There is always the question, isn’t there, behind this gender ideology madness, as to where the vast sums of money and the corruption are. What is driving this? Excellent work has been done on this by such great experts as Jennifer Bilek - see, as just one example, Who Is Behind The Trans Agenda.
The 1974 film Chinatown not only has one of our favourite roles, the lone hero , this time in the form of detective Jake Gittes (masterful performance by Jack Nicholson) but also vast amounts of money and corruption around ( believe it or not) water supply- based on what were known as the California Water Wars in the early 20th century. Oh yeh, and it also stars Faye Dunaway as Evelyn Mulwray.
Consultations
I haven’t forgotten the ongoing consultations.
I reported on the one into single sex toilets here ( deadline 08 October):
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/the-shawshank-redemption
I reported on the one on puberty blockers here ( deadline 01 November):
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/the-chant-of-jimmy-blacksmith
I am keeping any eye on the websites of the main gender critical/women’s rights groups to see when they produce a submission. No sign of any as yet. My plan at the moment is to do my response supporting one or two of these submissions and then to simply add some thoughts of my own. If any of you see a submission, please let me know 👍
Online Safety Bill
Very importantly the worrying phrase ‘legal but harmful’ has been taken out of the Bill. However we still have a situation where these vast social media companies can, effectively, make up their own rules as to what is and is not acceptable ( see what is happening with You Tube at the moment). All thoughts on this gratefully received. And second time I’ve quoted the Evening Standard in a week !! What’s going on!!??
Emma Loffhagen and Sian Hewitt in The Evening Standard( Online Safety Bill: government backs down from privacy battle 11 September) report:
The long-gestating Online Safety Bill is set to be enshrined in law in a matter of weeks, with massive consequences for the ways we access online services.
The bill passed its third and final reading in the Lords last week, and now waits to be approved by MPs this autumn.
According to the Government, the Online Safety Bill is designed to make the UK “the safest place in the world to be online” by regulating how tech platforms should handle harmful content, such as child sexual abuse imagery, cyberbullying, and misinformation.
Since it was published in 2021, the bill has been mired in political turmoil, with privacy campaigners and tech firms labelling it a threat to free speech and people’s data.
Messaging platforms WhatsApp and Signal have even threatened to quit the UK over a provision in the bill, which requires them to scan encrypted messages for child abuse material.
Tech companies have a moral duty to ensure they are not blinding themselves and law enforcement to the unprecedented levels of child sexual abuse on their platforms
To allay those fears, ministers recently assured tech firms that they could not be forced to pry open private messages, which they cannot currently access due to a security technology called end-to-end encryption.
At the eleventh hour, the Government appeared to back down by confirming in the Lords that it would only require messaging firms to scan for illegal content when it became “technically feasible”.
Crucially, however, that phrase didn’t make it into the amended legislation, leading many privacy advocates and industry bodies to worry that the can has simply been kicked down the road.
What is the Online Safety Bill?
The Online Safety Bill is a new set of laws to protect children and adults online. It is intended to make social media companies more responsible for their users’ safety on their platforms.
If the bill becomes law, it would force social media companies to remove illegal content.
The Online Safety Bill has been working its way through Parliament since being published in draft form in May 2021. The Government says it would put the media regulator Ofcom in charge of checking whether platforms were protecting their users. Firms that break rules for harmful content would face large fines.
Which measures were scrapped in the Online Safety Bill?
In November, controversial measures that would have forced big technology platforms to take down “legal but harmful” material were scrapped from the bill. Critics of the section in the bill claimed it posed a risk to free speech and gave big tech companies too much power.
Ministers axed the provision on regulating “legal but harmful” material accessed by adults — offensive content that does not constitute a criminal offence. They are instead requiring platforms to enforce their terms and conditions for users.
A Week In The War On Women
Hopefully most if not all of you will have caught up with JL’s as ever comprehensive trawl through the latest horror stories on the Glinner Update. I just wanted to flag up a couple of things.
It is a very worrying situation in Ireland where the Government are trying to remove the words ‘mother’ and ‘woman’ from the Constitution. Meanwhile the enormously wide Hate Crime Bill is in progress. This effectively encourages such as the violent trans-identifying male in Dublin and the narcissistic primary school teacher (who JL reports on).
Well done Let Women Speak Utrecht ( where Mr Menno was present) and Sex Matters for persevering in the face of intimidation from the anti-women activists (AWAs)! I was amazed at how calm Helen Joyce, Emma Hilton and Maya Forstater looked in the photos as they were pursued down the street by the AWAs!
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/a-week-in-the-war-on-women-monday-e10
Passports for toilets
I don’t like to call an MP an idiot but, occasionally, you have to make an exception.
Amy Gibbons in The Telegraph ( Feminists want trans women to show passports at public lavatories, claims Labour MP 11 September) reports:
Dame Angela Eagle, the Labour MP for Wallasey. Or is that Wally at Sea?
Gender-critical feminists want trans women to show their passports to use public lavatories, a veteran Labour MP has claimed.
Dame Angela Eagle, who is standing to be a Commons committee chairman, said lavatories were being “policed” at the expense of those who don’t conform to gender norms.
The MP for Wallasey said the heated debate about trans people using single-sex spaces revolved around “recreating and then enforcing” gender stereotypes.
Lets try this again, Ms Eagle. Biological women ( just so that you are clear) do not want biological men using their toilets and , if you can’t understand why, please have reference to back numbers of JL’s updates!!
The Religion of Critical Social Justice
This interview by Jennifer Grossman of the Atlas Society with Andrew Doyle links in with a lot of what Jennifer Bilek talks about in the interview linked to at the start of this update. Do set aside some time to listen to both of them if you can - essential listening I think 😎
And finally…
I don’t know why this old classic came to my mind as I was out walking today but it is just what is required after reading JL’s horror stories and getting annoyed by Ms Eagle!😎
https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/accurate-transition-regret-and-detransition?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=225618&post_id=136961289&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1v403b&utm_medium=email
There may be something of use here.
Sorry Dusty, can’t get the Jennifer Bilek link to work but Andrew Doyle is fascinating as ever.
I haven’t heard anything re: the consultations yet, will forward if I do.