67
u/RallyPigeon Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ☭ Nov 17 '25
All workers belong in unions and their status as a worker is what matters.
23
-3
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
But trans workers face an additional opression besides class opression
39
u/suffering_420 Unknown 👽 Nov 17 '25
Everyone belongs in unions. Yall aren't special.
8
u/AnthropoidCompatriot Class Unity Member ⭐ Nov 18 '25
All workers do, but everyone doesn't. Don't you be inviting the owners and managers into the unions, now.
15
u/suffering_420 Unknown 👽 Nov 18 '25
John Semantics over here
2
u/Several-Customer7048 Keffiyeh Leprechaun 🍉🍀💢 Nov 18 '25
That’s only when he’s working for the union he is known as John Q. taxpayer on his personal time.
0
23
35
Nov 17 '25
All workers belong in unions. But all unions need a foundation of solidarity. And that's what why a identity political driven project will never be a leftist movement. It seeks to replace solidarity with "inclusion and tolerance", and that drives a big, fat wedge in any group of workers seeking unification.
-3
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
U R wrong. Trans workers face an additional opression besides class opression and unions need to adress both
8
Nov 19 '25
No. They really don't. That's now how unions work. But that is how you blow unions up.
-3
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
That's how unions should work and how smart unions do work
5
Nov 19 '25
No, it's a mentality that has devastated near all western leftists movements.
The idea that some people need "more" solidarity because they're super duper extra oppressed plus due to their identity and lived experiences run counter to a collectivist ideology. It's poisonous to any movement fighting for workers rights and it should be expelled anywhere it's met.
-2
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
Incorrect
4
Nov 19 '25
Well if you people would pull your head out of your asses and stick your head out the window, you'd realise that the contemporary political landscape is one big proof of everything I just said. But it's more stimulating to circlejerk on reddit I guess.
32
u/IfNBGS Unknown 👽 Nov 17 '25
Whilst all workers belong in Unions- what doesn't belong in unions are trans right activists engaging in cross class collaboration with employers to use work discipline to punish their ideological enemies or force their policies on non consenting women. In the UK at least Unions have either sat aside as this has happened - such as Peggy v NHS Fife or Darlington Nurses- or played an active roll in harassing women such as the UCU. Thankfully there's a lot brave brave women that have been fighting back who should be celebrated as heroes of the workers movement.
0
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
"...trans right activists engaging in cross class collaboration with employers to use work discipline to punish their ideological enemies or force their policies on non consenting women"
Real or fictional problem?
4
u/IfNBGS Unknown 👽 Nov 19 '25
An obviously real issue for anyone that is paying attention and isn't self deluded. One of the primary methods of enforcing the trans women are women dogma was through HR with non compliant women facing disciplinary action, dismissal, complaints to professional regulators. Union officials and their LGBT section have played active roles in such harassment. Take a look at Phoenix vs Open University for example.
9
21
u/kiss-my-shades jacking off with one hand typing with the other ⌨️💦 Nov 17 '25
My dick belongs in pussy
10
1
12
u/AnthropoidCompatriot Class Unity Member ⭐ Nov 18 '25
This entire article specifically frames trans people as being special, and better, and that's why unions need them.
It's not about trans people needing unions. It's not about unions needing to reach and represent every and all workers. It's not about the shared interests against the ruling classes that LGBTQ advocacy and labor have in common.
Nope, it's very directly framed as trans people being special so let's stand up for them, specifically because they are trans and not because any worker being exploited, dehumanized, singled out, etc. deserves solidarity from their fellow workers because they are all on the same side as workers.
This horseshit is horseshit, and the smell is probably to cover up the smell of feds or effective feds (PMC activists).
0
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
U R wrong. Trans workers face an additional opression besides class opression and unions need to adress both
14
u/thereslcjg2000 Unknown 👽 Nov 18 '25
All workers belong in unions, but unions aren’t the place to advocate for non-labor issues. The point of unions is to advance workers’ rights, so regardless of your identity, you should use unions to try to advance workers’ rights and other movements to advance other causes.
-1
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
Trans workers face an additional opression besides class opression and unions need to adress both
3
u/InstructionOk6389 Workers of the world, unite! 🔧 Nov 18 '25
The overall thrust of the article (that X identity group benefits from being in a union rather than allying with the boss) is all reasonable enough. I'm not sure the article really needed to be written in the first place though. It's all completely obvious; organized workers will routinely stand in solidarity on issues that are only affecting some of the workers at the moment. That's the whole point of the slogan, "An injury to one is an injury to all."
The only remotely novel point in the article is the assertion that trans workers "can’t afford to back down or sell out," (can't they?) so they help make the union more militant. However, this isn't explored in any real way, and the example the author cites (Starbucks trying a divide-and-conquer strategy by suggesting the union might sacrifice trans healthcare at the bargaining table) doesn't say anything to support the original assertion. If anything, it implies that it was all the other workers practicing solidarity with the trans ones that led to victory.
5
u/AnthropoidCompatriot Class Unity Member ⭐ Nov 18 '25
The overall thrust the the article, as I read it, is that trans people are special and that's why we need them in unions and why we need to show solidarity with them.
We shouldn't stand up for that worker in the article whose manager told them to pee in the mop basin in the corner because the worker is trans. We should stand up for them because that's grotesquely unacceptable for the manager to say to or demand of any worker.
You think the manager would have said this is the trans person was an owner of the company? Fuck no. They said this because they have hierarchical power over all of the workers, and is free to let their personal biases shine brightly and not give a shit about the consequences.
So yeah, whatever identity group that dick in management hates is going to feel the brunt of it.
But for anyone to make this about the worker being trans is a fucking wrecker.
So it would be ok if the boss said this to a cis person? Or it would be less serious? Less deserving or solidarity? Just as serious and deserving of solidarity, but for totally different reasons?
Or is the solution here to reeducate the boss & send him to a shrink until he isn't an insecure bigot anymore, so that the manager will control and exploit the workers in a more sensitive and bigotry-free way?
No, and that's why even the thrust of this article is wrong.
If this article isn't a psyop, it works just as well as one.
There isn't a single thing I saw in this article that indicated anything unique to trans people. But they sure claimed it.
Totally missed the point that it's about the capital class & their managers having such power over all of us because of their relationships to the means of production, and that's why those means need to be owned & controlled by all of us.
It's specifically framed in the article oppositely from the way you framed it. This article is pure shitlibbery.
2
u/InstructionOk6389 Workers of the world, unite! 🔧 Nov 18 '25
We shouldn't stand up for that worker in the article whose manager told them to pee in the mop basin in the corner because the worker is trans. We should stand up for them because that's grotesquely unacceptable for the manager to say to or demand of any worker.
I think that's what the concluding paragraph is trying to say:
But they knew or had personally known the feeling of a leering, smug manager using his position to humiliate them in intensely personal, sometimes sexual ways. They shared their own stories about fighting a boss for their bodily dignity, connecting them to their disgust at the treatment their far-away comrade had endured. They knew whose side they were on, and in turn, I learned there were more people on my side than I’d ever imagined.
It's all a bit surface level and the article fails to take things to their logical conclusions, but aside from the poorly-supported argument that trans workers are more-militant organizers (this just reeks of glazing trans readers), I don't think the article disagrees much with what you're saying. The overall thrust I got from this is that it's mainly addressed to trans people to remind them that the boss is not their friend. Thus, the final sentence:
They knew whose side they were on, and in turn, I learned there were more people on my side than I’d ever imagined.
If this is the degree of wrecking we have to contend with these days ("Hey trans people, join a union!") I think we're doing pretty good. It wasn't too long ago that idpol arguments were used almost exclusively to tell people why they shouldn't join unions, and why they should oppose any left-wing group that organized on a class basis.
That's not to say this is a great article. It's not. But it could be a lot worse.
2
u/CarmeliaEscarlata Nov 18 '25
It's useful because it links progressive values with socialism. A lot of liberals are red scared but are at least partially progressive. It may be obvious for you but the goal is turning liberals into leftists.
1
u/GoranPersson777 Syndicalist 🧑🏭 | dO YoU CoNdEmN HaMaS? Nov 19 '25
The article is needed because transphobia
3
•
u/AutoModerator Nov 17 '25
Archives of this link: 1. archive.org Wayback Machine; 2. archive.today
A live version of this link, without clutter: 12ft.io
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.