A question that's frequently asked is: What the fuck does it take for people to react to the gender bullshit and everything associated with it? Not in some half arsed way that's going to make no impact, with with real anger and determination. Using words like 'no' 'fuck you' 'I'm not doing it', etc. Including those people who have shown support for misogynistic trans related bollocks, or even been 'allies'. When is a boundary crossed that they can't sugar coat and explain back to themselves as being okay? So much of this isn't okay, it's damaging, abusive and it puts people, particularly women and young people, in danger. Anyone who can afford to take a risk should do it; some can't and they shouldn't be expected to. But they can make other aware of what is happening, however. This isn't going to stop on its own, a stage isn't going to be reached when the organisations and people driving this are going to think they've bullied people enough.
I will post this with the next update - just missed this one.
I don't know if you have managed to watch the Xi Van Fleet interview yet but what you say is very much her conclusion I think. It occurs to me that her other act of bravery is in saying what she is saying about the Chinese Government. They are not going to like this! I watched a Peter Boghossian street epistemology session recently with Glinner and Leo Kearse which I eventually decided not to include because it ranged over many subjects. They were all agreed that China was using TikTok as a 'soft weapon' against the west ( e.g. the Osama Bin Laden 'document') and that the Chinese Government were feeding in a lot of stuff by other means as well to fuel the critical social justice bollocks. We are experiencing a cultural revolution within what are supposed to be democracies where the 'ordinary people' would not support this bollocks if it was explained to them and they certainly never voted for it - look at how gender recognition was smuggled in in 2015 in Ireland!
Further thoughts on this, you and others?
Thanks for your great contribution as ever. Lovely to hear from you 😎
Yes, I particularly noticed her emphasis on personal bravery and I agree with her… at the very least, sportswomen could make a stand, especially if they they all worked together.
Yes Arty’s piece was great. It kind of built to a crescendo 😊
Thanks for sending me the Transgender Trend piece on the WHO though, as Dennis and Clive said, the guidance is probably a foregone conclusion. They might as well have invited Peter Tatchell and Fred Wallace to take part!! As was also said by D and C we need a government that will say ‘ we’ve got Cass so we don’t need this rubbish’
Yes, sportswomen could make a considerable difference if they were vocal about the manifest unfairness of female athlete having to compete against men. Their refusal frequently means the the threat of being dropped, as the women who swam against Lia Thomas were. And even offered therapy to overcome their resistance to sharing changing room with a man. The problem was entirely theirs and not the situation they'd been put in.
Sorry Dusty, I’m being thick again. Is KJK saying that she is not allowed to discriminate against candidates on the basis of a belief in gender identity as opposed to a person with gender reassignment? If so, that makes a mockery of democracy. What it would mean is that no Party could be set up to campaign for a belief in biological reality without including people who actively oppose the Party’s core reason for existence. It’s like saying that the Brexit Party had to include Remainers as candidates. That said, a person with gender reassignment, who did not believe in GI could probably qualify ( Debbie Hatton possibly) but that would confuse the general public so much as to be counter productive. The laws need to be completely reworked and there’s no way that will happen under Labour.
On the contrary you are being as incisive as ever! I re-wrote that short piece about twice and still thought 'I'm still not sure I've got to the root of this but I'll post it anyway and see what people think'. I think I need to listen to KJK again - the missing piece may be what exactly has the barrister told them they need to do ( I would love to know who the barrister is!!). A constitutional law barrister may be inclined to be more cautious than, for example, Dennis K might have been. She mentioned that the 'manifesto' or whatever it is called is available on the Electoral Commission website, so I think I need to try and find that and get back to you all in the next update. Watch this space!!
Yes, the Countess did some lovely landscapes.
I thought there was a WI break away group but not sure if they are still going?
A question that's frequently asked is: What the fuck does it take for people to react to the gender bullshit and everything associated with it? Not in some half arsed way that's going to make no impact, with with real anger and determination. Using words like 'no' 'fuck you' 'I'm not doing it', etc. Including those people who have shown support for misogynistic trans related bollocks, or even been 'allies'. When is a boundary crossed that they can't sugar coat and explain back to themselves as being okay? So much of this isn't okay, it's damaging, abusive and it puts people, particularly women and young people, in danger. Anyone who can afford to take a risk should do it; some can't and they shouldn't be expected to. But they can make other aware of what is happening, however. This isn't going to stop on its own, a stage isn't going to be reached when the organisations and people driving this are going to think they've bullied people enough.
Hi Radhwa
That is all spot on.
Here is Rex Landy talking about a NZ supermarket where a woman wearing one of Rex's T shirts was ejected! https://rexlandy.substack.com/p/new-world-ordure-in-otaki-nz?publication_id=809039&post_id=140409400&isFreemail=true&r=20xc5g&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
I will post this with the next update - just missed this one.
I don't know if you have managed to watch the Xi Van Fleet interview yet but what you say is very much her conclusion I think. It occurs to me that her other act of bravery is in saying what she is saying about the Chinese Government. They are not going to like this! I watched a Peter Boghossian street epistemology session recently with Glinner and Leo Kearse which I eventually decided not to include because it ranged over many subjects. They were all agreed that China was using TikTok as a 'soft weapon' against the west ( e.g. the Osama Bin Laden 'document') and that the Chinese Government were feeding in a lot of stuff by other means as well to fuel the critical social justice bollocks. We are experiencing a cultural revolution within what are supposed to be democracies where the 'ordinary people' would not support this bollocks if it was explained to them and they certainly never voted for it - look at how gender recognition was smuggled in in 2015 in Ireland!
Further thoughts on this, you and others?
Thanks for your great contribution as ever. Lovely to hear from you 😎
Dusty
Yes, I particularly noticed her emphasis on personal bravery and I agree with her… at the very least, sportswomen could make a stand, especially if they they all worked together.
Hi TT
Agreed.
BTW I could not find the document on the Electoral Commission website so have asked SFW if I am allowed to look at it at this stage.
Dusty
I couldn’t find it either so let’s hope you get somewhere.
Btw, really glad you spotted Arty Morty’s excellent response to deBoer in the last update. I nearly sent it but you are usually on top of most things.
I’ll let you know how I get on.
Yes Arty’s piece was great. It kind of built to a crescendo 😊
Thanks for sending me the Transgender Trend piece on the WHO though, as Dennis and Clive said, the guidance is probably a foregone conclusion. They might as well have invited Peter Tatchell and Fred Wallace to take part!! As was also said by D and C we need a government that will say ‘ we’ve got Cass so we don’t need this rubbish’
Dusty
Yes, sportswomen could make a considerable difference if they were vocal about the manifest unfairness of female athlete having to compete against men. Their refusal frequently means the the threat of being dropped, as the women who swam against Lia Thomas were. And even offered therapy to overcome their resistance to sharing changing room with a man. The problem was entirely theirs and not the situation they'd been put in.
Sorry Dusty, I’m being thick again. Is KJK saying that she is not allowed to discriminate against candidates on the basis of a belief in gender identity as opposed to a person with gender reassignment? If so, that makes a mockery of democracy. What it would mean is that no Party could be set up to campaign for a belief in biological reality without including people who actively oppose the Party’s core reason for existence. It’s like saying that the Brexit Party had to include Remainers as candidates. That said, a person with gender reassignment, who did not believe in GI could probably qualify ( Debbie Hatton possibly) but that would confuse the general public so much as to be counter productive. The laws need to be completely reworked and there’s no way that will happen under Labour.
Beautiful watercolour.
The WI 😳
Hi TT
On the contrary you are being as incisive as ever! I re-wrote that short piece about twice and still thought 'I'm still not sure I've got to the root of this but I'll post it anyway and see what people think'. I think I need to listen to KJK again - the missing piece may be what exactly has the barrister told them they need to do ( I would love to know who the barrister is!!). A constitutional law barrister may be inclined to be more cautious than, for example, Dennis K might have been. She mentioned that the 'manifesto' or whatever it is called is available on the Electoral Commission website, so I think I need to try and find that and get back to you all in the next update. Watch this space!!
Yes, the Countess did some lovely landscapes.
I thought there was a WI break away group but not sure if they are still going?
Dusty