Stonewall could be pulling out of schools either because they’re afraid of future court cases or because they think their work is done……or is there a darker reason as in Scotland? Great work by Malcolm Clark and Wings of Scotland. Parents need to organise.
Sarah Phillimore’s words about power at the top of her piece, remind me of Genevieve Gluck’s words regarding all the different threads and influences behind gender ideology. Gluck says the same thing…that all roads lead to power. All Critical Social Justice themes are really about divide and rule strategies which enable the imposition of state power. None of the ideas occur naturally in a population, they have to be forced fed through propaganda and then enforced through legislation. With gender ideology we have the imposition of male power over women and children with the added bonus of predatory rights for narcissistic, entitled and abusive males who then act as state or ‘religious’ informers and enforcers. And all the time, handmaidens and good little lefties act as the useful idiots for authoritarianism.
You summarise things perfectly, TT. Did they talk to the barristers first before trying to impose this new code? Of course not. It reminds me of the BMA saying they will go against Cass without having talked to doctors.
I'm with Michael Foran on this one. I have read the case reports of Sal Grover's case and have a lot of questions about what her legal team thought they were doing. It would have been a miracle if they had won! If an argument can be advanced at appeal that the judge completely wrongly stated the law, and failed to enact the will of the legislature, there is still hope. Being optimistic, perhaps that's why the legal team threw the case - they wanted the chance to get it into a higher court!
I hadn't had chance to read Sarah Philimore's Substack article yet, so thank you for putting it in front of me. The BSC are no longer fit for purpose. What they propose undermines the key principle of the Rule of Law. It is, frankly, terrifying.
Thanks for your very helpful comments as ever, Jeremy. I am hoping that the AAWAA's arguments might give a glimmer of hope. Also the argument by Reem Alsalem which Michael F seems to have more time for. I think failure to argue a point at lower court is not necessarily fatal.
Sarah P's piece is great and, yes, it is appalling what BSC are proposing!!
Dear readers, Mr Menno has an interview with Sall Grover tonight at 20.30 GMT. See some of you there 😊
Dusty
Caught up with it on YouTube, thanks Dusty.
The BBC- bah, humbug!
Stonewall could be pulling out of schools either because they’re afraid of future court cases or because they think their work is done……or is there a darker reason as in Scotland? Great work by Malcolm Clark and Wings of Scotland. Parents need to organise.
Sarah Phillimore’s words about power at the top of her piece, remind me of Genevieve Gluck’s words regarding all the different threads and influences behind gender ideology. Gluck says the same thing…that all roads lead to power. All Critical Social Justice themes are really about divide and rule strategies which enable the imposition of state power. None of the ideas occur naturally in a population, they have to be forced fed through propaganda and then enforced through legislation. With gender ideology we have the imposition of male power over women and children with the added bonus of predatory rights for narcissistic, entitled and abusive males who then act as state or ‘religious’ informers and enforcers. And all the time, handmaidens and good little lefties act as the useful idiots for authoritarianism.
Love the end pieces 😂. Great work Dusty.
You're welcome, TT.
Yes parents need to organise!
You summarise things perfectly, TT. Did they talk to the barristers first before trying to impose this new code? Of course not. It reminds me of the BMA saying they will go against Cass without having talked to doctors.
Dusty
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W0zL0B9kvzg
Gluck’s comments from 30 minutes.
Thanks, TT
I'm with Michael Foran on this one. I have read the case reports of Sal Grover's case and have a lot of questions about what her legal team thought they were doing. It would have been a miracle if they had won! If an argument can be advanced at appeal that the judge completely wrongly stated the law, and failed to enact the will of the legislature, there is still hope. Being optimistic, perhaps that's why the legal team threw the case - they wanted the chance to get it into a higher court!
I hadn't had chance to read Sarah Philimore's Substack article yet, so thank you for putting it in front of me. The BSC are no longer fit for purpose. What they propose undermines the key principle of the Rule of Law. It is, frankly, terrifying.
Thanks for your very helpful comments as ever, Jeremy. I am hoping that the AAWAA's arguments might give a glimmer of hope. Also the argument by Reem Alsalem which Michael F seems to have more time for. I think failure to argue a point at lower court is not necessarily fatal.
Sarah P's piece is great and, yes, it is appalling what BSC are proposing!!
Dusty
That cheater Petrillo probably lost to women 20 years younger than him. Can you imagine a woman his age even getting near the Para Olympics?
Hi Katrina
Yes, exactly, what person of that age would get to the athletics in an Olympics!!
Dusty