Farage situation reminds me a bit of when Farage has been attacked by the public, it all a bit laugh for some...Jezza getting attacked, then its oh i am not sure thats on...then we get a range of politicians get a hassled / attacked on regular basis and all of a sudden its an incredibly serious threat to democracy...and eventually we even get scientists getting the same treatment.
Farage is not a politician. He was a politician, but he’s not now seeking election or running a party. He’s a broadcaster.
That of course makes his account closure situation worse.
Pourquoi?
Because the spin is he is a politically exposed person, but he is a talking head on a little watched tv channel not as you rightly state a politician. And yet the bank has a dossier on his opinions and friendships, that's quite sinster. Same as Triggernometry had their accounts closed while running a business arround a small podcast.
The way he gets quoted wall to wall on newspapers and media? Much more than you portray him as. For instance, the boat invasion defence stuff a year or so back.
So are the likes of Owen Jones or Martin Lewis...i hope banks aren't building dossiers on them either. It would be equally outrageous if Owen Jones was debanked and couldn't recieve money for his YouTube content.
Sure, they do that too. Nor does 'politician' or 'politically actice person' fall within the statutory 'politically exposed person' at least as quoted a little while back here.
And that's the whole point, its wrong, be it Farage or Owen Jones...both people I wish I never saw on the telly ever again.
Don't watch them then. Farage seems to be doing quite well as the almost-martyr of the moment. I tried to open an account at CelebDaq to see how he's faring there but I couldn't get in. He'll be able to charge more at Cameo if he still offers his services on that site.
Not heard Cameo mentioned for a couple of years! That was great fun during the pandemic, as hundreds of out-of-work actors and comedians still had mortgages to pay, and would sing Happy Birthday to your friend for $75.
Word up.
I might pay a modest amount of money to see Farage in this getup
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
So they just haven't met the right (transwo)man...
I mean, many cis lesbians are attracted to and sleep with transwomen and don't think that makes them any less lesbian - you'd have to take it up with them.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Horses in the common room would be a bit disruptive.
I was going to make the opposite joke about throwing pianos and horses, but you got there first. Ah well. EDIT: It appears almost everyone got there before me.
Farage situation reminds me a bit of when Farage has been attacked by the public, it all a bit laugh for some...Jezza getting attacked, then its oh i am not sure thats on...then we get a range of politicians get a hassled / attacked on regular basis and all of a sudden its an incredibly serious threat to democracy...and eventually we even get scientists getting the same treatment.
Interesting narrative turn
The BBC however are still trying to do everything but apologise by getting others to give muddying opinions, when just as worrying as an account being closed is discussion of bank balances, allegedly as a public charity dinner between the bank chief and a journalist.
Its a good job they haven't recently made a big deal of being BBC Verify, The Fact Checkers....who actually managed to f##k up their very first series with a load of easily checkable claims that they got wrong...again because they have a bias against the person they are making claims against.
Wasn't there some story recently about a bus of Jewish people being verbally abused where the BBC added some unverified detail and fought tooth and nail against correcting the record?
Yes they did...a load of kids got hassled and attackrd, and they even tried to spin audio of the Jewish kids were shouting racist abuse, when translated it was actually they were shit scared and screaming for help.
The BBC is the official news “gatekeeper” that the slow learner, @OnlyLivingBoy, wants to rely on in future when AI threatens the objectivity and truth of all news
Farage situation reminds me a bit of when Farage has been attacked by the public, it all a bit laugh for some...Jezza getting attacked, then its oh i am not sure thats on...then we get a range of politicians get a hassled / attacked on regular basis and all of a sudden its an incredibly serious threat to democracy...and eventually we even get scientists getting the same treatment.
Interesting narrative turn
The BBC however are still trying to do everything but apologise by getting others to give muddying opinions, when just as worrying as an account being closed is discussion of bank balances, allegedly as a public charity dinner between the bank chief and a journalist.
Its a good job they haven't recently made a big deal of being BBC Verify, The Fact Checkers....who actually managed to f##k up their very first series with a load of easily checkable claims that they got wrong...again because they have a bias against the person they are making claims against.
Wasn't there some story recently about a bus of Jewish people being verbally abused where the BBC added some unverified detail and fought tooth and nail against correcting the record?
Yes they did...a load of kids got hassled and attackrd, and they even tried to spin audio of the Jewish kids were shouting racist abuse, when translated it was actually they were shit scared and screaming for help.
The BBC is the official news “gatekeeper” that the slow learner, @OnlyLivingBoy, wants to rely on in future when AI threatens the objectivity and truth of all news
Yes. The BBC. And the Guardian
Not only is the Beeb the offical news gatekeeper it is now the arbiter of what is true and what isn't through its BBC Verfiy initiative.
The slipping standards of journalism at the BBC are really noticeable unfortunately. Perhaps I should be fair and say that there are slipping standards across the board compared to say 10-15 years ago (The Guardian and Telegraph, publications I had a lot of respect for on different sides of the argument, have now completely dissolved into echo-chambers of their own self-righteousness), but it feels more depressing with the Beeb, somehow.
Take a look on the news website and not only does it give incredibly weird prominence to some stories over others and have very weird obsessions with certain issues, but it is very easy to find articles on there completely cluttered with assertions and blatant editorialising that simply wouldn’t have passed an editor in years gone by.
Farage situation reminds me a bit of when Farage has been attacked by the public, it all a bit laugh for some...Jezza getting attacked, then its oh i am not sure thats on...then we get a range of politicians get a hassled / attacked on regular basis and all of a sudden its an incredibly serious threat to democracy...and eventually we even get scientists getting the same treatment.
Interesting narrative turn
The BBC however are still trying to do everything but apologise by getting others to give muddying opinions, when just as worrying as an account being closed is discussion of bank balances, allegedly as a public charity dinner between the bank chief and a journalist.
Its a good job they haven't recently made a big deal of being BBC Verify, The Fact Checkers....who actually managed to f##k up their very first series with a load of easily checkable claims that they got wrong...again because they have a bias against the person they are making claims against.
Out of interest, what was the BBC Verify thing they got wrong?
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
"As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?"
This makes no sense. No - we haven't. We have decided to segregate sports on the basis of physical differences that accord to each sex not gender - just as we separate children's age groups, boxing weights, and paralympic classifications based on different physical characteristics. The fact that some transmen are happy to compete against cismen is neither here nor there. I'm sure that some middleweight boxers fancy their chances against heavyweights, and before his incarceration Oscar Pestorius was happy to run against able bodied athletes, but that is not a reason to force all paralympians to complete against their able-bodied counterparts or underweight boxers to fight against heavier categories.
Transwomen have an unfair advantage, it's not their fault, but they do. East German teens being pumped full of hormones against their will was not their fault either but they should not have been able to compete. In this arena rights collide and it is not transphobic to prefer the right of females to compete against those who share their specific characteristics.
I'm not going to lie, I don't really understand the arguments about "fairness in sports" - when it comes to basketball or Michael Phelps the biological advantages of height and just being physiologically weird are hunky dory, but if you happen to be an African women with slightly too much testosterone (but still within the range of a typical cis woman) you can't run with other women any more... Kinda feels that fairness isn't what people are gatekeeping.
I've also noted before that the history of segregation of sports by gender had nothing to do with fairness, it had to do with men not wanting to compete against women, especially women who could beat them.
Having a testosterone puberty may be advantageous in some sports, but studies are pretty inconclusive that it is advantageous in all instances, especially if that person is then on HRT. But that should only be a consideration in competitive sports, right?I've also noted before that the history of segregation of sports by gender had nothing to do with fairness, it had to do with men not wanting to compete against women, especially women who could beat them.
I've also noted before that the history of segregation of sports by gender had nothing to do with fairness, it had to do with men not wanting to compete against women, especially women who could beat them.
Bullshit. Citation please.
I've also noted before that the history of segregation of sports by gender had nothing to do with fairness, it had to do with men not wanting to compete against women, especially women who could beat them.
I was Canterbury and District Boys Under 15 200m Champion in both 1988 and 1989. I'm still very proud of it. As I know was my female counterpart in the latter year. That summer I came in 5th in the county championship posting a time that would have won the girls event by roughly two seconds. I knew the girl who won both district and county 200m that year, she was at Invicta East Kent Athletics Club at the same time as me, trained loads, whereas I had taken to having the odd cigarette, was hardly at training at that point, and was mildly addicted to King Sized Mars Bars.
Why would it have been fair for a mildly talented but lazy fat bastard like me, having hypothetically transitioned in early 1989, to compete and win against her having put so much into beating her peers? Why should I have deprived her of the pride she had in winning both the district and county 200m?
So your argument is that if you had transitioned, and you retained the function you had prior, then you may have beaten her (italics for emphasis). It's plausible certainly[1] , but it's not an actual example.
[1] although I do not want to visualise a younger @DougSeal with boobs, thank you. YMMV.
If I had simply self-ID'd then yes, I would have retained the function I had previously. It's a hypothetical. As would be my boobs, which would have looked marvellous.
Female seals don’t have boobs. It wouldn’t be hydrodynamic.
Explain mermaids then, genius.
A legend based on manatees/dugongs. Which are very unstreamlined and slow swimmers, as the very low aspect caudal fin implies.
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Farage situation reminds me a bit of when Farage has been attacked by the public, it all a bit laugh for some...Jezza getting attacked, then its oh i am not sure thats on...then we get a range of politicians get a hassled / attacked on regular basis and all of a sudden its an incredibly serious threat to democracy...and eventually we even get scientists getting the same treatment.
Interesting narrative turn
The BBC however are still trying to do everything but apologise by getting others to give muddying opinions, when just as worrying as an account being closed is discussion of bank balances, allegedly as a public charity dinner between the bank chief and a journalist.
Its a good job they haven't recently made a big deal of being BBC Verify, The Fact Checkers....who actually managed to f##k up their very first series with a load of easily checkable claims that they got wrong...again because they have a bias against the person they are making claims against.
Wasn't there some story recently about a bus of Jewish people being verbally abused where the BBC added some unverified detail and fought tooth and nail against correcting the record?
Yes they did...a load of kids got hassled and attackrd, and they even tried to spin audio of the Jewish kids were shouting racist abuse, when translated it was actually they were shit scared and screaming for help.
The BBC is the official news “gatekeeper” that the slow learner, @OnlyLivingBoy, wants to rely on in future when AI threatens the objectivity and truth of all news
Yes. The BBC. And the Guardian
Not only is the Beeb the offical news gatekeeper it is now the arbiter of what is true and what isn't through its BBC Verfiy initiative.
The slipping standards of journalism at the BBC are really noticeable unfortunately. Perhaps I should be fair and say that there are slipping standards across the board compared to say 10-15 years ago (The Guardian and Telegraph, publications I had a lot of respect for on different sides of the argument, have now completely dissolved into echo-chambers of their own self-righteousness), but it feels more depressing with the Beeb, somehow.
Take a look on the news website and not only does it give incredibly weird prominence to some stories over others and have very weird obsessions with certain issues, but it is very easy to find articles on there completely cluttered with assertions and blatant editorialising that simply wouldn’t have passed an editor in years gone by.
Like what or is it just a generalisation?
Well in the case of weird obsessions, to use a non political example there does appear to be weird prominence given to certain films/media or entertainment releases, or tours by certain artists. It feels like if you’re Taylor Swift and you have concert tickets out, the BBC will want to tell everyone about it. I have no particular opinion on the musical work of Ms Swift so can’t claim to have skin in the game, I just find it a bit odd. Similarly the Barbie movie - they must have had an article or 2 a day on it for the last week or so.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
Nigel Fucking Farage has not been denied banking services
He has been refused a specific account with a specific bank. Happens to millions of people
He should be paying Coutts for generating enough publicity to get him back on TV
I'm eternally grateful for the existence of Farage simply because of his ability to enrage otherwise [presumably] sane people to the point that they need to swear.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
I'm not seeing what I've misunderstood to be honest.
Interestingly, Old Trafford (and Edgbaston) are cashless.
Great idea, as speeds up beer purchasing as I noted in Birmingham a few weeks ago.
Presumably several PBers will refuse to attend Test matches because they can't exchange stupid pieces of paper for scraps of metal?
Lords was cashless as well when I was there last year. In fact I think all cricket grounds are, once you get inside. I think Trent Bridge might have been accepting cash to buy a ticket before entering.
Works well doesn't it? Less time-wasting faffing around with stupid slips of paper and daft scraps of metal when all you want is eight pints of lager.
Nigel Fucking Farage has not been denied banking services
He has been refused a specific account with a specific bank. Happens to millions of people
He should be paying Coutts for generating enough publicity to get him back on TV
Well he claims he has been denied accounts with 9 or 10 other banks because of this issue of being a risky client due to being a PEP. And that he was only offered a Natwest after the story broke. So its more than just can he have an account with an uber exclusive bank.
Interestingly, Old Trafford (and Edgbaston) are cashless.
Great idea, as speeds up beer purchasing as I noted in Birmingham a few weeks ago.
Presumably several PBers will refuse to attend Test matches because they can't exchange stupid pieces of paper for scraps of metal?
Lords was cashless as well when I was there last year. In fact I think all cricket grounds are, once you get inside. I think Trent Bridge might have been accepting cash to buy a ticket before entering.
Works well doesn't it? Less time-wasting faffing around with stupid slips of paper and daft scraps of metal when all you want is eight pints of lager.
I'd be worried about what I was paying for online if I had had 7 pints. At least with beer tokens you know how much there was at the beginning and the end of the day.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
I'm not seeing what I've misunderstood to be honest.
Tlotally agree. Also what does it even mean therefore to be transphopic? Does it make the person the most evil thing going and therefore to be huing, drawn and quartered or is it just a whole bunch of meaningless twaddle from someone who needs to get a life.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I've said this anecdote before, from a friend who worked in F1. A young girl was in karting, and doing well. Before a race, the father of another competitor peed in her fuel tank - in sight of her. She could not race, as (obvs.) the fuel was polluted. The other lad got DQ'ed because of her dad's actions, but the girl's dad decided he didn't want her in that toxic environment.
There are similar stories as well. Basically, motorsport is not that welcoming to young female drivers. That needs correcting if they're ever to make it regularly to the top in F1, Nascar, rallying etc.
TBF, F1 has made some big strides in women within the teams - it's much more open that it was, although the cost cap has allegedly made it worse, as fewer people are being taken on and the larger number of races means more time away from home. The problem is that there's a *massive* disconnect between that stratospheric level of the sport and the lowest rungs of the karting ladder.
Nigel Fucking Farage has not been denied banking services
He has been refused a specific account with a specific bank. Happens to millions of people
He should be paying Coutts for generating enough publicity to get him back on TV
Well he claims he has been denied accounts with 9 or 10 other banks because of this issue of being a risky client due to being a PEP. And that he was only offered a Natwest after the story broke. So its more than just can he have an account with an uber exclusive bank.
Who would want to enter into any commercial contract with him, when he has the capacity to damage your business so publicly.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
"As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?"
This makes no sense. No - we haven't. We have decided to segregate sports on the basis of physical differences that accord to each sex not gender - just as we separate children's age groups, boxing weights, and paralympic classifications based on different physical characteristics. The fact that some transmen are happy to compete against cismen is neither here nor there. I'm sure that some middleweight boxers fancy their chances against heavyweights, and before his incarceration Oscar Pestorius was happy to run against able bodied athletes, but that is not a reason to force all paralympians to complete against their able-bodied counterparts or underweight boxers to fight against heavier categories.
Transwomen have an unfair advantage, it's not their fault, but they do. East German teens being pumped full of hormones against their will was not their fault either but they should not have been able to compete. In this arena rights collide and it is not transphobic to prefer the right of females to compete against those who share their specific characteristics.
I'm not going to lie, I don't really understand the arguments about "fairness in sports" - when it comes to basketball or Michael Phelps the biological advantages of height and just being physiologically weird are hunky dory, but if you happen to be an African women with slightly too much testosterone (but still within the range of a typical cis woman) you can't run with other women any more... Kinda feels that fairness isn't what people are gatekeeping.
I've also noted before that the history of segregation of sports by gender had nothing to do with fairness, it had to do with men not wanting to compete against women, especially women who could beat them.
Having a testosterone puberty may be advantageous in some sports, but studies are pretty inconclusive that it is advantageous in all instances, especially if that person is then on HRT. But that should only be a consideration in competitive sports, right? When it comes to school sports or just for fun, even though sports tend to be gender segregated anyway, there is no need to do that for trans kids as it won't make a difference - and yet that is what anti trans activists want.
Have you ever watched a boys' football or cricket match at age 13-14 and compared it to a girls'?
Ergo times in rowing are quite conclusive.
Big advantage to men.
Don't know what ergometers do, but in general a big confounder is catchment or pool sizes: for most sports, probably 10x as many males as females think they are a good thing to devote time to. I have seen it suggested that women would probably run faster marathons than men, if more of them entered the sport. Same could plausibly be true of say cycling, given how much less of their own bodyweight they have to be propelling. For a rare example of the reverse phenomenon there's equestrianism where the sexes are pretty much equal, largely because it's an activity as or more popular with girls as with boys in most countries.
Rowing ergometers - aka rowing machines - are used competitively, in their own right. Worldwide.
With the advent of the web and people sharing their times online, there are databases of millions of athletes, ranging from rank amateur to Olympic.
These data sets have been analysed in x number of sports science PhDs
It’s quite clear in the data - middle aged, amateur blokes beat the times of national level women.
Indeed. If anything the male advantage in sports is underplayed. There is a huge difference in physical strength between the sexes.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
Nigel Fucking Farage has not been denied banking services
He has been refused a specific account with a specific bank. Happens to millions of people
He should be paying Coutts for generating enough publicity to get him back on TV
Well he claims he has been denied accounts with 9 or 10 other banks because of this issue of being a risky client due to being a PEP. And that he was only offered a Natwest after the story broke. So its more than just can he have an account with an uber exclusive bank.
'he claims'. That is touching but if he approaches you with Tower Bridge for sale be very careful...
I was Canterbury and District Boys Under 15 200m Champion in both 1988 and 1989. I'm still very proud of it. As I know was my female counterpart in the latter year. That summer I came in 5th in the county championship posting a time that would have won the girls event by roughly two seconds. I knew the girl who won both district and county 200m that year, she was at Invicta East Kent Athletics Club at the same time as me, trained loads, whereas I had taken to having the odd cigarette, was hardly at training at that point, and was mildly addicted to King Sized Mars Bars.
Why would it have been fair for a mildly talented but lazy fat bastard like me, having hypothetically transitioned in early 1989, to compete and win against her having put so much into beating her peers? Why should I have deprived her of the pride she had in winning both the district and county 200m?
So your argument is that if you had transitioned, and you retained the function you had prior, then you may have beaten her (italics for emphasis). It's plausible certainly[1] , but it's not an actual example.
[1] although I do not want to visualise a younger @DougSeal with boobs, thank you. YMMV.
If I had simply self-ID'd then yes, I would have retained the function I had previously. It's a hypothetical. As would be my boobs, which would have looked marvellous.
Female seals don’t have boobs. It wouldn’t be hydrodynamic.
Explain mermaids then, genius.
A legend based on manatees/dugongs. Which are very unstreamlined and slow swimmers, as the very low aspect caudal fin implies.
For all those of you who want to know the difference between manatees and dugongs, this video explains it.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I do recall lady F1 drivers in the past – not many admittedly. But I think there have been some?
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I've said this anecdote before, from a friend who worked in F1. A young girl was in karting, and doing well. Before a race, the father of another competitor peed in her fuel tank - in sight of her. She could not race, as (obvs.) the fuel was polluted. The other lad got DQ'ed because of her dad's actions, but the girl's dad decided he didn't want her in that toxic environment.
There are similar stories as well. Basically, motorsport is not that welcoming to young female drivers. That needs correcting if they're ever to make it regularly to the top in F1, Nascar, rallying etc.
TBF, F1 has made some big strides in women within the teams - it's much more open that it was, although the cost cap has allegedly made it worse, as fewer people are being taken on and the larger number of races means more time away from home. The problem is that there's a *massive* disconnect between that stratospheric level of the sport and the lowest rungs of the karting ladder.
What the fucking fuck...
DQ for that ? Should have been a life ban for the Dad and a call to the rozzers.
I was Canterbury and District Boys Under 15 200m Champion in both 1988 and 1989. I'm still very proud of it. As I know was my female counterpart in the latter year. That summer I came in 5th in the county championship posting a time that would have won the girls event by roughly two seconds. I knew the girl who won both district and county 200m that year, she was at Invicta East Kent Athletics Club at the same time as me, trained loads, whereas I had taken to having the odd cigarette, was hardly at training at that point, and was mildly addicted to King Sized Mars Bars.
Why would it have been fair for a mildly talented but lazy fat bastard like me, having hypothetically transitioned in early 1989, to compete and win against her having put so much into beating her peers? Why should I have deprived her of the pride she had in winning both the district and county 200m?
So your argument is that if you had transitioned, and you retained the function you had prior, then you may have beaten her (italics for emphasis). It's plausible certainly[1] , but it's not an actual example.
[1] although I do not want to visualise a younger @DougSeal with boobs, thank you. YMMV.
If I had simply self-ID'd then yes, I would have retained the function I had previously. It's a hypothetical. As would be my boobs, which would have looked marvellous.
Female seals don’t have boobs. It wouldn’t be hydrodynamic.
Explain mermaids then, genius.
A legend based on manatees/dugongs. Which are very unstreamlined and slow swimmers, as the very low aspect caudal fin implies.
For all those of you who want to know the difference between manatees and dugongs, this video explains it.
Nigel Fucking Farage has not been denied banking services
He has been refused a specific account with a specific bank. Happens to millions of people
He should be paying Coutts for generating enough publicity to get him back on TV
Well he claims he has been denied accounts with 9 or 10 other banks because of this issue of being a risky client due to being a PEP. And that he was only offered a Natwest after the story broke. So its more than just can he have an account with an uber exclusive bank.
Who would want to enter into any commercial contract with him, when he has the capacity to damage your business so publicly.
As I said down thread, that could be said of say Jeremy Corbyn or the eco nutters. I think it would be equally wrong to deny them a basic bank account.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
I think it's become compulsory on PB, malc. You won't be able to post until you can tell the difference between a male turnip and a female one.
Nigel Fucking Farage has not been denied banking services
He has been refused a specific account with a specific bank. Happens to millions of people
He should be paying Coutts for generating enough publicity to get him back on TV
Well he claims he has been denied accounts with 9 or 10 other banks because of this issue of being a risky client due to being a PEP. And that he was only offered a Natwest after the story broke. So its more than just can he have an account with an uber exclusive bank.
Who would want to enter into any commercial contract with him, when he has the capacity to damage your business so publicly.
As I said down thread, that could be said of say Jeremy Corbyn or the eco nutters. I think it would be equally wrong to deny them a basic bank account.
But who is the bank of last resort? We had that with the Post Office passbook, but that is extinct.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I've said this anecdote before, from a friend who worked in F1. A young girl was in karting, and doing well. Before a race, the father of another competitor peed in her fuel tank - in sight of her. She could not race, as (obvs.) the fuel was polluted. The other lad got DQ'ed because of her dad's actions, but the girl's dad decided he didn't want her in that toxic environment.
There are similar stories as well. Basically, motorsport is not that welcoming to young female drivers. That needs correcting if they're ever to make it regularly to the top in F1, Nascar, rallying etc.
TBF, F1 has made some big strides in women within the teams - it's much more open that it was, although the cost cap has allegedly made it worse, as fewer people are being taken on and the larger number of races means more time away from home. The problem is that there's a *massive* disconnect between that stratospheric level of the sport and the lowest rungs of the karting ladder.
What the fucking fuck...
DQ for that ? Should have been a life ban for the Dad and a call to the rozzers.
To be fair here may well not of been something the boy asked his dad to do or even knew about so a life ban for the kid seems a bit rough. A life ban from attending for the father however...
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
I think it's become compulsory on PB, malc. You won't be able to post until you can tell the difference between a male turnip and a female one.
Turnips are both (possibly sequentially within each flower, I forget the details).
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Why? He's an all-rounder who is protecting Root and Brook from the new ball.
Farage situation reminds me a bit of when Farage has been attacked by the public, it all a bit laugh for some...Jezza getting attacked, then its oh i am not sure thats on...then we get a range of politicians get a hassled / attacked on regular basis and all of a sudden its an incredibly serious threat to democracy...and eventually we even get scientists getting the same treatment.
Interesting narrative turn
The BBC however are still trying to do everything but apologise by getting others to give muddying opinions, when just as worrying as an account being closed is discussion of bank balances, allegedly as a public charity dinner between the bank chief and a journalist.
Its a good job they haven't recently made a big deal of being BBC Verify, The Fact Checkers....who actually managed to f##k up their very first series with a load of easily checkable claims that they got wrong...again because they have a bias against the person they are making claims against.
Out of interest, what was the BBC Verify thing they got wrong?
There first big expose was on the rise of conspiracy theories and people pushing them. One of the episodes included a load of stuff about Carl Benjamin and how these whackos on the internet are driving conspiracy theories...again not somebody I have a massive amount of time for.
However, they interviewed the Green council leader in Totnes, who made a load of wild claims that went unchecked and turned out to be false e.g. told a story that he turned up with Milo Yiannopoulos and they were causing lots of trouble as all the locals were against them. Quite believable, particularly Milo, except this was all the Euro Elections and he live streamed every day, uncut...and Yiannopoulos didn't go to Totnes with him (he was at another event) and it was more the "change my mind" event in which Benjamin invited people to debate him. So there was film video, hours of it, that showed the claims weren't true.
Then the same lady claimed Benjamin had been back more recently and all the locals now supported him because they watched his YouTube channels and all bought into conspiracy theories. No evidence has ever been provided. Benjamin says its untrue he has ever visited Totnes ever again, and given there are no photos, videos, etc, (and Benjamin loves nothing more than self-promtoion) you have to say if the whole of Totnes came out to treat him like a hero (as suggested by the council leader) there is going to be evidence.
Ok, so they took the word of whacky Green councillor without verifying. If the point of your programme is supposed to be fact checking everything, you better bring the facts.
Then, there were direct, easily verifiably claims, like Benjamin's YouTube channel was banned. It isn't, it has never been. Then the smeary stuff like he aligned with a particular white supremist, when it was the opposite, he debated the person on camera and disagreed vehemently with basically everything he said.
It went on, but basically BBC verify presenter doesn't like Carl Benjamin, let person bias result in believing what people said to her, put it out on BBC Verify podcast, with significant inaccuracies. So basically bad journalism.
When the thing is there is an interesting story there about how "alternative" media is gaining traction and I am sure is influencing people to some extent.
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Why? He's an all-rounder who is protecting Root and Brook from the new ball.
I don't grasp your point at all.
The pessimism bias when discussing England cricket on these forums is something no other sport or team comes close to.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
"All this dodgy stuff"? You mean the existence of trans people? Or queer people in general?
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
Farage situation reminds me a bit of when Farage has been attacked by the public, it all a bit laugh for some...Jezza getting attacked, then its oh i am not sure thats on...then we get a range of politicians get a hassled / attacked on regular basis and all of a sudden its an incredibly serious threat to democracy...and eventually we even get scientists getting the same treatment.
Interesting narrative turn
The BBC however are still trying to do everything but apologise by getting others to give muddying opinions, when just as worrying as an account being closed is discussion of bank balances, allegedly as a public charity dinner between the bank chief and a journalist.
Its a good job they haven't recently made a big deal of being BBC Verify, The Fact Checkers....who actually managed to f##k up their very first series with a load of easily checkable claims that they got wrong...again because they have a bias against the person they are making claims against.
Out of interest, what was the BBC Verify thing they got wrong?
There first big expose was on the rise of conspiracy theories and people pushing them. One of the episodes included a load of stuff about Carl Benjamin and how these whackos on the insert are driving conspiracy theories...again not somebody I have a massive amount of time for.
However, they interviewed the Green council leader in Totnes, who made a load of wild claims that went unchecked and turned out to be false e.g. told a story that he turned up with Milo Yiannopoulos and they were causing lots of trouble as all the locals were against them. Quite believable, particularly Milo, except this was all the Euro Elections and he live streamed every day, uncut...and Yiannopoulos didn't go to Totnes with him (he was at another event) and it was more the "change my mind" event in which Benjamin invited people to debate him. So there was film video, hours of it, that showed the claims weren't true.
Then the same lady claimed Benjamin had been back more recently and all the locals now supported him because they watched his YouTube channels and all bought into conspiracy theories. No evidence has ever been provided. Benjamin says its untrue he has ever visited Totnes ever again, and given there are no photos, videos, etc, (and Benjamin loves nothing more than self-promtoion) you have to say if the whole of Totnes came out to treat him like a hero (as suggested by the council leader) there is going to be evidence.
Ok, so they took the word of whacky Green councillor without verifying. If the point of your programme is supposed to be fact checking everything, you better bring the facts.
Then, there were direct, easily verifiably claims, like Benjamin's YouTube channel was banned. It isn't, it has never been. Then the smeary stuff like he aligned with a particular white supremist, when it was the opposite, he debated the person on camera and disagreed vehemently with basically everything he said.
It went on, but basically BBC verify presenter doesn't like Carl Benjamin, let person bias result in believing what people said to her, put it out on BBC Verify podcast, with significant inaccuracies.
I see, thanks for that.
I've always liked Snopes because it always tries to be fair, no matter your politics (although it might have got something wrong, I don't know!)
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Why? He's an all-rounder who is protecting Root and Brook from the new ball.
I don't grasp your point at all.
The pessimism bias when discussing England cricket on these forums is something no other sport or team comes close to.
Yup, it's frankly ridiculous, and really annoying, even when in 'jest'.
How do the elections work? Polls open at 9am (07:00 GMT, 0800 BST) on Sunday for the 37.4 million Spaniards who are eligible to vote, and close at 8pm (18:00 GMT, 19:00 BST) in mainland Spain. All 350 seats in the lower house of Spain’s main parliament are up for grabs along with 208 of the 265 senators’ seats in the upper house. Given the holiday period, 2.3 million have opted to vote by post, double the number of postal voters in the last elections. There are 1.6 million first-time voters.
When will the results be known? Forecasts for media outlets based on exit polls are published a few minutes after voting stations close, but a near-definitive total of seats only becomes clear by midnight (22:00 GMT, 23:00 BST).
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Why? He's an all-rounder who is protecting Root and Brook from the new ball.
I don't grasp your point at all.
To be fair, he has also batted at #3 in country cricket a fair amount of time. Pretty sure, the being a spinner started off a part-time thing, particularly for England where they wanted to get a spinner in without giving up a decent batter.
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Why? He's an all-rounder who is protecting Root and Brook from the new ball.
I don't grasp your point at all.
The pessimism bias when discussing England cricket on these forums is something no other sport or team comes close to.
Yup, it's frankly ridiculous, and really annoying, even when in 'jest'.
We good all talk about the merits of AV instead ;-)
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I've said this anecdote before, from a friend who worked in F1. A young girl was in karting, and doing well. Before a race, the father of another competitor peed in her fuel tank - in sight of her. She could not race, as (obvs.) the fuel was polluted. The other lad got DQ'ed because of her dad's actions, but the girl's dad decided he didn't want her in that toxic environment.
There are similar stories as well. Basically, motorsport is not that welcoming to young female drivers. That needs correcting if they're ever to make it regularly to the top in F1, Nascar, rallying etc.
TBF, F1 has made some big strides in women within the teams - it's much more open that it was, although the cost cap has allegedly made it worse, as fewer people are being taken on and the larger number of races means more time away from home. The problem is that there's a *massive* disconnect between that stratospheric level of the sport and the lowest rungs of the karting ladder.
I’ve a lot of similar stories, a young LH suffered horrific racist abuse as a young karter.
I think the atmosphere is a lot better now, and there’s many more women coming through. None of those any of us have heard of look likely to be F1 drivers though, perhaps a couple of the 16-year-olds in the Acadamy series might make F3. The fact of the Acadamy series, and W Series before it, does give the younger girls role models, and they can see women progressing.
Also, as you say, there’s more women around F1, as engineers, strategists and mechanics, as well as the more traditional roles of marketing, PR and catering. Yes, the 23-race season is brutal, and there will be a deal at some point to keep two teams of a lot of positions, with the budget adjusted accordingly.
War news: Norway-based shipping news service TradeWinds reckons maritime grain exports from Ukraine won't resume now Russia have pulled out of the grain initiative and issued a warning to commercial vessels and their flag states. The warning says that from today all ships en route to Ukrainian Black Sea ports will be considered potential carriers of military cargo, and that the flag states will be considered parties to the conflict.
How do the elections work? Polls open at 9am (07:00 GMT, 0800 BST) on Sunday for the 37.4 million Spaniards who are eligible to vote, and close at 8pm (18:00 GMT, 19:00 BST) in mainland Spain. All 350 seats in the lower house of Spain’s main parliament are up for grabs along with 208 of the 265 senators’ seats in the upper house. Given the holiday period, 2.3 million have opted to vote by post, double the number of postal voters in the last elections. There are 1.6 million first-time voters.
When will the results be known? Forecasts for media outlets based on exit polls are published a few minutes after voting stations close, but a near-definitive total of seats only becomes clear by midnight (22:00 GMT, 23:00 BST).
If they do not have Spanish women with great hair gesticulating wildly whilst sounding if they are spitting, I shall be vexed as telenovelas and Almodovar will have lied to me.
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Why? He's an all-rounder who is protecting Root and Brook from the new ball.
I don't grasp your point at all.
The pessimism bias when discussing England cricket on these forums is something no other sport or team comes close to.
Occasionally leavened with some spectacular triumphalism to be fair.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I do recall lady F1 drivers in the past – not many admittedly. But I think there have been some?
The last lady to drive an F1 car at a meeting was Susie Wolff - Mrs Toto - c.2016. The last lady to attempt to qualify for an F1 race was Giovanna Amati c.1992 The last lady to start an F1 race was Lella Lombardi in the mid-‘70s.
The most successful lady drivers of my lifetime have been Michelle Mouton in rallying, and Danica Patrick in Indycar and NASCAR over in the States.
Must say that Moeen at 3 looked like a cheap wicket which, together with the early loss of an opener, would put England under pressure. Delighted to have been proven wrong.
He's at 30, it's not proven wrong yet.
Eh ? He's above his average and the ball is 16 overs old. If he falls first ball after lunch he's done his job.
Being promoted to 3 England need more than his average.
Why? He's an all-rounder who is protecting Root and Brook from the new ball.
I don't grasp your point at all.
The pessimism bias when discussing England cricket on these forums is something no other sport or team comes close to.
I also notice the increased use of 'sensacion termica' or 'feels like' to bump the figures up way beyond the actual temeratures. Of course the most irritating thing is the now routine conflation of weather with climate.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I do recall lady F1 drivers in the past – not many admittedly. But I think there have been some?
The last lady to drive an F1 car at a meeting was Susie Wolff - Mrs Toto - c.2016. The last lady to attempt to qualify for an F1 race was Giovanna Amati c.1992 The last lady to start an F1 race was Lella Lombardi in the mid-‘70s.
The most successful lady drivers of my lifetime have been Michelle Mouton in rallying, and Danica Patrick in Indycar and NASCAR over in the States.
Are there any folk beliefs about lady magic in the F1 world as there are among sailors?
I also notice the increased use of 'sensacion termica' or 'feels like' to bump the figures up way beyond the actual temeratures. Of course the most irritating thing is the now routine conflation of weather with climate.
The conflation of weather with climate only happens when it’s hot. When it’s cold, they’re completely different things!
FWIW, we only got 39ºC out here today, several degrees cooler than normal for July. It looks like the heat is ending up in Europe, and not making it to the sandpit.
How do the elections work? Polls open at 9am (07:00 GMT, 0800 BST) on Sunday for the 37.4 million Spaniards who are eligible to vote, and close at 8pm (18:00 GMT, 19:00 BST) in mainland Spain. All 350 seats in the lower house of Spain’s main parliament are up for grabs along with 208 of the 265 senators’ seats in the upper house. Given the holiday period, 2.3 million have opted to vote by post, double the number of postal voters in the last elections. There are 1.6 million first-time voters.
When will the results be known? Forecasts for media outlets based on exit polls are published a few minutes after voting stations close, but a near-definitive total of seats only becomes clear by midnight (22:00 GMT, 23:00 BST).
If they do not have Spanish women with great hair gesticulating wildly whilst sounding if they are spitting, I shall be vexed as telenovelas and Almodovar will have lied to me.
I'm going to be disappointed if we don't get detailed reports on the prices of differently coloured fruits.
Last 10 overs have gone 70/1. Bazball in action, and it might make all the difference in what’s looking to be a three-day match, in which one side is content with the draw.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I do recall lady F1 drivers in the past – not many admittedly. But I think there have been some?
The last lady to drive an F1 car at a meeting was Susie Wolff - Mrs Toto - c.2016. The last lady to attempt to qualify for an F1 race was Giovanna Amati c.1992 The last lady to start an F1 race was Lella Lombardi in the mid-‘70s.
The most successful lady drivers of my lifetime have been Michelle Mouton in rallying, and Danica Patrick in Indycar and NASCAR over in the States.
Brittany Force was 2017 Top Fuel Champion and Ana Carrasco won the 2018 SSP300 title. (On two wheels but a full FIM sanctioned WC series.)
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I do recall lady F1 drivers in the past – not many admittedly. But I think there have been some?
The last lady to drive an F1 car at a meeting was Susie Wolff - Mrs Toto - c.2016. The last lady to attempt to qualify for an F1 race was Giovanna Amati c.1992 The last lady to start an F1 race was Lella Lombardi in the mid-‘70s.
The most successful lady drivers of my lifetime have been Michelle Mouton in rallying, and Danica Patrick in Indycar and NASCAR over in the States.
Last 10 overs have gone 70/1. Bazball in action, and it might make all the difference in what’s looking to be a three-day match, in which one side is content with the draw.
They are getting in practice for the Hundred, which I am sure we are extremely excited about ;-)
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I do recall lady F1 drivers in the past – not many admittedly. But I think there have been some?
The last lady to drive an F1 car at a meeting was Susie Wolff - Mrs Toto - c.2016. The last lady to attempt to qualify for an F1 race was Giovanna Amati c.1992 The last lady to start an F1 race was Lella Lombardi in the mid-‘70s.
The most successful lady drivers of my lifetime have been Michelle Mouton in rallying, and Danica Patrick in Indycar and NASCAR over in the States.
Brittany Force was 2017 Top Fuel Champion and Ana Carrasco won the 2018 SSP300 title. (On two wheels but a full FIM sanctioned WC series.)
Yes good point, loads of women in drag racing - total nutters the lot of them!
War news: Norway-based shipping news service TradeWinds reckons maritime grain exports from Ukraine won't resume now Russia have pulled out of the grain initiative and issued a warning to commercial vessels and their flag states. The warning says that from today all ships en route to Ukrainian Black Sea ports will be considered potential carriers of military cargo, and that the flag states will be considered parties to the conflict.
Ukraine has announced a similar approach to ships heading to Russian ports in the Black Sea. Althought as Ukraine does not have a navy this may well be a rhetorical tit for tat announcement.
Good point about snooker: why aren't men and women playing against each other when strength isn't important 99.9% of the time? What about chess as well.
One problem with snooker for at least some women is their chests are liable to foul the balls as they lean over the table. Another problem is limited access (increasingly for men too, as many snooker clubs have shut). And although strength is not an issue in snooker, height and reach are.
But as I've posted before, enterprising girls schools should have dartboards and snooker tables in every common room. If you never throw a dart, you won't know if you'll be any good at it. Likewise pianos and horses.
Indeed. There’s been a lot of discussion about this in motorsport, where everyone wants to see a lady F1 driver.
The biggest problem is that it’s a numbers game, and more than 90% of the eight-year-olds entering go-kart competitions are boys. So the most obvious way to get a lady F1 driver 15 years from now, is to get more girls driving karts at primary school, instead of riding horses!
I do recall lady F1 drivers in the past – not many admittedly. But I think there have been some?
The last lady to drive an F1 car at a meeting was Susie Wolff - Mrs Toto - c.2016. The last lady to attempt to qualify for an F1 race was Giovanna Amati c.1992 The last lady to start an F1 race was Lella Lombardi in the mid-‘70s.
The most successful lady drivers of my lifetime have been Michelle Mouton in rallying, and Danica Patrick in Indycar and NASCAR over in the States.
Brittany Force was 2017 Top Fuel Champion and Ana Carrasco won the 2018 SSP300 title. (On two wheels but a full FIM sanctioned WC series.)
Yes good point, loads of women in drag racing - total nutters the lot of them!
War news: Norway-based shipping news service TradeWinds reckons maritime grain exports from Ukraine won't resume now Russia have pulled out of the grain initiative and issued a warning to commercial vessels and their flag states. The warning says that from today all ships en route to Ukrainian Black Sea ports will be considered potential carriers of military cargo, and that the flag states will be considered parties to the conflict.
Ukraine has announced a similar approach to ships heading to Russian ports in the Black Sea. Althought as Ukraine does not have a navy this may well be a rhetorical tit for tat announcement.
Not much rhetorical about what happened to the Moskva.
"the entertainment lawyer Enty, who runs the Crazy Days and Nights blind-item site,"
If that is the source for this, it is more unreliable than a Land Rover Discovery....
Enty can be a good read, but most of it is rubbish or rumour - although he has been first with a lot of true stories over the years. Large pinch of salt required, especially around those two, for whom there are many hundreds of rumours.
Anti trans activism doesn't have the same kind of backing in the US because the bigotry at its heart is much clearer - firstly because the people advocating against trans people are the same anti LGBT and anti women people who have always campaigned against progress and secondly because those people clearly don't give a damn about women's welfare.
I also find it interesting that the GC movement, that claims to care so greatly about the rights of lesbians, are split over the moves in Italy to remove lesbian mothers who don't give birth to a child from a birth certificate of that child - potentially putting into question the rights of the non biological mother should anything happen to her partner. That prominent anti trans activists like Posie Parker (who has been defended by JKR and others despite openly saying she isn't a feminist, is against feminism and believes that abortion rights have gone too far) are cheering this change on whilst their lesbian supposed fellow travellers look at the movement they've shackled themselves to and ask "how can this have happened to me" should be a damascene moment for some of these people.
The anti trans campaign comes from the same place that always attacks women and their bodily autonomy - the lawyers in the UK who represent against trans rights are the same lawyers who push for rolling back abortion rights and argued against same sex marriage. The same people who fund CPAC and the Heritage Foundation are funding trips for prominent GCs to talk at their and other conferences. The same narrative - that the perverted transes are going to prey on your children and groom them and aren't safe in public toilets - are the same narratives used against gay people in the 50s and 60s. Protection of patriarchy in the face of progress.
Policies like those proposed by the government of banning social transition in schools does nothing but ensure rigid policing of gender norms; if transgirls can't grow out their hair or wear dresses what will stop teachers policing the feminine cisboys GCs claim they are protecting from being "too girly"? If transboys aren't allowed to wear trousers or shorts instead of skirts what will stop head teachers enforcing gendered clothing on cisgirls that demands they look feminine, again punishing those tomboys GCs claim would otherwise be forcibly transed? If a student is gay, and effeminate, would a teacher necessarily know the difference between that and transness, and therefore know if they should out their students to parents anyway? All these moves protect an understanding of strict gender roles and patriarchy - parents owning their children and their roles as boys and girls, men and women strictly enforced. Anti trans activists are not critical of gender - no matter how much they say "wear any clothes you like, just don't claim you're a woman / man" they still hate on drag or gender non conforming people.
You didn’t listen to a word if it, did you?
And as ever, you miss the fundamental point that it’s not “anti-trans” but “pro-women” and based on the view that “you cannot change your sex”.
Why do you think some men want access to women’s spaces and women’s sports?
Transwomen want to be able to live their lives as women - access to women's spaces is about the fact that many transwomen are indistinguishable from ciswomen and therefore would look out of place in men's spaces and therefore in danger. It's also about not having to out themselves in their daily life - if a transwoman can't use the woman's toilet in their place of work they will have to out themselves to all their colleagues, something they should not be forced to do if they don't want to.
As for women's sports - transpeople want to compete in the sport according to their gender because we have decided to segregate sports based on that criteria. There are transmen who would rather compete against cismen who are forced to compete against ciswomen - are you arguing that transmen want to compete against cismen for unfair advantages?
What is pro-women about demanding that children have to dress in gendered ways? What is pro-women about implementing laws that allow for genital checks if people think you are trans, as has happened in the US? What is pro-women about a movement that led to the killing of a ciswoman because someone thought she was trans?
You can claim disingenuously that it's about "protecting women", but when the movement welcomes Posie Parker and policies that want to erase lesbian families, when the outcomes of the rhetoric is increased attacks against all LGBTQ+ people and the policing of women's femininity, when the clear motivation of many people comes from the same place that attacks women's rights to abortion and bodily autonomy all I see is a reactionary movement that protects patriarchy trying to hide behind "protecting women", as anti gay movements before was about "protecting children" and racist movements before that was about "protecting white women".
And yet at the moment my daughter as a lesbian feels she has far more to fear from the extremist Trans movement than from their mainstream opponents.
So she is likely amongst the 12% of cis lesbians who don’t consider themselves accepting fully of trans people.
Not at all. She has been very strong in her defence and advocacy for trans people. Which is why it hits her so hard to be told that lesbianism should no longer be considered 'a thing' as has been the position of extremist (note that word) trans activists.
You just don't want to accept that in this case the extremists are also on your side of the debate.
Do you have a citation from so called extreme trans activists claiming that lesbianism isn't a thing? I am unaware of this claim from literally any activist or group.
Do you agree that lesbians who would never sleep with an MtF transwoman are transphobic?
I think that depends (and have also answered this question before on these forums). Most lesbians attest to finding transwomen attractive, but not everyone will sleep with everyone they find attractive. The reasons for having sex with someone differ greatly from person to person; it could be you have a good vibe, you share common interests, you like their personality etc. There are people I find attractive who I would never sleep with because I don't like them as people. If a lesbian says that they "can just tell" when a woman is trans, or even is willing to approach a transwoman and flirt and ask them out, only to change their mind when finding out they are trans - that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference (like how I prefer to only date vegetarian / vegans). Telling those apart can be difficult. I think that if you find someone attractive and like them on a personal level and learning they are trans then disgusts you, that is probably rooted in bigotry, yes.
I'm really uncomfortable with your attempt to tell people what their sexuality is and that it's bigoted if it isn't expressed in a way that you approve of.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
That is not what I said. I literally say "that could be about transphobia or it could be a sincere preference" - I am not saying anyone should feel they have to have sex with anyone they don't want to. What I am saying if is that if you are willing to sleep with someone and only upon learning they are trans you specifically feel disgust to the degree that you don't want to, that is probably transphobia - yes. The feeling of disgust being the main thing there that (to me) identifies the transphobia.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
You seem very well versed on all this dodgy stuff
I think it's become compulsory on PB, malc. You won't be able to post until you can tell the difference between a male turnip and a female one.
Turnips are both (possibly sequentially within each flower, I forget the details).
War news: Norway-based shipping news service TradeWinds reckons maritime grain exports from Ukraine won't resume now Russia have pulled out of the grain initiative and issued a warning to commercial vessels and their flag states. The warning says that from today all ships en route to Ukrainian Black Sea ports will be considered potential carriers of military cargo, and that the flag states will be considered parties to the conflict.
Ukraine has announced a similar approach to ships heading to Russian ports in the Black Sea. Althought as Ukraine does not have a navy this may well be a rhetorical tit for tat announcement.
Not much rhetorical about what happened to the Moskva.
A pro-Ukraine twitter account has chosen today to share this video (said to be of the launch of the Neptune missiles that sank the Moskva).
Its great stuff from England, but looking at the weather forecast, tomorrow looks iffy, Sat a wash out and Sun iffy. I don't see how you get to a result.
"the entertainment lawyer Enty, who runs the Crazy Days and Nights blind-item site,"
If that is the source for this, it is more unreliable than a Land Rover Discovery....
Enty can be a good read, but most of it is rubbish or rumour - although he has been first with a lot of true stories over the years. Large pinch of salt required, especially around those two, for whom there are many hundreds of rumours.
Some of you may be fans of the AGC Blind Items website. It used to have a wide variety of gossip, but of late it's been concentrating on the "Crazy Days And Nights" website, better known as "CDAN", with just an occasional diversion to Popbitch. CDAN's gossipmonger "Entertainment Lawyer", otherwise known as "Enty", has just been sued by a minor celeb on the grounds that his gossip ("blinds") about here are [check notes] total bullshit. The settlement involved Enty removing the blinds and acknowledges the level of bullshit. Maybe they will now return to more accurate gossips, if such a thing exists.
How do the elections work? Polls open at 9am (07:00 GMT, 0800 BST) on Sunday for the 37.4 million Spaniards who are eligible to vote, and close at 8pm (18:00 GMT, 19:00 BST) in mainland Spain. All 350 seats in the lower house of Spain’s main parliament are up for grabs along with 208 of the 265 senators’ seats in the upper house. Given the holiday period, 2.3 million have opted to vote by post, double the number of postal voters in the last elections. There are 1.6 million first-time voters.
When will the results be known? Forecasts for media outlets based on exit polls are published a few minutes after voting stations close, but a near-definitive total of seats only becomes clear by midnight (22:00 GMT, 23:00 BST).
If they do not have Spanish women with great hair gesticulating wildly whilst sounding if they are spitting, I shall be vexed as telenovelas and Almodovar will have lied to me.
I'm going to be disappointed if we don't get detailed reports on the prices of differently coloured fruits.
The last poll shown on Wikipedia GESOP is greyed out as it was conducted after the deadline. i'm hoping for more!
Comments
EDIT: It appears almost everyone got there before me.
I don't see what is bigoted about only wanting to have sex with someone who has the genitalia you like to have sex with. But that's the upshot of your argument.
Again - many cis lesbians are happy to have relationships with transwomen (many of whom also identify as lesbians). People claiming that lesbians can't find transwomen attractive are the ones telling people what their sexuality is.
There are similar stories as well. Basically, motorsport is not that welcoming to young female drivers. That needs correcting if they're ever to make it regularly to the top in F1, Nascar, rallying etc.
TBF, F1 has made some big strides in women within the teams - it's much more open that it was, although the cost cap has allegedly made it worse, as fewer people are being taken on and the larger number of races means more time away from home. The problem is that there's a *massive* disconnect between that stratospheric level of the sport and the lowest rungs of the karting ladder.
I'm bored with Jumbo Jet Dragging.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGHSe_9ahp
DQ for that ? Should have been a life ban for the Dad and a call to the rozzers.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/10/trans-rights-feminist-letter-rebecca-solnit
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/lgbt-trans-debate-lesbian-dyke-project-b2312572.html
https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/lesbians-erased-trans-people-myth
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/lesbians-stand-trans-women-open-letter-dangerous-bbc-article-rcna3903
https://connectingrainbows.org/life-as-a-trans-and-cis-couple-yes-were-still-lesbians/
I don't grasp your point at all.
Sad elegy, especially (but not only) for East Coast Scots such as @DavidL .
@kle4 will say it's not enough
However, they interviewed the Green council leader in Totnes, who made a load of wild claims that went unchecked and turned out to be false e.g. told a story that he turned up with Milo Yiannopoulos and they were causing lots of trouble as all the locals were against them. Quite believable, particularly Milo, except this was all the Euro Elections and he live streamed every day, uncut...and Yiannopoulos didn't go to Totnes with him (he was at another event) and it was more the "change my mind" event in which Benjamin invited people to debate him. So there was film video, hours of it, that showed the claims weren't true.
Then the same lady claimed Benjamin had been back more recently and all the locals now supported him because they watched his YouTube channels and all bought into conspiracy theories. No evidence has ever been provided. Benjamin says its untrue he has ever visited Totnes ever again, and given there are no photos, videos, etc, (and Benjamin loves nothing more than self-promtoion) you have to say if the whole of Totnes came out to treat him like a hero (as suggested by the council leader) there is going to be evidence.
Ok, so they took the word of whacky Green councillor without verifying. If the point of your programme is supposed to be fact checking everything, you better bring the facts.
Then, there were direct, easily verifiably claims, like Benjamin's YouTube channel was banned. It isn't, it has never been. Then the smeary stuff like he aligned with a particular white supremist, when it was the opposite, he debated the person on camera and disagreed vehemently with basically everything he said.
It went on, but basically BBC verify presenter doesn't like Carl Benjamin, let person bias result in believing what people said to her, put it out on BBC Verify podcast, with significant inaccuracies. So basically bad journalism.
When the thing is there is an interesting story there about how "alternative" media is gaining traction and I am sure is influencing people to some extent.
Yeah, I have trans friends, family and colleagues. I am not straight, and so have lots of queer friends, including cis and trans lesbians. I know lots of cis and trans gay men, too. Is that dodgy? Is worrying about holding hands with people I'm dating in public because I remember people shouting slurs at me "dodgy"? Is my desire to protect trans people from that same harassment, for the same reason, "dodgy"? Hate crimes against LGBTQ+ people in the UK have exploded in the last half a decade - many experts point at the anti trans rhetoric for that rise against all queer people - so is the fear for my safety and the safety of those I love also "dodgy"?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/hate-crime-transgender-uk-figures-b2196759.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2023_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_November_2019_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_April_2019_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2016_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2011_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2008_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2004_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_2019_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_2019_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Spanish_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Spanish_general_election
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/european-politics/spain-general-election/winner
I've always liked Snopes because it always tries to be fair, no matter your politics (although it might have got something wrong, I don't know!)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/3169070
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/7/19/spains-snap-vote-how-it-works-and-what-to-expect-on-july-23
How do the elections work?
Polls open at 9am (07:00 GMT, 0800 BST) on Sunday for the 37.4 million Spaniards who are eligible to vote, and close at 8pm (18:00 GMT, 19:00 BST) in mainland Spain. All 350 seats in the lower house of Spain’s main parliament are up for grabs along with 208 of the 265 senators’ seats in the upper house. Given the holiday period, 2.3 million have opted to vote by post, double the number of postal voters in the last elections. There are 1.6 million first-time voters.
When will the results be known?
Forecasts for media outlets based on exit polls are published a few minutes after voting stations close, but a near-definitive total of seats only becomes clear by midnight (22:00 GMT, 23:00 BST).
I think the atmosphere is a lot better now, and there’s many more women coming through. None of those any of us have heard of look likely to be F1 drivers though, perhaps a couple of the 16-year-olds in the Acadamy series might make F3. The fact of the Acadamy series, and W Series before it, does give the younger girls role models, and they can see women progressing.
Also, as you say, there’s more women around F1, as engineers, strategists and mechanics, as well as the more traditional roles of marketing, PR and catering. Yes, the 23-race season is brutal, and there will be a deal at some point to keep two teams of a lot of positions, with the budget adjusted accordingly.
https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1681625398856040448
https://www.tradewindsnews.com/bulkers/russia-formally-warns-ships-flag-states-to-steer-clear-of-ukraine/2-1-1488984
What are the main flag states? Panama? Liberia?
24hr Spanish news channels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3/24
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_Horas_(Spanish_TV_channel)
If they do not have Spanish women with great hair gesticulating wildly whilst sounding if they are spitting, I shall be vexed as telenovelas and Almodovar will have lied to me.
The last lady to attempt to qualify for an F1 race was Giovanna Amati c.1992
The last lady to start an F1 race was Lella Lombardi in the mid-‘70s.
The most successful lady drivers of my lifetime have been Michelle Mouton in rallying, and Danica Patrick in Indycar and NASCAR over in the States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailors'_superstitions
^ See Jonahs.
FWIW, we only got 39ºC out here today, several degrees cooler than normal for July. It looks like the heat is ending up in Europe, and not making it to the sandpit.
It makes me very glad to be in Europe at the moment.
https://thespectator.com/topic/meghan-markle-prince-harry-separating-rumors-royal-family/
If that is the source for this, it is more unreliable than a Land Rover Discovery....
AM I DOING THIS RIGHT ?
https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket/intervals
If this is the classic south Polish summer then Katowice might become the new Marbella if climate change persists
https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1682013091955892224
https://medium.com/britainelects/previewing-the-three-parliamentary-and-three-local-by-elections-of-20th-july-2023-95f9f043747d
viewcode, June 29 2023.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4455347/#Comment_4455347
Some of you may be fans of the AGC Blind Items website. It used to have a wide variety of gossip, but of late it's been concentrating on the "Crazy Days And Nights" website, better known as "CDAN", with just an occasional diversion to Popbitch. CDAN's gossipmonger "Entertainment Lawyer", otherwise known as "Enty", has just been sued by a minor celeb on the grounds that his gossip ("blinds") about here are [check notes] total bullshit. The settlement involved Enty removing the blinds and acknowledges the level of bullshit. Maybe they will now return to more accurate gossips, if such a thing exists.