Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Every person will have different "traditions" that they value.
I value the tradition that we don't flag wave like Americans because we're comfortable in our national identity but @Philip_Thompson doesn't seem to value that tradition.
I value the tradition that we are a United Kingdom but @Philip_Thompson doesn't seem to value that tradition.
However I also value the tradition that, on the whole, we treat separatists with decorum and let nations and territories become independent nations @HYUFD doesn't seem to value that tradition.
This whole "traditions" vs "woke" argument means something different to everyone.
Casino and others are traditionalists.
I'm quite openly not a traditionalist.
Im also quite "woke" on many issues. So don't put me down on the traditionalist side of the debate, I'm not.
You're on the "traditionalist" side of the debate if the Conservative Party is the "traditionalist" party, which is the point @MaxPB was making.
The fact is that for a majority of young people, things like transgenderism is just not an issue. Older people can argue about things like bathrooms and "family values", and I sympathise, but the genie isn't going back in the bottle. These new social norms are going to filter up through the ages as time goes on. This is just like attitudes against homosexuality and race.
The argument isn't settled at all though. I have gay friends who are all looking ominously at the LGB alliance as a safe haven from all of this stuff. My wife who is almost 5 years younger than me and in her late 20s is a staunch defender of female sexual rights, all of her friends are too.
It won't simple "filter up" instead all of you lot that propose it will continually lose elections and then bitch about how British people are all bigots on Twitter.
See this is where issues get difficult. I support transgendered people's right to be who they are. I also support women's rights to have protected spaces.
There's times when rights collide. No different to the right of people to pick their own religion, and the religions who decide to attack gay rights.
When issues collide you need to stop and think and tread carefully - not go steaming in with a two footed challenge calling everyone who has a different priority to you a bigot.
The rights aren't colluding, Philip. Female only spaces and hard won female based sex rights are being diluted for men in dresses that make no attempt to actually transition.
With all due respect @MaxPB, you are showing your ignorance and bigotism with comments like "men in dresses".
That isn't helpful and it's frankly insulting.
This isn't culture – it's being a bigot. You can be in support of safe spaces for women and be against puberty blockers for children without being a bigot.
Whatever, if you can't stand the heat.
You’re really doing yourself a disservice here.
If you think it’s justified to demean transgender people by describing them as “men in dresses” well... 🤦♂️
The issue is two fold.
1. There are transgender people who undertake the medical process of transitioning to the other sex. I have nothing but respect, sympathy and more respect for them. It must be one of the most difficult decisions and processes to undergo and my "men in dresses" comment is absolutely not aimed at anyone in this category. Post-opererative transgender people are the sex they have transitioned to and should have access to all the same things as people who are born that sex and the law should (mostly) make no distinction between the two. 2. The flip side of that is the "man in a dress" who says he's a woman, and this is where I'm firmly off the train, the same people who support this rubbish are the same people pushing puberty blockers to kids and sending them to the Tavistock centre to be brainwashed.
Circling back to the original point, Labour are squarely in the second camp.
Labour are not squarely in the second camp. The Tories under Mrs May were looking at reforming the GRA such that a formal medical diagnosis of dysphoria was no longer needed. Under Johnson such plans have been shelved but promises have been made for a "kinder, cheaper, more straightforward" transitioning process. Labour under Starmer have kept their distance, saying merely that they will scrutinize whatever plans are in due course put forward. The left of the party are not best pleased (obvs) but they have been marginalized.
Mr. kinabalu, well, sport's segregated on sex for a reason. One's personal feeling of gender doesn't rewrite one's genetic code. It's fundamentally unfair to women to have biological men competing against them (in almost every sport).
What I really like about this site (and it might be instructive about people more broadly too) is that when we have good conversations about "woke" or climate change or meat or lockdown or personal privacy issues we can normally zone into a moderate practical position that by-and-large takes both points of view into account. This is a very good thing, and why we do it.
Didn't really happen with Brexit but we all got far too invested in that.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
I agree.
Fundamentally I think this is an issue that should be left for the medical community to diagnose and discuss - and I don't particularly want to get involved either way.
Good call.
So, anyway, what did happen to your pole? Is there a story there?
No.
Which is why I didn't respond to your first five enquiries.
There's no need to be like that. It's purely harmless probing on my behalf. No agenda at all.
You had a flagpole and now don't. I'm simply curious as to how that came to pass. Why clam up about it?
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
I guess we need to see how the current wave pans out, but one early lesson (yet again) is that high rates of mask wearing don't seem to do much (anything?) to stop or even slow down big outbreaks. https://covidmap.umd.edu/map/index.html"
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
Yeah, agreed. Labour need to be in "biding your time" mode, while identifying key policy differences.
Need a new shadow cabinet first. Need some flagship policies.
I've said it on here before but the screamingly obvious one is those on ZHCs and casual labour/ so called self employed. It is a fairly incredible state of affairs when the Supreme Court seems to be more concerned with the rights of these exploited people (as in the Uber case) than the leader of the Labour Party.
What's the policy though?
A worker's charter:
Guaranteed minimum hours in every contract of employment. A right to get paid if given less than 7 days notice of the removal of hours. Sick pay and holiday pay for the "self employed". Security of employment after a specified period. The right to payment for "waiting time". Legal obligations to make sure all self employed earning less than, say, £25k a year are covered by your employers liability insurance. A right to be fully refunded for the cost of using your own vehicle.
No doubt many more. That is just off the top of my head but there are millions of our fellow citizens trapped in exploitative employment with no security, no ability to get mortgages or loans, bearing the risks of downturns of trade which should be on the trader and vulnerable to sickness and injury. It is totally morally unacceptable and if that means an extra 50p on our carry outs or 20p on our cappuccinos it is a price we should all bear as being part of a civilised society.
Thing is, if labour did push such policies, the tories would probably nick them.
This is everything that is wrong about the tribalism of british politics. Surely the important thing is the policy gets implemented not who implements it.
But we don't want a chancer like Boris Johnson as PM for an eternity. I think that's a valid concern.
Ah so a policy you think is desperately needed, should be delayed for up to 3 years, perhaps more for electoral advantage? Gotcha.....and the left claim to care about the poor. Evidence seems to say otherwise on this one
I'm just saying don't totally ignore the benefit of NOT having Boris Johnson as PM for an interminable period of time.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Every person will have different "traditions" that they value.
I value the tradition that we don't flag wave like Americans because we're comfortable in our national identity but @Philip_Thompson doesn't seem to value that tradition.
I value the tradition that we are a United Kingdom but @Philip_Thompson doesn't seem to value that tradition.
However I also value the tradition that, on the whole, we treat separatists with decorum and let nations and territories become independent nations @HYUFD doesn't seem to value that tradition.
This whole "traditions" vs "woke" argument means something different to everyone.
Casino and others are traditionalists.
I'm quite openly not a traditionalist.
Im also quite "woke" on many issues. So don't put me down on the traditionalist side of the debate, I'm not.
You're on the "traditionalist" side of the debate if the Conservative Party is the "traditionalist" party, which is the point @MaxPB was making.
The fact is that for a majority of young people, things like transgenderism is just not an issue. Older people can argue about things like bathrooms and "family values", and I sympathise, but the genie isn't going back in the bottle. These new social norms are going to filter up through the ages as time goes on. This is just like attitudes against homosexuality and race.
The argument isn't settled at all though. I have gay friends who are all looking ominously at the LGB alliance as a safe haven from all of this stuff. My wife who is almost 5 years younger than me and in her late 20s is a staunch defender of female sexual rights, all of her friends are too.
It won't simple "filter up" instead all of you lot that propose it will continually lose elections and then bitch about how British people are all bigots on Twitter.
See this is where issues get difficult. I support transgendered people's right to be who they are. I also support women's rights to have protected spaces.
There's times when rights collide. No different to the right of people to pick their own religion, and the religions who decide to attack gay rights.
When issues collide you need to stop and think and tread carefully - not go steaming in with a two footed challenge calling everyone who has a different priority to you a bigot.
The rights aren't colluding, Philip. Female only spaces and hard won female based sex rights are being diluted for men in dresses that make no attempt to actually transition.
With all due respect @MaxPB, you are showing your ignorance and bigotism with comments like "men in dresses".
That isn't helpful and it's frankly insulting.
This isn't culture – it's being a bigot. You can be in support of safe spaces for women and be against puberty blockers for children without being a bigot.
Whatever, if you can't stand the heat.
You’re really doing yourself a disservice here.
If you think it’s justified to demean transgender people by describing them as “men in dresses” well... 🤦♂️
The issue is two fold.
1. There are transgender people who undertake the medical process of transitioning to the other sex. I have nothing but respect, sympathy and more respect for them. It must be one of the most difficult decisions and processes to undergo and my "men in dresses" comment is absolutely not aimed at anyone in this category. Post-opererative transgender people are the sex they have transitioned to and should have access to all the same things as people who are born that sex and the law should (mostly) make no distinction between the two. 2. The flip side of that is the "man in a dress" who says he's a woman, and this is where I'm firmly off the train, the same people who support this rubbish are the same people pushing puberty blockers to kids and sending them to the Tavistock centre to be brainwashed.
Circling back to the original point, Labour are squarely in the second camp.
Labour are not squarely in the second camp. The Tories under Mrs May were looking at reforming the GRA such that a formal medical diagnosis of dysphoria was no longer needed. Under Johnson such plans have been shelved but promises have been made for a "kinder, cheaper, more straightforward" transitioning process. Labour under Starmer have kept their distance, saying merely that they will scrutinize whatever plans are in due course put forward. The left of the party are not best pleased (obvs) but they have been marginalized.
I'll believe it when I see it. Starmer took the knee, he's not a defender of tradition.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
This is a good framing. And to achieve a perfect balance I'd add to the final para -
As for the transphobe extremists, in their hatred of the very idea of a born man becoming a woman, and the way in which they conduct the debate, they have a freakish amount in common with the homophobes of yesteryear. Indeed many of them are the closet homophobes of thisayear.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
I agree.
Fundamentally I think this is an issue that should be left for the medical community to diagnose and discuss - and I don't particularly want to get involved either way.
It seems to me that one you have - after appropriate consultation and advice - taken positive steps along the transition pathway (ie medical intervention) then it becomes more of a discussion of whether you get access to biologically based rights
That's what happens now and what the government has reaffirmed by dumping all of the bullshit from the May era reforms. What the agitators want is to break the link between biological sex and sex based rights, which, again, circling back to my original point on Labour struggling to get back into power, is an impossible policy to sell to voters.
The Conservatives went along with it for far too long. It think Cameron-May basically followed a centre-left social policy for 7-8 years too long after it had overreached in the name of "modernisation".
It's why one of my principles is that you must test every sides of the debate on every issue - particularly the controversial ones or where there's a very strong or fashionable consensus. You must always put up a proposition and an opposition in a free society.
It's another reason to rate Liz Truss. She got those barnacles off the boat with minimum fuss.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
Well this is it. I could vote for Labour, if it had identical policies and ideas as the Tories...
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
The judges comments are a little concerning ruling that her views “are not worthy of respect in a democratic society”.
WTF? All views are worthy of respect.
Judge should be dismissed.
I really disliked Blair’s (?) extension of the title “judge” to tribunal chairs because it seemed to me that it undermined the respect for that title that is necessary
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
Well this is it. I could vote for Labour, if it had identical policies and ideas as the Tories...
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
This is a good framing. And to achieve a perfect balance I'd add to the final para -
As for the transphobe extremists, in their hatred of the very idea of a born man becoming a woman, and the way in which they conduct the debate, they have a freakish amount in common with the homophobes of yesteryear. Indeed many of them are the closet homophobes of thisayear.
It destroys the balance. You note that I criticised the actions of the “woke extremists” not them as individuals. But you seem to believe that those who oppose your position are bad in and of themselves
Boris Johnson's senior aide Eddie Lister was a director of a firm that was aiming to build a "Hong Kong" in Libya, while serving as a non-executive director at the Foreign Office.
He joined after Boris Johnson drew criticism for describing a group of UK business people as "wonderful guys" who planned to turn Sirte into the “next Dubai”, adding the "only thing they've got to do is clear the dead bodies away and then they'll be there". https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1385967974780129280
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
Well this is it. I could vote for Labour, if it had identical policies and ideas as the Tories...
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
I agree.
Fundamentally I think this is an issue that should be left for the medical community to diagnose and discuss - and I don't particularly want to get involved either way.
It seems to me that one you have - after appropriate consultation and advice - taken positive steps along the transition pathway (ie medical intervention) then it becomes more of a discussion of whether you get access to biologically based rights
That's what happens now and what the government has reaffirmed by dumping all of the bullshit from the May era reforms. What the agitators want is to break the link between biological sex and sex based rights, which, again, circling back to my original point on Labour struggling to get back into power, is an impossible policy to sell to voters.
The Conservatives went along with it for far too long. It think Cameron-May basically followed a centre-left social policy for 7-8 years too long after it had overreached in the name of "modernisation".
It's why one of my principles is that you must test every sides of the debate on every issue - particularly the controversial ones or where there's a very strong or fashionable consensus. You must always put up a proposition and an opposition in a free society.
In what way was May centre left?
Cameron was modernising but none of it was bad, it was all necessary. May was authoritarian and drowning in Brexit i can't think of any modernisation she did.
The judges comments are a little concerning ruling that her views “are not worthy of respect in a democratic society”.
WTF? All views are worthy of respect.
No, all views are not worthy of respect.
Dumbest comment on here for quite some time.
She’s wrong. But she has the right to have her views and that right should be respected
Ok. But I was responding to your "all views are worthy of respect". You surely don't mean this. There are many views out there, sincerely held, yet worthy of no respect at all.
Boris Johnson's senior aide Eddie Lister was a director of a firm that was aiming to build a "Hong Kong" in Libya, while serving as a non-executive director at the Foreign Office.
He joined after Boris Johnson drew criticism for describing a group of UK business people as "wonderful guys" who planned to turn Sirte into the “next Dubai”, adding the "only thing they've got to do is clear the dead bodies away and then they'll be there". https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1385967974780129280
Providing he recuses himself from any specific discussion that shouldn’t be an issue.
In fact it would make him more valuable as an non executive at the foreign office
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
I agree.
Fundamentally I think this is an issue that should be left for the medical community to diagnose and discuss - and I don't particularly want to get involved either way.
It seems to me that one you have - after appropriate consultation and advice - taken positive steps along the transition pathway (ie medical intervention) then it becomes more of a discussion of whether you get access to biologically based rights
That's what happens now and what the government has reaffirmed by dumping all of the bullshit from the May era reforms. What the agitators want is to break the link between biological sex and sex based rights, which, again, circling back to my original point on Labour struggling to get back into power, is an impossible policy to sell to voters.
The Conservatives went along with it for far too long. It think Cameron-May basically followed a centre-left social policy for 7-8 years too long after it had overreached in the name of "modernisation".
It's why one of my principles is that you must test every sides of the debate on every issue - particularly the controversial ones or where there's a very strong or fashionable consensus. You must always put up a proposition and an opposition in a free society.
In what way was May centre left?
Cameron was modernising but none of it was bad, it was all necessary. May was authoritarian and drowning in Brexit i can't think of any modernisation she did.
I can't remember anything Theresa May did as PM except nearly lose her job, then lose her job.
Providing he recuses himself from any specific discussion that shouldn’t be an issue.
In fact it would make him more valuable as an non executive at the foreign office
On Friday, we asked both the Foreign Office and Lord Lister to provide details of his declared interests during his time as a NED. A No10 spokesperson said Lord Lister had declared any "relevant" interests but did not confirm whether this included Eribi Holdings.
Asked directly whether Lord Lister had declared Eribi Holdings to the Foreign Office and the extent of Johnson’s knowledge of the project, the spokesperson said: “We don’t have anything more to add at this point.” https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1385968772545122305
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
This is a good framing. And to achieve a perfect balance I'd add to the final para -
As for the transphobe extremists, in their hatred of the very idea of a born man becoming a woman, and the way in which they conduct the debate, they have a freakish amount in common with the homophobes of yesteryear. Indeed many of them are the closet homophobes of thisayear.
It destroys the balance. You note that I criticised the actions of the “woke extremists” not them as individuals. But you seem to believe that those who oppose your position are bad in and of themselves
Somebody "putting themselves above everyone else and trying to scream down all dissent" sounds like a personal criticism to me. And I'm sure it's justified in some cases. And, yes, there are some nasty people on the transphobic fringe. Take a look at some of the stuff they come out with if you doubt that. It's a cesspit.
My position is not for uncontrolled self ID btw. I think there are genuine issues. eg refuges and elite sport.
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
One of the aspects of the Hong Kong situation that can be hard for outsiders to understand is that there are many in Hong Kong who support Beijing. Are there many people in Taiwan who would do the same?
A political crisis in Taiwan, with a significant fraction of the island supporting Beijing over independence, could provide the circumstances that would allow a successful invasion. But perhaps support for Beijing in Taiwan is low.
There's quite a significant proportion of Taiwanese who would support reunification. But I'm not sure they'd be that keen on getting invaded.
China would do better with honey and promises and "all China structures", than with invasion.
On the other hand, one takes about 25 years, while the other is quick.
If this is going to be mandatory in an independent Scotland I make that *consults notes* reason 642 to vote no.
In fact I might even put it higher up the list.
I think I can speak on behalf of the whole independence movement in saying that you will be able to drink whoever's piss you like in an indy Scotland, or indeed no piss at all.
Ok, I will score that one out.
Edit, does this cover Tennant's lager or not?
Tennent's. Tennent's. Tennent's.
Your spelling evokes unfortunate visions of Drs Who of yore ... as well as memories of young ladies in swimsuits on the side of the cans.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
My daughter is 13. Several of her friends identify as non-binary or as men.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
My daughter is 13. Several of her friends identify as non-binary or as men.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
Is it your opinion that you should need to do that? Are people allowed to get offended if you get their pronouns wrong?
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
One of the aspects of the Hong Kong situation that can be hard for outsiders to understand is that there are many in Hong Kong who support Beijing. Are there many people in Taiwan who would do the same?
A political crisis in Taiwan, with a significant fraction of the island supporting Beijing over independence, could provide the circumstances that would allow a successful invasion. But perhaps support for Beijing in Taiwan is low.
There's quite a significant proportion of Taiwanese who would support reunification. But I'm not sure they'd be that keen on getting invaded.
China would do better with honey and promises and "all China structures", than with invasion.
On the other hand, one takes about 25 years, while the other is quick.
There is indeed. This number diminishes massively when it becomes re-unification under the leadership of Xi and the CCP.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
My daughter is 13. Several of her friends identify as non-binary or as men.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
The idea of tomboys is very old. But now some think a girl who likes 'boy' things or a boy who likes 'girl' things isn't just a girl or boy with an interest, they're actually a boy or girl (respectively). As if personal interests rather than genetics matter more.
I think that's deeply unhealthy as the effect, perversely perhaps, is to reinforce gender stereotypes to the extent that people's genders are defined by their interests.
I'd write more on this but I have to go.
Just quickly add that, while I don't get it, I support the right of knowing adults to change, if they so wish, but it shouldn't just be a quick and easy self-ID, and I'm very wary of the way some of this is being presented to children.
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
One of the aspects of the Hong Kong situation that can be hard for outsiders to understand is that there are many in Hong Kong who support Beijing. Are there many people in Taiwan who would do the same?
A political crisis in Taiwan, with a significant fraction of the island supporting Beijing over independence, could provide the circumstances that would allow a successful invasion. But perhaps support for Beijing in Taiwan is low.
There's quite a significant proportion of Taiwanese who would support reunification. But I'm not sure they'd be that keen on getting invaded.
China would do better with honey and promises and "all China structures", than with invasion.
On the other hand, one takes about 25 years, while the other is quick.
I think there has been quite a lot of drift to the mainland, at least in the days BC*, particularly for young Taiwanese looking for career opportunities.
"A Japanese man has been arrested after reportedly dating more than 35 women at the same time.
Takashi Miyagawa, a part-time worker, is being investigated for allegedly defrauding dozens of women by pretending he was serious about each of their relationships and receiving hundreds of pounds worth of gifts from them.
Among the claims is that he gave each woman a different date for his birthday, ensuring a constant stream of gifts throughout the year."
I mean, they are right to feel aggrieved. But this very clearly is not a criminal matter.
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
My daughter is 13. Several of her friends identify as non-binary or as men.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
There's an argument for calling all teenagers "it"....
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
I agree.
Fundamentally I think this is an issue that should be left for the medical community to diagnose and discuss - and I don't particularly want to get involved either way.
It seems to me that one you have - after appropriate consultation and advice - taken positive steps along the transition pathway (ie medical intervention) then it becomes more of a discussion of whether you get access to biologically based rights
That's what happens now and what the government has reaffirmed by dumping all of the bullshit from the May era reforms. What the agitators want is to break the link between biological sex and sex based rights, which, again, circling back to my original point on Labour struggling to get back into power, is an impossible policy to sell to voters.
The Conservatives went along with it for far too long. It think Cameron-May basically followed a centre-left social policy for 7-8 years too long after it had overreached in the name of "modernisation".
It's why one of my principles is that you must test every sides of the debate on every issue - particularly the controversial ones or where there's a very strong or fashionable consensus. You must always put up a proposition and an opposition in a free society.
In what way was May centre left?
Cameron was modernising but none of it was bad, it was all necessary. May was authoritarian and drowning in Brexit i can't think of any modernisation she did.
She went along with the take that the UK is institutionally racist, didn't qualify anything in the trans debate and suggested the next James Bond could be a woman.
Providing he recuses himself from any specific discussion that shouldn’t be an issue.
In fact it would make him more valuable as an non executive at the foreign office
On Friday, we asked both the Foreign Office and Lord Lister to provide details of his declared interests during his time as a NED. A No10 spokesperson said Lord Lister had declared any "relevant" interests but did not confirm whether this included Eribi Holdings.
Asked directly whether Lord Lister had declared Eribi Holdings to the Foreign Office and the extent of Johnson’s knowledge of the project, the spokesperson said: “We don’t have anything more to add at this point.” https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1385968772545122305
I don’t know any of the specifics on timing and so forth. But if it should have been declared then it should have been declared, and, if it was not, then he is right to resign
"A Japanese man has been arrested after reportedly dating more than 35 women at the same time.
Takashi Miyagawa, a part-time worker, is being investigated for allegedly defrauding dozens of women by pretending he was serious about each of their relationships and receiving hundreds of pounds worth of gifts from them.
Among the claims is that he gave each woman a different date for his birthday, ensuring a constant stream of gifts throughout the year."
I mean, they are right to feel aggrieved. But this very clearly is not a criminal matter.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
This is a good framing. And to achieve a perfect balance I'd add to the final para -
As for the transphobe extremists, in their hatred of the very idea of a born man becoming a woman, and the way in which they conduct the debate, they have a freakish amount in common with the homophobes of yesteryear. Indeed many of them are the closet homophobes of thisayear.
It destroys the balance. You note that I criticised the actions of the “woke extremists” not them as individuals. But you seem to believe that those who oppose your position are bad in and of themselves
Somebody "putting themselves above everyone else and trying to scream down all dissent" sounds like a personal criticism to me. And I'm sure it's justified in some cases. And, yes, there are some nasty people on the transphobic fringe. Take a look at some of the stuff they come out with if you doubt that. It's a cesspit.
My position is not for uncontrolled self ID btw. I think there are genuine issues. eg refuges and elite sport.
Putting their *interests* not themselves above others. It’s a criticism of their actions not their being.
“Many of them are the closet homophobes of this year” is saying they are bad people
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
I agree.
Fundamentally I think this is an issue that should be left for the medical community to diagnose and discuss - and I don't particularly want to get involved either way.
It seems to me that one you have - after appropriate consultation and advice - taken positive steps along the transition pathway (ie medical intervention) then it becomes more of a discussion of whether you get access to biologically based rights
That's what happens now and what the government has reaffirmed by dumping all of the bullshit from the May era reforms. What the agitators want is to break the link between biological sex and sex based rights, which, again, circling back to my original point on Labour struggling to get back into power, is an impossible policy to sell to voters.
The Conservatives went along with it for far too long. It think Cameron-May basically followed a centre-left social policy for 7-8 years too long after it had overreached in the name of "modernisation".
It's why one of my principles is that you must test every sides of the debate on every issue - particularly the controversial ones or where there's a very strong or fashionable consensus. You must always put up a proposition and an opposition in a free society.
In what way was May centre left?
Cameron was modernising but none of it was bad, it was all necessary. May was authoritarian and drowning in Brexit i can't think of any modernisation she did.
She went along with the take that the UK is institutionally racist, didn't qualify anything in the trans debate and suggested the next James Bond could be a woman.
Absolutely, she was the worst of all worlds. Authoritarian but also completely captured by the woke.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
My daughter is 13. Several of her friends identify as non-binary or as men.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
I presume these are her friends who were born biologically female who are doing this?
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
My daughter is 13. Several of her friends identify as non-binary or as men.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
Is it your opinion that you should need to do that? Are people allowed to get offended if you get their pronouns wrong?
You shouldn't look to cause offence. Others shouldn't look to take it.
"A Japanese man has been arrested after reportedly dating more than 35 women at the same time.
Takashi Miyagawa, a part-time worker, is being investigated for allegedly defrauding dozens of women by pretending he was serious about each of their relationships and receiving hundreds of pounds worth of gifts from them.
Among the claims is that he gave each woman a different date for his birthday, ensuring a constant stream of gifts throughout the year."
I mean, they are right to feel aggrieved. But this very clearly is not a criminal matter.
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
One of the aspects of the Hong Kong situation that can be hard for outsiders to understand is that there are many in Hong Kong who support Beijing. Are there many people in Taiwan who would do the same?
A political crisis in Taiwan, with a significant fraction of the island supporting Beijing over independence, could provide the circumstances that would allow a successful invasion. But perhaps support for Beijing in Taiwan is low.
There's quite a significant proportion of Taiwanese who would support reunification. But I'm not sure they'd be that keen on getting invaded.
China would do better with honey and promises and "all China structures", than with invasion.
On the other hand, one takes about 25 years, while the other is quick.
I think put to a free vote in 1997 about 60% of Hong Kong would have voted for continued British administration but with greater self-rule (think Gibraltar) about 25% reunification with China and about 10-15% undecided or favouring other options, like total independence.
I don't know what those numbers would be like now.
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
One of the aspects of the Hong Kong situation that can be hard for outsiders to understand is that there are many in Hong Kong who support Beijing. Are there many people in Taiwan who would do the same?
A political crisis in Taiwan, with a significant fraction of the island supporting Beijing over independence, could provide the circumstances that would allow a successful invasion. But perhaps support for Beijing in Taiwan is low.
There's quite a significant proportion of Taiwanese who would support reunification. But I'm not sure they'd be that keen on getting invaded.
China would do better with honey and promises and "all China structures", than with invasion.
On the other hand, one takes about 25 years, while the other is quick.
I'm thinking, at least in part, of vague parallels with the Russian takeover of Crimea.
It's easy to imagine something that looks like d-day, but it could be a lot more confusing and messy - "There are no Chinese soldiers in Taipei."
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
Fox Jr used to push around my wife's old dolls* in a pram when he was a toddler. That was one of his favourite playthings, along with his plastic animals from the Early Learning Centre.
*black dolls that she had as a child in Zambia too.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
Well this is it. I could vote for Labour, if it had identical policies and ideas as the Tories...
Apple's new iMac is awesome: a technical marvel and a culmination of Apple's stunning engineering achievements over the past several years. It's also ugly as sin."
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
Fox Jr used to push around my wife's old dolls* in a pram when he was a toddler. That was one of his favourite playthings, along with his plastic animals from the Early Learning Centre.
*black dolls that she had as a child in Zambia too.
I love the way you felt you had to add that final sentence.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
This is a good framing. And to achieve a perfect balance I'd add to the final para -
As for the transphobe extremists, in their hatred of the very idea of a born man becoming a woman, and the way in which they conduct the debate, they have a freakish amount in common with the homophobes of yesteryear. Indeed many of them are the closet homophobes of thisayear.
It destroys the balance. You note that I criticised the actions of the “woke extremists” not them as individuals. But you seem to believe that those who oppose your position are bad in and of themselves
Somebody "putting themselves above everyone else and trying to scream down all dissent" sounds like a personal criticism to me. And I'm sure it's justified in some cases. And, yes, there are some nasty people on the transphobic fringe. Take a look at some of the stuff they come out with if you doubt that. It's a cesspit.
My position is not for uncontrolled self ID btw. I think there are genuine issues. eg refuges and elite sport.
Putting their *interests* not themselves above others. It’s a criticism of their actions not their being.
“Many of them are the closet homophobes of this year” is saying they are bad people
Bad people as evidenced by bad behaviour. As I say, if you took a look at some of their output you would agree. At least I jolly well hope you would.
I think Taiwan would actually be quite a tough nut to crack.
They have powerful modern armed forces, much of the hardware, supplied by the yanks. The coastline on the western side is mostly unsuitable for landing. There are well dug in defensive lines. Weather conditions mean that only April and October are suitable for an invasion.
You have to ask why China has not tried to invade Taiwan before.
One of the aspects of the Hong Kong situation that can be hard for outsiders to understand is that there are many in Hong Kong who support Beijing. Are there many people in Taiwan who would do the same?
A political crisis in Taiwan, with a significant fraction of the island supporting Beijing over independence, could provide the circumstances that would allow a successful invasion. But perhaps support for Beijing in Taiwan is low.
There's quite a significant proportion of Taiwanese who would support reunification. But I'm not sure they'd be that keen on getting invaded.
China would do better with honey and promises and "all China structures", than with invasion.
On the other hand, one takes about 25 years, while the other is quick.
I think put to a free vote in 1997 about 60% of Hong Kong would have voted for continued British administration but with greater self-rule (think Gibraltar) about 25% reunification with China and about 10-15% undecided or favouring other options, like total independence.
I don't know what those numbers would be like now.
My current Registrar was born in Hong Kong, her family there aren't bothered by Chinese rule, and thought the pro-democracy protesters a bunch of troublemakers bent on disorder. They apparently are quite proud of their Social Credit score, and see it as a way of encouraging respectful behaviour. A minority opinion perhaps, but there it is.
Downing St’s decision on Friday to pick a fight with Cummings — identifying him as an alleged leaker — has created an asymmetric fight between an ex-adviser with plenty of secrets to tell & little to lose and the holder of the highest office in the land.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
Fox Jr used to push around my wife's old dolls* in a pram when he was a toddler. That was one of his favourite playthings, along with his plastic animals from the Early Learning Centre.
*black dolls that she had as a child in Zambia too.
I love the way you felt you had to add that final sentence.
Just so you can get the picture. My wife was brought up in the Zambian copper belt. Toyshops were more limited there.
Downing St’s decision on Friday to pick a fight with Cummings — identifying him as an alleged leaker — has created an asymmetric fight between an ex-adviser with plenty of secrets to tell & little to lose and the holder of the highest office in the land.
Downing St’s decision on Friday to pick a fight with Cummings — identifying him as an alleged leaker — has created an asymmetric fight between an ex-adviser with plenty of secrets to tell & little to lose and the holder of the highest office in the land.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
I bet parents giving their daughters 'boy toys' is more common than giving their sons 'girl toys'.
I wonder if this is subliminal acceptance that the Patriarchy is a real thing?
Downing St’s decision on Friday to pick a fight with Cummings — identifying him as an alleged leaker — has created an asymmetric fight between an ex-adviser with plenty of secrets to tell & little to lose and the holder of the highest office in the land.
Cummings is an epic bullshitter. In betting speak, he’s an aftertimer. A complete narcissist.
Journos would be wise to be sceptical of his claims.
Personally, I don’t believe a word of what he says.
Of course one should, but this is Dom vs. Boris. And Johnson is also an epic bullshitter. In betting speak, he’s an aftertimer. A complete narcissist.
Except Dom takes himself and his project more seriously. I imagine the original deal was that BoJo had all the fun of Being PM as long as Dom got to run things.
And Dom, mad though he and his vision are, will have been organised enough to the receipts.
Downing St’s decision on Friday to pick a fight with Cummings — identifying him as an alleged leaker — has created an asymmetric fight between an ex-adviser with plenty of secrets to tell & little to lose and the holder of the highest office in the land.
Downing St’s decision on Friday to pick a fight with Cummings — identifying him as an alleged leaker — has created an asymmetric fight between an ex-adviser with plenty of secrets to tell & little to lose and the holder of the highest office in the land.
Now, I too wouldn't believe what Cummings said. But what he's written contains not just opinions but a recollection of events as 'facts'.
I can guarantee that if what Cummings has written is factually incorrect then the PM's office would have come out all guns blazing to shoot it down over the last 24 hours. As far as I know, they haven't. Which suggests.....?
Who to believe pathological liar Johnson or the equally odious Cummings !
If people really cared about all the lies then Johnson wouldn’t have got a large majority. This is largely a Westminster bubble story and I can’t see it having much of an impact unless Cummings has dirt to dish which is more resonant to the public backed up by evidence .
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
I bet parents giving their daughters 'boy toys' is more common than giving their sons 'girl toys'.
I wonder if this is subliminal acceptance that the Patriarchy is a real thing?
Similarly, I wonder how many on here have children's dolls of a different ethnicity to themselves/their partner.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
I bet parents giving their daughters 'boy toys' is more common than giving their sons 'girl toys'.
I wonder if this is subliminal acceptance that the Patriarchy is a real thing?
Similarly, I wonder how many on here have children's dolls of a different ethnicity to themselves/their partner.
We've got a set of Russian Dolls that my nieces love, does that count?
Breaking News: President Joe Biden said the U.S. views the killing of 1.5 million Armenians over 100 years ago as a genocide, raising tensions with Turkey, a NATO ally.
As Winston Churchill retorted to an American society matron in the 1930s who demanded to know "What he was going to do with his Indians?" - "Leastways madam, not what you did with yours....."
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
My daughter is 13. Several of her friends identify as non-binary or as men.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
‘They’ is more polite, and has the advantage of being common usage, as an alternate singular pronoun, for many centuries.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
I bet parents giving their daughters 'boy toys' is more common than giving their sons 'girl toys'.
I wonder if this is subliminal acceptance that the Patriarchy is a real thing?
Does Action Man [sic] count as a doll? The neighbour's son certainly thought mine were.
Which makes me wonder ... *checks* yes, still available, and updated with a SA80 and desert cams rather than DPM. Though still with a Bobby Moore oiption. And still with no Action Woman. Not that he would know what to do given his rather neuter nether regions.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
I bet parents giving their daughters 'boy toys' is more common than giving their sons 'girl toys'.
I wonder if this is subliminal acceptance that the Patriarchy is a real thing?
Well, that's bollocks because even if the former were true it would favour introducing girls to boys toys over the opposite and thus work against the power structure of the "Patriarchy".
Some people will look for gender, race and sexuality obsessions wherever they can. Perhaps you just need to get over your dogma, and let kids be kids.
Tiresome discussion. Labour will win again when it has fully detoxified from the Corbyn years, Boris has finally shot his load, and Labour has a telegenic female leader a la Rosena.
I want to agree with this, however, I'm not convinced that Labour have it within them to beat the Tories in England again like Blair could. The issue is that Labour members aren't anti flag, they're anti the people who like to wave flags. They hate the people, not the flag. Until this changes Labour won't win in England.
That plus all the other cultural stuff will keep anyone who values tradition voting for the blue team. Until people can trust Labour not to sell out the nation's values to Islington's chattering classes it's going to be very, very difficult for them to get a look in.
@Casino_Royale has been saying this for a few months and unfortunately no one in Labour is listening to him and everyone else who can see it.
It starts with repudiation of mermaids and other militant transgender "charities", celebrating our history rather than be embarrassed by it or as I hear Labour people tell me all the time "we should teach children the truth about the empire" and it needs to embrace the fact that conservative values which place importance on families, education and tradition are important to this nation. I grew up in an immigrant, working class family, we should be prime Labour territory, except we're not. Labour's values are out of alignment and I fear that Labour members see me as the enemy because I value tradition.
Thanks. I think they assume I have an agenda or want to throw them off the scent.
I think I've said before that, whilst I'm not a supporter, I respect (most of) the British centre-left as part of our political heritage and landscape and think it's important they play a competitive part in our democracy so we all have a safe, secure and stable society overall.
I'm not trying to trick them into a 1,000 year Tory Reich.
I have no issue with voting Labour in theory. I couldn't vote for Starmer's Labour party. He represents the worst aspects of it, wokery, anti-tradition, will sell out brexit, I simply don't trust him to defend traditional British values against the onslaught of thought police supporting lefties. He simply won't defend free speech from those who want us to stop talking about and thinking about "wrong" things such as women being actually female and not men who declare themselves to be women etc...
The thing is you have to see the other side, which I'm not sure you do.
You see no issue in describing a "man who has declared themselves to be a woman" as a man and thus are offended that some people would try and interfere with your free speech, I assume?
However if you see no problem in someone born biologically male declaring themselves female, your objection to that choice is seen as an equally hateful interference with someone's liberty to be themselves.
I'm not having a go at you here, I'm just trying to express the other side of the debate.
I hesitate to get involved in trans debates... lots of fire and fury
The issue is one of conflicting rights. At what point does someone who was biologically born a male become a female from the perspective of the law?
The “woke” side of the argument says “whenever they want”. The “bigoted” side says “never”. The answer is somewhere in between.
The issue is that some of those rights - refuges, etc - have real impact on other people. Fundamentally the “woke” extremists are putting their interests above everyone else in society and trying to scream down disagreement
Good post.
Small point, but AIUI, currently most of the teenagers seeking help were born female.
A big change from just a few years ago.
One of the interesting aspects of the debate is how many commentators are very focussed on one gender and mostly ignore the other. I’m not sure I have a point to make about it, I just find it interesting.
AIUI, the ratio of M to F transitioning cf F to M is approx 2:1.
Your figures are out of date;
Apologies, I’m tapping this out, quoting from a podcast:
“Used to be 85% male to female. In the last 15 years there’s been this exponential rise in a completely different cohort. Now it’s 85% female to male and they’re getting younger and younger”
Anecdote, but from an excellent source;
Marcus Evans is a Psychoanalyst in private practice and formerly served as Consultant Psychotherapist and Associate Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Service at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Yes, it is an issue particularly when considering life changing treatments like puberty blockers etc. Puberty is an emotional time, and one that girls generally face sooner. It is a time too of experimentation. There have always been tomboys, and effeminate boys, but that doesn't necessarily mean either Gay or Trans, and I do wonder whether they are now pushed by peers and society to identify as one or other of these.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
Sensible position.
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
I suppose that I have generally been gender conforming, though not universally. I only became interested in football when my son became keen. I wasn't bothered by sport until aged 35 for example.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
Yeah, the gendered toy thing is utter bollocks. I've given my daughter toy tractors, cars, trains and bricks, and baby dolls and a pushchair. We didn't "foist" anything on her.
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
I bet parents giving their daughters 'boy toys' is more common than giving their sons 'girl toys'.
I wonder if this is subliminal acceptance that the Patriarchy is a real thing?
Similarly, I wonder how many on here have children's dolls of a different ethnicity to themselves/their partner.
I thought so. Your comment was really about you signalling your superiority.
Comments
Didn't really happen with Brexit but we all got far too invested in that.
You had a flagpole and now don't. I'm simply curious as to how that came to pass. Why clam up about it?
I guess we need to see how the current wave pans out, but one early lesson (yet again) is that high rates of mask wearing don't seem to do much (anything?) to stop or even slow down big outbreaks. https://covidmap.umd.edu/map/index.html"
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1385952297889447939
Dumbest comment on here for quite some time.
I think peoples beliefs can be simultaneously wrong and also worthy of respect. I don’t know what democracy has got to do with it.
Silly, grandstanding judge, IMO.
As for the transphobe extremists, in their hatred of the very idea of a born man becoming a woman, and the way in which they conduct the debate, they have a freakish amount in common with the homophobes of yesteryear. Indeed many of them are the closet homophobes of thisayear.
I am quite happy to leave it in the hands of the child psychiatrists, though these are woefully underfunded, with very long waiting lists, not just for gender dysphoria either.
I cannot see myself ever voting Conservative again, not with their economic, social or foreign policies. Lib Dem or Green for me.
🚨 Huge story from @johnjohnstonmi 🚨 https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/exclusive-eddie-lister-was-a-director-of-firm-aiming-to-build-the-next-dubai-in-libya-while-serving-on-foreign-office-board
Some people think that Covid is a hoax.
Do we respect that view?
He joined after Boris Johnson drew criticism for describing a group of UK business people as "wonderful guys" who planned to turn Sirte into the “next Dubai”, adding the "only thing they've got to do is clear the dead bodies away and then they'll be there".
https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1385967974780129280
Cameron was modernising but none of it was bad, it was all necessary. May was authoritarian and drowning in Brexit i can't think of any modernisation she did.
In fact it would make him more valuable as an non executive at the foreign office
Asked directly whether Lord Lister had declared Eribi Holdings to the Foreign Office and the extent of Johnson’s knowledge of the project, the spokesperson said: “We don’t have anything more to add at this point.”
https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1385968772545122305
I think our society works best when we allow decent latitude for gender expression.
Personally, although I’m pretty gender conforming, I’ve always hated male gatekeepers who take the piss/try to police masculinity.
For me, that is a big chunk of the trans issue, right there.
Clamp down on the bullies and these kids lives will get a lot better. Pills/Surgery should be a last resort.
My position is not for uncontrolled self ID btw. I think there are genuine issues. eg refuges and elite sport.
Does anyone really think the Tokyo Olympics are a good idea this year?
China would do better with honey and promises and "all China structures", than with invasion.
On the other hand, one takes about 25 years, while the other is quick.
Your spelling evokes unfortunate visions of Drs Who of yore ... as well as memories of young ladies in swimsuits on the side of the cans.
Without somebody co-ordinating, near zero chance of them happening.
I've taken to using the pronoun "it" for everyone to avoid causing offence.
This number diminishes massively when it becomes re-unification under the leadership of Xi and the CCP.
I think that there is a problem with gender gate keepers policing both girls and boys. It starts very oung too, with gendered clothing and toys. We do need to be more accepting of personal eccentricity and individuality in these things. Once that was seen as a strong British cultural value, but now we are informed that there is only one way to be a boy, one way to be a girl and one way to be a patriot by the self appointed "anti-woke" police.
Let a thousand flowers bloom, and value the variety of the rich tapestry that is human existence. Tolerance, acceptance and respecting how others want to live their lives are not uniquely British, but they are a core part of what being British means to me.
The idea of tomboys is very old. But now some think a girl who likes 'boy' things or a boy who likes 'girl' things isn't just a girl or boy with an interest, they're actually a boy or girl (respectively). As if personal interests rather than genetics matter more.
I think that's deeply unhealthy as the effect, perversely perhaps, is to reinforce gender stereotypes to the extent that people's genders are defined by their interests.
I'd write more on this but I have to go.
Just quickly add that, while I don't get it, I support the right of knowing adults to change, if they so wish, but it shouldn't just be a quick and easy self-ID, and I'm very wary of the way some of this is being presented to children.
*Before Covid
Takashi Miyagawa, a part-time worker, is being investigated for allegedly defrauding dozens of women by pretending he was serious about each of their relationships and receiving hundreds of pounds worth of gifts from them.
Among the claims is that he gave each woman a different date for his birthday, ensuring a constant stream of gifts throughout the year."
I mean, they are right to feel aggrieved. But this very clearly is not a criminal matter.
https://news.yahoo.com/japan-man-arrested-dating-35-152935505.html
https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
Though there are fewer yellow areas on the map:
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map
I wonder if the increase in testing is producing enough false positives to give a permanent residual number of 'infected'.
But it seems not.
“Many of them are the closet homophobes of this year” is saying they are bad people
As you can imagine I'm not interested in the latter but whenever she wants to play it's the dolls and pushchair she wants to go for.
She's a very opinionated and assertive young lady who knows her own mind. And she's only two.
It really is quite simple.
I don't know what those numbers would be like now.
It's easy to imagine something that looks like d-day, but it could be a lot more confusing and messy - "There are no Chinese soldiers in Taipei."
*black dolls that she had as a child in Zambia too.
Is there any reason you persist in being such a deliberately obtuse and tedious dipstick, or can you just not help yourself?
Apple's new iMac is awesome: a technical marvel and a culmination of Apple's stunning engineering achievements over the past several years. It's also ugly as sin."
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/21/tech/apple-new-imac/index.html
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1385982418344189952?s=20
I haven't heard of any other credible explanations for false positives.
Journos would be wise to be sceptical of his claims.
Personally, I don’t believe a word of what he says.
👍
Very positive
I wonder if this is subliminal acceptance that the Patriarchy is a real thing?
Except Dom takes himself and his project more seriously. I imagine the original deal was that BoJo had all the fun of Being PM as long as Dom got to run things.
And Dom, mad though he and his vision are, will have been organised enough to the receipts.
It will quite possibly come to nothing, but...
Boswell: Life of Johnson
https://dominiccummings.com/
Now, I too wouldn't believe what Cummings said. But what he's written contains not just opinions but a recollection of events as 'facts'.
I can guarantee that if what Cummings has written is factually incorrect then the PM's office would have come out all guns blazing to shoot it down over the last 24 hours. As far as I know, they haven't. Which suggests.....?
If people really cared about all the lies then Johnson wouldn’t have got a large majority. This is largely a Westminster bubble story and I can’t see it having much of an impact unless Cummings has dirt to dish which is more resonant to the public backed up by evidence .
Even then Bozo seems to be made of teflon !
Breaking News: President Joe Biden said the U.S. views the killing of 1.5 million Armenians over 100 years ago as a genocide, raising tensions with Turkey, a NATO ally.
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1385993495807148032?s=20
As Winston Churchill retorted to an American society matron in the 1930s who demanded to know "What he was going to do with his Indians?" - "Leastways madam, not what you did with yours....."
Which makes me wonder ... *checks* yes, still available, and updated with a SA80 and desert cams rather than DPM. Though still with a Bobby Moore oiption. And still with no Action Woman. Not that he would know what to do given his rather neuter nether regions.
I want to pay tribute to the whole team involved in the vaccine roll-out across the UK.
Each jab administered helps to protect our loved ones and our country from this virus.
https://twitter.com/MattHancock/status/1385996265922650112?s=20
Some people will look for gender, race and sexuality obsessions wherever they can. Perhaps you just need to get over your dogma, and let kids be kids.