Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Keir Starmer now slumps to Corbyn levels in the latest Ipsos leader ratings – politicalbetting.com

1567911

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,301
    edited June 2021

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    edited June 2021

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Asked if he might have to raise wages in order to attract a chef, the Peterborough pub owner pauses for a moment, before admitting “it might come to that.”


    https://twitter.com/DuncanWeldon/status/1403024734799994887?s=20

    We need savage enforcement of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Labourers_1351
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,123
    Better over rate today, but still going to be six short at the scheduled close.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,113
    Taz said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women?
    That could have you labeled a "TERF" "Trans-exclusive-radical-feminist".

    The issue is some people think some spaces should be natal-sex exclusive - eg Women's refuges, women's prisons - only for people who were born women.

    Others see that as discriminatory against trans-sexual people. The issue has gained added controversy with the Gender Recognition act - where people can "self declare" their gender, and argue that a natal-male should have access to natal-female only spaces, however far (or not) they have gone down the transition road.

    Given the horrendously long waiting lists for people seeking to transition, I have some sympathy with their plight - what reduces that sympathy is the vitriol of some of their supporters.
    The vitriol of their opponents is a wonder to behold too.
    Have they tried to get people sacked too?
    Yes.
    And needing police protection, too.
    I was very pro trans until I read the cotton ceiling and that tempered it somewhat.

    I just wish the trans brigade could try to come to some sort of accommodation with feminists instead of just steamrollering them.

    It’s a toxic debate and that’s all I have to say.
    What do you mean by "pro trans"?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    If only someone here could confirm that for certain.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.
    You should drop that pledge. I think there's a fair chance you'd nail it.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    edited June 2021
    BBC News - EA hacked and source code stolen
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57431987

    "Source code is a version of computer software which is usually much easier to read and understand than the end version in a finished product, and could be used to reverse engineer parts of the product."

    Jesus Fucking Christ, the BBC appear to employ total morons. That is just wrong, wrong and wrong on so many levels.... can't people they employ even google properly anymore?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    kle4 said:

    DougSeal said:

    I need to stay off Twitter


    I bet the government are regretting ever having her anywhere near a SAGE committee.
    She can fuck off to North Korea and stay there.
    If someone does go to North Korea they may not have much of a choice about staying there forever.
    She’s not even an epidemiologist or anything. She’s a behavioural scientist. Quite why/how that qualifies her to make those sorts of pronouncements, who know?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,301

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    edited June 2021

    Julia Hartley-Brewer
    @JuliaHB1
    ·
    20m
    About bloody time!!! Only took them a year to do it...

    NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive



    At last!!! Wonder what has bought this bout of common sense on?

    Chortle.

    Excellent.

    I predict a sharp fall in “cases”!
    It will impact the hospitalisation figures not the cases figure. So people in hospital who happen to have Covid will be separated out from those who are there because of it. Resulting in a drop, of whatever size, in the hospitalisation figures. I wonder why?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,477

    COVID Summary

    It's hard to tell - might be that increases are slowing down. Though we've had pauses in the increases before.

    Hmmm

    The case by age with the five year groups is interesting.

    05-09 - flat or falling since the 29th
    10-14 - flat or falling since the 29th

    The rising ages for cases are very strongly correlated to vaccination rates - the younger (and hence less jabbed) the steeper the increase.

    image

    The pattern continues for admissions

    image

    Hmm…
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,360
    edited June 2021
    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    DougSeal said:

    Theresa May went proper anti-lockdown re international travel while I wasn't watching the Commons......
    ....."Last year in 2020 I went to Switzerland in Aug, S Korea in Sep, there was no vaccine, travel was possible; this year there is a vaccine, travel is not possible. I really do not understand the stance the govt is taking"......

    "We will not eradicate Covid-19 in the UK; variants will keep on coming – if the govt's position is that we cannot open up travel until there are no new variants elsewhere in the world then we will never be able to travel abroad ever again".....

    "The 3rd fact that the govt needs to state much more clearly is that sadly people will die from Covid here in the UK, as 10-20k do every year from flu, and we are falling behind the rest of Europe in our decisions to open up"

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1402992109137784835?s=20

    She falls into that rare category of better ex-PM than PM. A sort of British Jimmy Carter.
    She appears, like Jeremy Hunt and a few others, to be providing more acute Opposition than the Labour Party.
    That's what happens when the opposition is useless.
    Blaming Labour for Tory failings now, are we? Nice one.
    I think we can. Labour has been a hopeless opposition since the Tories first took power after Brown. It isn't as though there are not decent Labour MPs, it is just that most are languishing on the back benches still. The reason we have Boris Johnson with such a huge majority is Labour ineptitude. The reason we have Boris Johnson is Labour, because if we didn't have Corbyn we would probably not have Johnson. They are two cheeks of the populist arse.
    You know I don't buy that narrative, Nigel. I think there was a big POSITIVE vote at GE19 not only for Brexit but for Johnson too. It was the 'BBC' election and in that order. Brexit 1st, "Boris" 2nd, Corbyn 3rd. Although of course these were related. Brexit gave Johnson much of his appeal and cost Corbyn much of his.
    Corbyn mismanaged the response of the opposition to Brexit at every level, and pretty much everything else. He was hopeless. The people that supported putting such a dimwit in as LoTO are essentially useful idiots to the supporters of Johnson's populists.
    The Con landslide came from the Parliament vs People narrative. That narrative was enabled by Remainer hardcore resistance culminating in the Benn Act. A terrible error, but not primarily Corbyn's.
    I think that's right. Corbyn just didn't care that much about our place in the EU. But it is somewhat of a handicap, when you're leader of the opposition, not to care about the dominating issue of the day.
    I think he did care. he supported leave, and the UK managed with his strange sort of help to get there. His fans of course, mostly Remainers, were/are so blind and immature that they seemed to have no idea of his actual political record on the subject.

    It's basic: it is hard to turn the UK into Venezuela/Cuba/Gaza when constrained by the ECJ, the ECB, FoM and the rules of capitalism.

    Tony Benn was always clear on these matters.



  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    COVID Summary

    It's hard to tell - might be that increases are slowing down. Though we've had pauses in the increases before.

    Hmmm

    The case by age with the five year groups is interesting.

    05-09 - flat or falling since the 29th
    10-14 - flat or falling since the 29th

    The rising ages for cases are very strongly correlated to vaccination rates - the younger (and hence less jabbed) the steeper the increase.

    image

    The pattern continues for admissions

    image

    Hmm…
    Forgot to mention - the case data is more lagged for the 5 year increments, so it only goes up to the 5th
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,123
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Could you have not posted a link and warning to that?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    I think Theresa May would have a very different view on Covid restrictions if she were in office as either Home Secretary or PM, IMHO.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,301

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Could you have not posted a link and warning to that?
    Sharing is caring.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,257

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Could you have not posted a link and warning to that?
    YOU REPOSTED IT.
    Some of us were thinking about dinner.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    BBC News - EA hacked and source code stolen
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57431987

    "Source code is a version of computer software which is usually much easier to read and understand than the end version in a finished product, and could be used to reverse engineer parts of the product."

    Jesus Fucking Christ, the BBC appear to employ total morons. That is just wrong, wrong and wrong on so many levels.... can't people they employ even google properly anymore?

    {Gell-Mann Amnesia enters the chat}
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,893
    New Zealand are going to get all 90 overs in in the day. Sure I heard all sorts last test about how it couldn't be done and so on
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Arg! I don't think anyone here deserved that!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    A pre 2000s feminist.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Chris said:

    A usually sober analyst of these numbers thinks 21st is off now:

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    1h
    By Specimen Date, June 7th is already 69% up, & room for more to be added. Can't see Step 4 proceeding on time, tbh. There'd need to have been at least a week of R falling. Ain't gonna happen now.

    The point is that at a rate of growth of 69%, even if reopening didn't increase it, by late July we would breach the January peak in the rate of hospital admissions, even allowing for the fact that a smaller percentage of positive tests are resulting in hospitalisation.
    Based on the challengeable assumption that there is no ceiling in case numbers...
  • COVID Summary

    It's hard to tell - might be that increases are slowing down. Though we've had pauses in the increases before.

    Hmmm

    The case by age with the five year groups is interesting.

    05-09 - flat or falling since the 29th
    10-14 - flat or falling since the 29th

    The rising ages for cases are very strongly correlated to vaccination rates - the younger (and hence less jabbed) the steeper the increase.

    image

    The pattern continues for admissions

    image

    Hmm…
    Forgot to mention - the case data is more lagged for the 5 year increments, so it only goes up to the 5th
    Impact of half term holidays 31 May to 4 June?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Could you have not posted a link and warning to that?
    Sharing is caring.
    You have violated the Visual Morality Statue.

    You are sentenced to be confined for 99 years to a single room contains Piers Morgan, Piers Corbyn and a demented lawyer with a baseball bat. The only food will be pineapple pizza. The only entertainment will be access to Conservative Home and Radiohead playing on continuous loop 24/7. May God have mercy on your soul.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,477
    Pulpstar said:

    New Zealand are going to get all 90 overs in in the day. Sure I heard all sorts last test about how it couldn't be done and so on

    Heard a great idea the other day to stop low over rates: take a man off the field for every five short. That would rapidly learn em.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    algarkirk said:

    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    DougSeal said:

    Theresa May went proper anti-lockdown re international travel while I wasn't watching the Commons......
    ....."Last year in 2020 I went to Switzerland in Aug, S Korea in Sep, there was no vaccine, travel was possible; this year there is a vaccine, travel is not possible. I really do not understand the stance the govt is taking"......

    "We will not eradicate Covid-19 in the UK; variants will keep on coming – if the govt's position is that we cannot open up travel until there are no new variants elsewhere in the world then we will never be able to travel abroad ever again".....

    "The 3rd fact that the govt needs to state much more clearly is that sadly people will die from Covid here in the UK, as 10-20k do every year from flu, and we are falling behind the rest of Europe in our decisions to open up"

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1402992109137784835?s=20

    She falls into that rare category of better ex-PM than PM. A sort of British Jimmy Carter.
    She appears, like Jeremy Hunt and a few others, to be providing more acute Opposition than the Labour Party.
    That's what happens when the opposition is useless.
    Blaming Labour for Tory failings now, are we? Nice one.
    I think we can. Labour has been a hopeless opposition since the Tories first took power after Brown. It isn't as though there are not decent Labour MPs, it is just that most are languishing on the back benches still. The reason we have Boris Johnson with such a huge majority is Labour ineptitude. The reason we have Boris Johnson is Labour, because if we didn't have Corbyn we would probably not have Johnson. They are two cheeks of the populist arse.
    You know I don't buy that narrative, Nigel. I think there was a big POSITIVE vote at GE19 not only for Brexit but for Johnson too. It was the 'BBC' election and in that order. Brexit 1st, "Boris" 2nd, Corbyn 3rd. Although of course these were related. Brexit gave Johnson much of his appeal and cost Corbyn much of his.
    Corbyn mismanaged the response of the opposition to Brexit at every level, and pretty much everything else. He was hopeless. The people that supported putting such a dimwit in as LoTO are essentially useful idiots to the supporters of Johnson's populists.
    The Con landslide came from the Parliament vs People narrative. That narrative was enabled by Remainer hardcore resistance culminating in the Benn Act. A terrible error, but not primarily Corbyn's.
    I think that's right. Corbyn just didn't care that much about our place in the EU. But it is somewhat of a handicap, when you're leader of the opposition, not to care about the dominating issue of the day.
    I think he did care. he supported leave, and the UK managed with his strange sort of help to get there. His fans of course, mostly Remainers, were/are so blind and immature that they seemed to have no idea of his actual political record on the subject.

    It's basic: it is hard to turn the UK into Venezuela/Cuba/Gaza when constrained by the ECJ, the ECB, FoM and the rules of capitalism.

    Tony Benn was always clear on these matters.



    And when it is relatively easy to escape the country...
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    edited June 2021

    BBC News - EA hacked and source code stolen
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57431987

    "Source code is a version of computer software which is usually much easier to read and understand than the end version in a finished product, and could be used to reverse engineer parts of the product."

    Jesus Fucking Christ, the BBC appear to employ total morons. That is just wrong, wrong and wrong on so many levels.... can't people they employ even google properly anymore?

    {Gell-Mann Amnesia enters the chat}
    I don't even know where you would get such a definition...if you google it, you get plenty of concise clear explanations for non-nerds. Its more garbled than a Big Dom SubStack.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    There is more to it, yes. And it's actually a very interesting issue. The complexities are intellectually stimulating, legally and philosophically. Although it's niche it has potentially wide implications. That's one of the reasons it generates so much heat on both sides. It's also a great one for flushing out mindless dogma on the one hand and innate bigotry (sometimes crass, sometimes urbanely expressed) on the other. For me, you have to take a dive into this topic (but not necessarily take a clear position on it) if you want to keep abreast of the culture war element of our politics. And that element, like it or not, is important and influential. So I think you're selling yourself short here.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,301
    kle4 said:

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Arg! I don't think anyone here deserved that!
    I've had a long day at work today, it was my way of sharing the fun.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    COVID Summary

    It's hard to tell - might be that increases are slowing down. Though we've had pauses in the increases before.

    Hmmm

    The case by age with the five year groups is interesting.

    05-09 - flat or falling since the 29th
    10-14 - flat or falling since the 29th

    The rising ages for cases are very strongly correlated to vaccination rates - the younger (and hence less jabbed) the steeper the increase.

    image

    The pattern continues for admissions

    image

    Hmm…
    Forgot to mention - the case data is more lagged for the 5 year increments, so it only goes up to the 5th
    Impact of half term holidays 31 May to 4 June?
    Yes indeed. The interesting bit, to me, is how all the older groups "fan out" like that, with the slope apparently dependent on the vaccination level.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637
    In today's Telegraph, the NI Protocol was forced on the UK by "the imperialist bullies" of the EU & "signed under duress" to stave off the "economic damage" of "a No Deal Brexit". Very odd. I thought "we held all the cards" & would "prosper mightily" with No Deal
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,177

    Pulpstar said:

    New Zealand are going to get all 90 overs in in the day. Sure I heard all sorts last test about how it couldn't be done and so on

    Heard a great idea the other day to stop low over rates: take a man off the field for every five short. That would rapidly learn em.
    Boycott suggested a thousand runs per over, on the basis that no one would ever risk it, so it would not be needed.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    Are they basically cuddly anarchists?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    algarkirk said:

    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    DougSeal said:

    Theresa May went proper anti-lockdown re international travel while I wasn't watching the Commons......
    ....."Last year in 2020 I went to Switzerland in Aug, S Korea in Sep, there was no vaccine, travel was possible; this year there is a vaccine, travel is not possible. I really do not understand the stance the govt is taking"......

    "We will not eradicate Covid-19 in the UK; variants will keep on coming – if the govt's position is that we cannot open up travel until there are no new variants elsewhere in the world then we will never be able to travel abroad ever again".....

    "The 3rd fact that the govt needs to state much more clearly is that sadly people will die from Covid here in the UK, as 10-20k do every year from flu, and we are falling behind the rest of Europe in our decisions to open up"

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1402992109137784835?s=20

    She falls into that rare category of better ex-PM than PM. A sort of British Jimmy Carter.
    She appears, like Jeremy Hunt and a few others, to be providing more acute Opposition than the Labour Party.
    That's what happens when the opposition is useless.
    Blaming Labour for Tory failings now, are we? Nice one.
    I think we can. Labour has been a hopeless opposition since the Tories first took power after Brown. It isn't as though there are not decent Labour MPs, it is just that most are languishing on the back benches still. The reason we have Boris Johnson with such a huge majority is Labour ineptitude. The reason we have Boris Johnson is Labour, because if we didn't have Corbyn we would probably not have Johnson. They are two cheeks of the populist arse.
    You know I don't buy that narrative, Nigel. I think there was a big POSITIVE vote at GE19 not only for Brexit but for Johnson too. It was the 'BBC' election and in that order. Brexit 1st, "Boris" 2nd, Corbyn 3rd. Although of course these were related. Brexit gave Johnson much of his appeal and cost Corbyn much of his.
    Corbyn mismanaged the response of the opposition to Brexit at every level, and pretty much everything else. He was hopeless. The people that supported putting such a dimwit in as LoTO are essentially useful idiots to the supporters of Johnson's populists.
    The Con landslide came from the Parliament vs People narrative. That narrative was enabled by Remainer hardcore resistance culminating in the Benn Act. A terrible error, but not primarily Corbyn's.
    I think that's right. Corbyn just didn't care that much about our place in the EU. But it is somewhat of a handicap, when you're leader of the opposition, not to care about the dominating issue of the day.
    I think he did care. he supported leave, and the UK managed with his strange sort of help to get there. His fans of course, mostly Remainers, were/are so blind and immature that they seemed to have no idea of his actual political record on the subject.

    It's basic: it is hard to turn the UK into Venezuela/Cuba/Gaza when constrained by the ECJ, the ECB, FoM and the rules of capitalism.

    Tony Benn was always clear on these matters.



    Quite - and Leave was part and parcel of the 1980s policies that he (Corbyn) sees as the One True Way. Leaving the EEC and NATO was always a package with those types.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320
    edited June 2021
    “ PM says dealing with Biden is like a ‘breath of fresh air’ and says instead of dispute over NI there was ‘complete harmony’ over need to get it sorted out”

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1403036969966485509

    image
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,749
    Breaking news

    One of the press hotels in Cornwall have a covid outbreak
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457

    Breaking news

    One of the press hotels in Cornwall have a covid outbreak

    Head in hands....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    Are they basically cuddly anarchists?
    Depends if you consider Yanis Varoufakis cuddly or not.
  • JBriskin3JBriskin3 Posts: 1,254
    Even the PM of the USA is dropping hints that we need a new PB thread-

    https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1403037362670743559?s=20
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    So where would you "stick" a transgender woman who requires prison time then?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    “ PM says dealing with Biden is like a ‘breath of fresh air’ and says instead of dispute over NI there was ‘complete harmony’ over need to get it sorted out”

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1403036969966485509

    image

    Plenty of more progressive democrats seem to really dislike Biden, palling it up with Boris-Trump will only drive them madder.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,123
    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    So where would you "stick" a transgender woman who requires prison time then?
    Does the offender have a penis?
    Yes- men's prison
    No - women's prison
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    edited June 2021
    Looking at that photo I have a confession to make - I shook someone's hand last week. It was a pavlovian reaction, they extended their hand toward me and my body took over.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    Breaking news

    One of the press hotels in Cornwall have a covid outbreak

    Head in hands....
    Probably planted by MI5
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    Is their motto "down with that sort of thing...careful now"?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Boris really knows how to do a photo op, doesn't he?
  • JBriskin3JBriskin3 Posts: 1,254
    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    So where would you "stick" a transgender woman who requires prison time then?
    Does the offender have a penis?
    Yes- men's prison
    No - women's prison
    Brutal analysis for the woke brigade. But probably an illegal opinion. Neee Naw Neee Naw

  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,662
    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    So where would you "stick" a transgender woman who requires prison time then?
    Does the offender have a penis?
    Yes- men's prison
    No - women's prison
    Both?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947

    In today's Telegraph, the NI Protocol was forced on the UK by "the imperialist bullies" of the EU & "signed under duress" to stave off the "economic damage" of "a No Deal Brexit". Very odd. I thought "we held all the cards" & would "prosper mightily" with No Deal

    Yes, I thought it was us not them who got a result through playing hardball. I thought it was 'No Deal here we come' unless they 'caved in'. Some of the numptier Leavers still think that happened, would you believe. I know!
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,317

    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.

    Agree - however, there is also a lot of naivety revealed in these exchanges, people interpreting the woke as a espousing a slightly more radical version of their own liberal worldview and thus being essentially harmless and youthfully eccentric. This is quite a comfortable position that can be held for a long time until reality intervenes.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    That's superb.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Johnson does look like he’s lost some weight and found a suit to fit
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    There is more to it, yes. And it's actually a very interesting issue. The complexities are intellectually stimulating, legally and philosophically. Although it's niche it has potentially wide implications. That's one of the reasons it generates so much heat on both sides. It's also a great one for flushing out mindless dogma on the one hand and innate bigotry (sometimes crass, sometimes urbanely expressed) on the other. For me, you have to take a dive into this topic (but not necessarily take a clear position on it) if you want to keep abreast of the culture war element of our politics. And that element, like it or not, is important and influential. So I think you're selling yourself short here.
    There isn't a "right" or "wrong".

    It's about conflicting rights and where society wants to draw the line.

    You can't prove it one way or the other.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,677
    darkage said:

    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.

    Agree - however, there is also a lot of naivety revealed in these exchanges, people interpreting the woke as a espousing a slightly more radical version of their own liberal worldview and thus being essentially harmless and youthfully eccentric. This is quite a comfortable position that can be held for a long time until reality intervenes.

    Either that or a lot of PB-ers are way less intelligent than we thought

    The stupidity on this subject is astounding
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    Vaccination rates frankly a bit disappointing recently. Total daily doses hovering about half a million. Even "bumper" weeks at the end of May didn't get the seven-day average above 600,000 seen in March.

    https://twitter.com/Smyth_Chris/status/1403041060817977350?s=20
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,283

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Could you have not posted a link and warning to that?
    I have often wondered how Farage could make himself look even more of a twat. Now I know. Someone should tell him to go back to the faux upper-class-twit-of-the-year look.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Breaking news

    One of the press hotels in Cornwall have a covid outbreak

    Head in hands....
    Lock em up
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.

    Agree - however, there is also a lot of naivety revealed in these exchanges, people interpreting the woke as a espousing a slightly more radical version of their own liberal worldview and thus being essentially harmless and youthfully eccentric. This is quite a comfortable position that can be held for a long time until reality intervenes.

    Either that or a lot of PB-ers are way less intelligent than we thought

    The stupidity on this subject is astounding
    No, they see it's you and me posting it and then instantly dismiss it.

    They need to hear it from someone they know and trust who's on their own side.

    If there's one thing I've learned from recent years it's that people decide on their beliefs first and then filter out the evidence that supports them. Not the other way round.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,301
    edited June 2021
    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    My favourite political party name is the Association of Combatant Clerics of Iran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Combatant_Clerics

    Not to be confused with the Combatant Clergy Association, which isn't a political party in the strictest sense but has considerable political influence.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combatant_Clergy_Association
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320
    Biden in St. Ives in Cornwall, England:

    "It's gorgeous. I don't want to go home."


    https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1403034906108776448?s=21
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Young people are really Woke, aren't they?

    I wonder how many of these boys are achingly right-on with their pronouns, and yet they do this - which I never did:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-57411363
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637
    kinabalu said:

    In today's Telegraph, the NI Protocol was forced on the UK by "the imperialist bullies" of the EU & "signed under duress" to stave off the "economic damage" of "a No Deal Brexit". Very odd. I thought "we held all the cards" & would "prosper mightily" with No Deal

    Yes, I thought it was us not them who got a result through playing hardball. I thought it was 'No Deal here we come' unless they 'caved in'. Some of the numptier Leavers still think that happened, would you believe. I know!
    Wheres Phil when you need him!!
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,239
    Taz said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women?
    That could have you labeled a "TERF" "Trans-exclusive-radical-feminist".

    The issue is some people think some spaces should be natal-sex exclusive - eg Women's refuges, women's prisons - only for people who were born women.

    Others see that as discriminatory against trans-sexual people. The issue has gained added controversy with the Gender Recognition act - where people can "self declare" their gender, and argue that a natal-male should have access to natal-female only spaces, however far (or not) they have gone down the transition road.

    Given the horrendously long waiting lists for people seeking to transition, I have some sympathy with their plight - what reduces that sympathy is the vitriol of some of their supporters.
    The vitriol of their opponents is a wonder to behold too.
    Have they tried to get people sacked too?
    Yes.
    And needing police protection, too.
    I was very pro trans until I read the cotton ceiling and that tempered it somewhat.

    I just wish the trans brigade could try to come to some sort of accommodation with feminists instead of just steamrollering them.

    It’s a toxic debate and that’s all I have to say.
    It’s characteristic of these kind of culture war debates that each side brings up the absolute worst / most extreme positions taken by a minority of the other side & uses it as a stick to frighten their own side into taking the more extreme versions of their own in turn.

    Thus the wheels of the culture war turn.
  • JBriskin3JBriskin3 Posts: 1,254

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.

    Agree - however, there is also a lot of naivety revealed in these exchanges, people interpreting the woke as a espousing a slightly more radical version of their own liberal worldview and thus being essentially harmless and youthfully eccentric. This is quite a comfortable position that can be held for a long time until reality intervenes.

    Either that or a lot of PB-ers are way less intelligent than we thought

    The stupidity on this subject is astounding
    No, they see it's you and me posting it and then instantly dismiss it.

    They need to hear it from someone they know and trust who's on their own side.

    If there's one thing I've learned from recent years it's that people decide on their beliefs first and then filter out the evidence that supports them. Not the other way round.
    The fact that anti-woke opinions are now literally illegal may also be a problem here.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    edited June 2021

    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    My favourite political party name is the Association of Combatant Clerics of Iran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Combatant_Clerics

    Not to be confused with the Combatant Clergy Association, which isn't a political party in the strictest sense but has considerable political influence.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combatant_Clergy_Association
    Always makes me chuckle there is the Communist Party of Canada and their sworn enemies the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Canada....

    Who is a common or garden commie supposed to vote for....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    Biden in St. Ives in Cornwall, England:

    "It's gorgeous. I don't want to go home."


    https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1403034906108776448?s=21

    He's a smooth operator. And he comes across as normal (minus the handsy stuff). Probably why he won in the Democrat field.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,677

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.

    Agree - however, there is also a lot of naivety revealed in these exchanges, people interpreting the woke as a espousing a slightly more radical version of their own liberal worldview and thus being essentially harmless and youthfully eccentric. This is quite a comfortable position that can be held for a long time until reality intervenes.

    Either that or a lot of PB-ers are way less intelligent than we thought

    The stupidity on this subject is astounding
    No, they see it's you and me posting it and then instantly dismiss it.

    They need to hear it from someone they know and trust who's on their own side.

    If there's one thing I've learned from recent years it's that people decide on their beliefs first and then filter out the evidence that supports them. Not the other way round.
    But, I'm right about everything! That's nuts

    I was right about Covid, I'm right about Lab Leak, I'm right about Woke and I am right to be agitated about "aliens", because something is happening, even if it ain't ET

    Tsk

    This is an interesting example below. I don't like to pick on Gardenwalker coz he's actually one of the smarter commenters on here, but this is illustrative

    I said the Anglo-Saxons were cancelled. His reply:

    "It’s not clear what this means, is it supposed to be woke?

    Perhaps historians have realised that there were few Angles and no Saxons, so the name is simply inaccurate, rather than being (as you seem to suggest) a label so hideously drenched in whiteness it can no longer be voiced without oral disinfectant."

    In the time it took him to write that he could have gone on Google, typed just "Anglo Saxon" plus "word" or "term" or "problematic" and he'd have found a hundred hits saying Yes, it's been cancelled by Woke because *race*. And he'd have had time left over for a sobering coffee

    Yet he didn't do this. He made a little sneering joke, and left it at that. If I hadn't nobly taken the time to educate him, he'd still be ignorant. And it's this wilful ignorance, this blinkered refusal to see, which irritates

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637
    Glamorgan 2.52 £53.89 £81.91

    WI over 100 2.00 £43.61 £43.61

    Yo win some you lose some
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    JBriskin3 said:

    Even the PM of the USA is dropping hints that we need a new PB thread-

    https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1403037362670743559?s=20

    "PM of the USA"?
  • JBriskin3JBriskin3 Posts: 1,254

    JBriskin3 said:

    Even the PM of the USA is dropping hints that we need a new PB thread-

    https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1403037362670743559?s=20

    "PM of the USA"?
    Yeah - I said PM instead of President for the shits and giggles. I'm a naughty boy.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    My favourite political party name is the Association of Combatant Clerics of Iran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Combatant_Clerics

    Not to be confused with the Combatant Clergy Association, which isn't a political party in the strictest sense but has considerable political influence.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combatant_Clergy_Association
    Always makes me chuckle there is the Communist Party of Canada and their sworn enemies the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Canada....

    Who is a common or garden commie supposed to vote for....
    That sort of thing is very common of course. I dont have heart to look up all the different ones here now. Though Left Unity had an improbable name.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,994
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.

    Agree - however, there is also a lot of naivety revealed in these exchanges, people interpreting the woke as a espousing a slightly more radical version of their own liberal worldview and thus being essentially harmless and youthfully eccentric. This is quite a comfortable position that can be held for a long time until reality intervenes.

    Either that or a lot of PB-ers are way less intelligent than we thought

    The stupidity on this subject is astounding
    No, they see it's you and me posting it and then instantly dismiss it.

    They need to hear it from someone they know and trust who's on their own side.

    If there's one thing I've learned from recent years it's that people decide on their beliefs first and then filter out the evidence that supports them. Not the other way round.
    But, I'm right about everything! That's nuts

    I was right about Covid, I'm right about Lab Leak, I'm right about Woke and I am right to be agitated about "aliens", because something is happening, even if it ain't ET

    Tsk

    This is an interesting example below. I don't like to pick on Gardenwalker coz he's actually one of the smarter commenters on here, but this is illustrative

    I said the Anglo-Saxons were cancelled. His reply:

    "It’s not clear what this means, is it supposed to be woke?

    Perhaps historians have realised that there were few Angles and no Saxons, so the name is simply inaccurate, rather than being (as you seem to suggest) a label so hideously drenched in whiteness it can no longer be voiced without oral disinfectant."

    In the time it took him to write that he could have gone on Google, typed just "Anglo Saxon" plus "word" or "term" or "problematic" and he'd have found a hundred hits saying Yes, it's been cancelled by Woke because *race*. And he'd have had time left over for a sobering coffee

    Yet he didn't do this. He made a little sneering joke, and left it at that. If I hadn't nobly taken the time to educate him, he'd still be ignorant. And it's this wilful ignorance, this blinkered refusal to see, which irritates

    Exactly.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549

    kle4 said:

    I've just discovered that there is a political party in Greece called the 'European Realistic Disobedience Front' - that's hilarious, better than the blandly named centrist or moderate parties out there. Just something about promising disobedience, but that you are realistic about it, that tickles me.

    My favourite political party name is the Association of Combatant Clerics of Iran.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Combatant_Clerics

    Not to be confused with the Combatant Clergy Association, which isn't a political party in the strictest sense but has considerable political influence.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combatant_Clergy_Association
    Always makes me chuckle there is the Communist Party of Canada and their sworn enemies the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party of Canada....

    Who is a common or garden commie supposed to vote for....
    Leftist sectarianism has been around forever. Yawn.

    The really innovative Canuck poltical movement, is (or was) the Edible Ballot Society, group of anarchists urging their fellow Great White Northers to eat their election ballots as alternative to voting.

    At one point they even issued a cook book!
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,177
    stodge said:

    alex_ said:

    Johnson does look like he’s lost some weight and found a suit to fit

    Mrs Stodge's reaction on seeing the picture of the Johnsons and the Bidens on the beach at Carbis Bay:

    "What idiot wears a suit on a beach? He looks ridiculous!"

    I then pointed out I had stood on that very beach in the past

    "Did you wear a suit?", queried Mrs Stodge.

    "No, but I wasn't meeting the President of the United States either" was all I could come up with on the spur of the moment.
    I played rugby for my university, and we all wore blazers etc on the way to games. I will never forget a gormless fresher guffawing to his gormless mates about ‘what dickhead wears a blazer to university’. He was very fresh and had no idea I was a front row in the university 1st team off to represent the university...
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,662
    alex_ said:

    Johnson does look like he’s lost some weight and found a suit to fit

    P
    JBriskin3 said:

    Leon said:

    darkage said:

    It's clear from reading some of the comments on here that many will simply dismiss any Woke insanity until such time as it actually impinges on their own lives. Which, unchecked, it will eventually.

    The article about Anglo-Saxons is instructive because it's the history that is being rewritten to fit the Wokeness, not the other way round, and that way madness lies.

    Agree - however, there is also a lot of naivety revealed in these exchanges, people interpreting the woke as a espousing a slightly more radical version of their own liberal worldview and thus being essentially harmless and youthfully eccentric. This is quite a comfortable position that can be held for a long time until reality intervenes.

    Either that or a lot of PB-ers are way less intelligent than we thought

    The stupidity on this subject is astounding
    No, they see it's you and me posting it and then instantly dismiss it.

    They need to hear it from someone they know and trust who's on their own side.

    If there's one thing I've learned from recent years it's that people decide on their beliefs first and then filter out the evidence that supports them. Not the other way round.
    The fact that anti-woke opinions are now literally illegal may also be a problem here.
    Which is why it needs to be fought. Woke think is madness.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    U.K. readout on Biden / Johnson NI discussion:

    https://twitter.com/peston/status/1403042246119804931?s=21
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,549
    Phil said:

    Taz said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women?
    That could have you labeled a "TERF" "Trans-exclusive-radical-feminist".

    The issue is some people think some spaces should be natal-sex exclusive - eg Women's refuges, women's prisons - only for people who were born women.

    Others see that as discriminatory against trans-sexual people. The issue has gained added controversy with the Gender Recognition act - where people can "self declare" their gender, and argue that a natal-male should have access to natal-female only spaces, however far (or not) they have gone down the transition road.

    Given the horrendously long waiting lists for people seeking to transition, I have some sympathy with their plight - what reduces that sympathy is the vitriol of some of their supporters.
    The vitriol of their opponents is a wonder to behold too.
    Have they tried to get people sacked too?
    Yes.
    And needing police protection, too.
    I was very pro trans until I read the cotton ceiling and that tempered it somewhat.

    I just wish the trans brigade could try to come to some sort of accommodation with feminists instead of just steamrollering them.

    It’s a toxic debate and that’s all I have to say.
    It’s characteristic of these kind of culture war debates that each side brings up the absolute worst / most extreme positions taken by a minority of the other side & uses it as a stick to frighten their own side into taking the more extreme versions of their own in turn.

    Thus the wheels of the culture war turn.
    And a good time is had by all!
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,360
    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    There is more to it, yes. And it's actually a very interesting issue. The complexities are intellectually stimulating, legally and philosophically. Although it's niche it has potentially wide implications. That's one of the reasons it generates so much heat on both sides. It's also a great one for flushing out mindless dogma on the one hand and innate bigotry (sometimes crass, sometimes urbanely expressed) on the other. For me, you have to take a dive into this topic (but not necessarily take a clear position on it) if you want to keep abreast of the culture war element of our politics. And that element, like it or not, is important and influential. So I think you're selling yourself short here.
    Thanks. Interesting. The issue of culture war itself is problematic. Like almost all the UK public I am a centrist. This means that on more or less all contestable subjects there is a variety of respected positions. Intelligent discussion about them is the stuff of our lives. Politics, media, religion, a liberal society, philosophy, academia (and PB) exist because of all this and to enhance it.

    More and more people act as if there is only one true position on matters about which this is obvious untrue. The Brexit debate was perhaps a tipping point in such things, where obvious moderates, by the many million, were cast as extremists.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141

    One thing you can be certain about subbing to Big Doms Substack, you certainly get value for money when it comes to words / £.

    'Big Doms Substack' sounds like a genre on Pornhub.
    Imagine him doing Cameo....
    His fellow Brexiteer Nigel Farage has an Onlyfans.


    Could you have not posted a link and warning to that?
    Alan Partridge.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    kinabalu said:

    In today's Telegraph, the NI Protocol was forced on the UK by "the imperialist bullies" of the EU & "signed under duress" to stave off the "economic damage" of "a No Deal Brexit". Very odd. I thought "we held all the cards" & would "prosper mightily" with No Deal

    Yes, I thought it was us not them who got a result through playing hardball. I thought it was 'No Deal here we come' unless they 'caved in'. Some of the numptier Leavers still think that happened, would you believe. I know!
    Wheres Phil when you need him!!
    We discussed this earlier in the day.

    Yes we did hold the cards and we got a great deal by playing hard ball extricating Great Britain from the EU's grasp, even if we needed to concede the Protocol because May had already screwed the pooch so much in the negotiations.

    Now having got what we want from playing hardball for Great Britain, we're now playing hardball to get what we want with Northern Ireland - and its going to work there too. Because again, we hold the cards.

    Barnier spent years negotiating to entrap us within the EU's regulatory orbit and all he got to show for it is the Protocol and the Protocol is dying before us. Good riddance, rest in peace, no flowers.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    Phil said:

    Taz said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women?
    That could have you labeled a "TERF" "Trans-exclusive-radical-feminist".

    The issue is some people think some spaces should be natal-sex exclusive - eg Women's refuges, women's prisons - only for people who were born women.

    Others see that as discriminatory against trans-sexual people. The issue has gained added controversy with the Gender Recognition act - where people can "self declare" their gender, and argue that a natal-male should have access to natal-female only spaces, however far (or not) they have gone down the transition road.

    Given the horrendously long waiting lists for people seeking to transition, I have some sympathy with their plight - what reduces that sympathy is the vitriol of some of their supporters.
    The vitriol of their opponents is a wonder to behold too.
    Have they tried to get people sacked too?
    Yes.
    And needing police protection, too.
    I was very pro trans until I read the cotton ceiling and that tempered it somewhat.

    I just wish the trans brigade could try to come to some sort of accommodation with feminists instead of just steamrollering them.

    It’s a toxic debate and that’s all I have to say.
    It’s characteristic of these kind of culture war debates that each side brings up the absolute worst / most extreme positions taken by a minority of the other side & uses it as a stick to frighten their own side into taking the more extreme versions of their own in turn.

    Thus the wheels of the culture war turn.
    Another reason extremes usually win out in successful revolutions
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,800
    Evening all :)

    After the CDU's huge win in the Saxony-Anhalt election last week, the polls have shifted:

    The latest Infratest poll (changes from last poll):

    CDU/CSU-EPP: 28% (+4)
    GRÜNE-G/EFA: 20% (-5)
    SPD-S&D: 14% (-1)
    FDP-RE: 12%
    AfD-ID: 12% (+1)
    LINKE-LEFT: 7%

    A big swing back to the Union yet the irony is the victorious CDU leader in Saxony-Anhalt election is a fierce critic of the CDU Spitzenkandidat Laschet having backed Soder and the Saxony result was indicative of what the polls were suggesting would happen if the CDU had chosen Soder.

    We'll have to see if this is a clear change or a temporary blip in the coming weeks.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited June 2021
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141
    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    So where would you "stick" a transgender woman who requires prison time then?
    Does the offender have a penis?
    Yes- men's prison
    No - women's prison
    And if the offender is endangered by other prisoners, then isolate them.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,457
    Its worth watching the Unherd interview with Maya Forstater. As so often over past year or so, the interviewer conducts a sensible interview and I am more informed about the ladies position.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    So where would you "stick" a transgender woman who requires prison time then?
    Does the offender have a penis?
    Yes- men's prison
    No - women's prison
    All about the penis then for you. Ok.

    Reasoning being no penis = no rape threat to other inmates?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    Biden in St. Ives in Cornwall, England:

    "It's gorgeous. I don't want to go home."


    https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1403034906108776448?s=21

    Fox News: Traitor Biden yearns to leave USA.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637

    kinabalu said:

    In today's Telegraph, the NI Protocol was forced on the UK by "the imperialist bullies" of the EU & "signed under duress" to stave off the "economic damage" of "a No Deal Brexit". Very odd. I thought "we held all the cards" & would "prosper mightily" with No Deal

    Yes, I thought it was us not them who got a result through playing hardball. I thought it was 'No Deal here we come' unless they 'caved in'. Some of the numptier Leavers still think that happened, would you believe. I know!
    Wheres Phil when you need him!!
    We discussed this earlier in the day.

    Yes we did hold the cards and we got a great deal by playing hard ball extricating Great Britain from the EU's grasp, even if we needed to concede the Protocol because May had already screwed the pooch so much in the negotiations.

    Now having got what we want from playing hardball for Great Britain, we're now playing hardball to get what we want with Northern Ireland - and its going to work there too. Because again, we hold the cards.

    Barnier spent years negotiating to entrap us within the EU's regulatory orbit and all he got to show for it is the Protocol and the Protocol is dying before us. Good riddance, rest in peace, no flowers.
    Biden says we should fold.

    Who holds the cards in your opinion on the US / UK trade deal?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    kle4 said:

    Biden in St. Ives in Cornwall, England:

    "It's gorgeous. I don't want to go home."


    https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1403034906108776448?s=21

    Fox News: Traitor Biden yearns to leave USA.
    NBC: Biden happier in very white counties.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    edited June 2021
    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    Does anyone else find this entire issue incomprehensible beyond the obvious?: Live and Let Live, Whatever You Are in Private Is Your Business and please don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women? I am sure there is more but maybe I am too old to work it out.
    You should join me in my pledge never to comment on trans issues on PB. It is by far the more sane option if you don't have a dog in the fight. Oh and aren't worried about the collapse of Western civilisation.

    If you’re a woman, you have a dog in this fight. Indeed, a pussy
    I am sure that womankind will sleep easy, knowing that such a stalwart ally is fighting their corner.
    Well that's the great thing about the Trans debate.

    It's put so many reactionary men in touch with their inner feminist.
    Just how much of a feminist does one need to be to think that sticking a man in a women's prison is wrong?
    So where would you "stick" a transgender woman who requires prison time then?
    Does the offender have a penis?
    Yes- men's prison
    No - women's prison
    One thing that a decadent society will never fail to master is to take something so simple that a child could understand it and instead wrap it up in a maze of counter-intuitive, irrational pseudo-intellectualization, its members priding themselves on the brilliance of their ingenuity the further from essential reason they depart...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Has the cold-chain challenge been fixed?

    Pres. Biden says "the U.S. will purchase half a billion doses of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to donate to nearly 100 nations that are in dire need in the fight against this pandemic."

    https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1403047170413142018?s=20
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    Stocky said:

    Taz said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Phil said:

    Phil said:


    NB. I’m not a lawyer, but the judgement in AEA vs EHRC seems to be in direct opposition to that given by Akua Reindorf in their U.of.Essex report. Their assertion that the Equalities Act doesn’t say what Stonewall said it does relies on the wording of the Equalities Act only applying to “gender reassignment” whereas the judgement in AEA vs EHRC appears to be clear that this definition has been expanded more widely by subsequent case law.

    Happy to be corrected on this, but it seems to me that the cherry-picked quote that is being used to bash Stonewall is based on a misunderstanding of the law as currently applied.

    NB. Having now read the relevant bits of Reindorf, it’s clear that they understand the the Equalities Act applied equally to trans people with & without a GRC.

    It’s GC social media who are busily spreading carefully ambiguous mis-readings of Reindorf as part of the wider attempt to smear Stonewall.
    don't let people with very obviously male sexual attributes into female changing rooms etc on the basis of their private judgement that they are in fact women?
    That could have you labeled a "TERF" "Trans-exclusive-radical-feminist".

    The issue is some people think some spaces should be natal-sex exclusive - eg Women's refuges, women's prisons - only for people who were born women.

    Others see that as discriminatory against trans-sexual people. The issue has gained added controversy with the Gender Recognition act - where people can "self declare" their gender, and argue that a natal-male should have access to natal-female only spaces, however far (or not) they have gone down the transition road.

    Given the horrendously long waiting lists for people seeking to transition, I have some sympathy with their plight - what reduces that sympathy is the vitriol of some of their supporters.
    The vitriol of their opponents is a wonder to behold too.
    Have they tried to get people sacked too?
    Yes.
    And needing police protection, too.
    I was very pro trans until I read the cotton ceiling and that tempered it somewhat.

    I just wish the trans brigade could try to come to some sort of accommodation with feminists instead of just steamrollering them.

    It’s a toxic debate and that’s all I have to say.
    What do you mean by "pro trans"?
    They all need to get a life and leave people to get on with theirs instead of incessant whining. A good days work is what most of them need rather than woke mince.
This discussion has been closed.