The argument is not about trans rights. The reality is that there are no legal rights which other groups have which trans people lack. Women have no issue with people with gender dysphoria getting the help, resources and kindness and care they need.
The argument is about women's rights which will be seriously harmed and diminished if the gender ideologists gets their way, gender ideologists who care little for doing anything practical for people with gender dysphoria.
One final point gender ideology is, when you think about it, based on very old-fashioned stereotypes. It assumes that if you are a "butch" girl, a tomboy you must therefore be a boy. Or that if you are a more "feminine" sort of man you must be a girl. This is of course nonsense. These are the sorts of stereotypes which feminism has tried to move away from. Quite why they should now be seen as something to be applauded let alone used as the basis for legislation and medical experimentation on children of a most gruesome kind is beyond me.
I stand for the rights of women. I stand for the rights of people who have gender dysphoria. I stand for the rights of gay people whose sexuality is based on sex not on gender. I do not stand for trans activists who seek attack women and gay people and who do nothing for those with gender dysphoria.
And the reason I feel strongly about this is not just because I am a woman and a feminist. But because I have a gay child and one who went through some of the issues which some gay adolescents go through (worrying about whether he might be trans etc). He is now happily gay and probably quite a feminine sort of man. But who cares? Plus I am a trustee of a primary school and there are some very serious issues around safeguarding which are raised by this ideology.
So apologies for boring you all. But this is an important issue and one which will affect my vote. I will not vote for a party which makes self-ID part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which does not make the maintenance of women's' rights and the sex-based rights under the various Acts which women have had to fight for long and hard over decades a fundamental part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which adopts policies undermining the reality of same sex attraction. I will not vote for a party which thinks that being a woman "is an attitude". Womanhood is a reality not a "feeling".
This is a very male forum. I make no apologies for occasionally bringing a female perspective to it.
Excellent post. I don't think you are bringing a female perspective into it. I think you are bringing rationality into it.
Oddly, many women and feminists disagree with Ms Free's views on this. Including Mrs J. Ms Free does speak from her own perspective, not that of all women or feminists.
The problem is not that this forum is too male: it's that we don't have many trans voices. I know we had one openly-trans poster, whom I sadly don't think has posted for a while. (As I recall, his views were not always as I'd expect, which was brilliant.)
I have known trans people, and one - a good friend - committed suicide. I still miss him. I have also directly seen others being bullied sniggered at etc in offices and on the street. This is the other side of the equation that Ms Free always rejects, e.g. when she outhandedly rejects Stonewall's figures. Behaviour that would be socially unacceptable towards gays or lesbians is fine against too many trans people. I have witnessed this first hand over the years.
I am not a 'gender idealist'. It's just that I accept the world is non-binary; and not just in the case of intersex people. The world is not as neat and tidy as some people want. So we can either accept that it is not tidy, or try to force people into pigeonholes. That latter approach is the one used throughout history, and has led to all sorts of pain for individuals who are different. I prefer the former approach.
I have sympathy for some of her points. Growing up is confusing for many people, and encouraging people to convert as children makes me very uneasy. I don't think changing gender should be made easier. The use of chemicals on children - especially pre-puberty - is wrong IMO.
But too many trans people don't face real issues and dangers that the rest of us do not.
I am not trans. I have no inclination to be, and never have. I am also not a woman. So perhaps I should have no voice in the matter. But those are my views.
And yet - in this one particular respect - the world IS neat and tidy. Everyone is born either a male or a female. They may not want to live a stereotypically male or female life, and we should not force them to do so - but biological non-binarism(?) is a fiction.
"Everyone is born either a male or a female."
Not everyone is born either male or a female. Biologically, there are intersex people.
Gosh, that one is fast becoming an old chestnut. This is incredibly rare. Are you suggesting that transgender people are "intersex" people?
Of course not, although the groups might intersect (*)
Intersex people may be 'Incredibly' rare, or just rare, depending on definition. But they still exist. And deserve a little more understanding than being ignored with "Everyone is born either a male or a female."
(*) Goodness, how I hate using 'intersect' nowadays...
I could believe that 0.02% or 1.7% might be correct, depending on the definition. Intersex is probably a range of things, not all of which might be immediately physically obvious.
I'd love to see other figures.
But it isn't zero.
That's the population of Leicester. A ridiculous figure taken from a unpublished dissertation. So somewhere between zero and the population of :Leicester. I'm betting much closer to zero.
But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality. The "not everyone is either male sex or female sex" gambit is like me saying that a coin toss will result in a heads or a tails outcome and them saying "No, no you are wrong, it could land on its edge".
"But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality."
Wow. You're trying to say intersex people are so vanishingly close to zero that they might as well live in Haiti (*), and then you come out with that?
I don't know the true number of intersex people. Which, you might think, is actually a symptom of the problem. People like to pigeonhole others; say they fit into nice little categories. Well, it seems humans are not that simple to pigeonhole. Whether it is boys wanting to date other boys, boys wanting to be girls, or people born with a confusing gender, people are messy and confusing.
We need to start accepting that.
(*) For anyone reading this morning's thread...
What? We need to *start* accepting boys wanting to date other boys?
The transgender people I know are happy getting on with life and anywhere between neutral and seriously hostile to people purporting to activise on their behalf. It's like the anti apartheid stuff in the 70s and 80s: go down to a South African township, and the quickest way to get severely beaten or killed, other than wear a Rolex, is to start giving it large about how you stood shoulder to shoulder with them in the fight against racial injustice. People are just sooooo ungrateful.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say.
I'm not trying to activise on their behalf. I'm just giving my view, based on the experiences I've had in life, and the people I've known. I don't go onto the streets to campaign for them, or onto any specialist websites. As I said this morning, many pro-trans activists go to far, as do anti-trans ones.
But I'll state my views on here, and argue strongly with others when I think they're wrong. And that is the nature of PB.
I am not talking about you, sorry if you thought I was.
It may be just that I'm out of touch with the zeitgeist here out west, but I didn't think being anti-trans was a big thing. I'm not aware of any insulting expressions equivalent to faggot, poofter etc. And you can see why there wouldn't be. It is relatively easy to understand (meaning solely understand, not in a million years empathize with) some elements of being anti gay: it is deprecated in the Bible, just about, if you squint enough, and it's a thing people do as well as just are. Neither of which applies to trans people So my impression of the activists is that they are hysterically seeking out anti transism just as the HUAC sought out un American activities.
Fairy nuff.
But a question: in a post above, you say you know transgender people. When I knew a few transgender people (I don't at the moment, as it happens), I frequently heard comments directed against them - even from people in the same office. Nastiness disguised as 'jokes'. It was really bad for a friend of mine at school (who has now had the op).
Have you heard and experienced similar?
In one case absolutely not. Everybody was surprised they were trans (very beautiful teen girl), now they've transitioned it's obvious they would never have been happy as a woman. Other case was an obviously unhappy man, now looks like an obviously unhappy man in an unflattering dress. Nobody has said anything more than that about him.
Mad Nad for Education! Dolores Umbridge made real.
Is that confirmed?
I imagine @ydoethur has steam coming out of his ears like a cartoon character right now.
No - Culture Secretary
Does Nad have any Culture?
I have no clue where she stands on Culture etc issues - like should the BBC Licence Fee be scrapped which I think is her department then? It would be good to see that dealt with.
Happy to see Truss get a promotion though I always felt she was doing more for our foreign relations as Trade Secretary than Raab did as Foreign Secretary. I hope she can keep up the good work and gets a worthy successor (unless I've missed it and its been named already).
But to be honest I've never been entirely certain why Foreign Secretary even is a Great Office nowadays. Without wanting to be ignorant, it seems all 'serious' foreign policy issues are done by the PM not the Foreign Secretary anyway. How much credibly foreign policy actually originates in the Foreign Office and not Downing Street?
Agree. Hard to remember who Blair's FS was, in a period overshadowed by foreign affairs.
Robin Cook, who famously resigned. Jack Straw after him I think.
Don't forget Margaret Beckett who was also Foreign Secretary under Blair.
Very much forgettable. Did she achieve anything in office?
You'll never be a politician if you don't regard obtaining the office as the achievement in itself.
Nadine Dorries very kindly offered to look after my then three year old son, when my daughter (then six) demanded I took her to the bathroom "to make a poop".
I would note that this was outside at a very fancy St James's restaraunt.
Did you accept?
Trying to think if there are any from the Con front line I would leave my children with. Williamson obviously a no-no (but no longer counts, I guess). Raab lacks the attention to detail ("I didn't realise the importance of keeping an eye on young children, not just expecting them to stay put"). Johnson isn't very good at keeping track of children, as far as we can tell. Patel would have the little love on the next plane out of the country. Grant Shapps would teach some dubious habits. Sunak would steal his pocket money. Gove would, unintentionally, leave the poor little guy traumatised. Truss would hold him the wrong way up. Rees Mogg would send him off to the workhouse...
I might actually consider Starmer. Not sure about the rest of the Labour front bench (not knowing who most of them are...)
Happy to see Truss get a promotion though I always felt she was doing more for our foreign relations as Trade Secretary than Raab did as Foreign Secretary. I hope she can keep up the good work and gets a worthy successor (unless I've missed it and its been named already).
But to be honest I've never been entirely certain why Foreign Secretary even is a Great Office nowadays. Without wanting to be ignorant, it seems all 'serious' foreign policy issues are done by the PM not the Foreign Secretary anyway. How much credibly foreign policy actually originates in the Foreign Office and not Downing Street?
Liz Truss deserves her promotion in a way. No minister has ever self-promoted more and she seems popular with Conservative Party members.
It is a good idea for a country to have a foreign policy, even if the PM ignores it. Formulating and implementing the foreign policy would fall to the FM. Unfortunately the UK doesn't have a coherent foreign policy at the moment. I wouldn't look to Truss to come up with one, but we will see.
Johnson is seen as an instinctive campaigner with the common touch, Sunak is seen as a master strategist while Patel and Truss as self-promoting.
Mad Nad for Education! Dolores Umbridge made real.
Is that confirmed?
I imagine @ydoethur has steam coming out of his ears like a cartoon character right now.
No - Culture Secretary
Does Nad have any Culture?
I have no clue where she stands on Culture etc issues - like should the BBC Licence Fee be scrapped which I think is her department then? It would be good to see that dealt with.
“ Licence Fee scrapped “
And replaced with what funding mechanism for state broadcaster?
Happy to see Truss get a promotion though I always felt she was doing more for our foreign relations as Trade Secretary than Raab did as Foreign Secretary. I hope she can keep up the good work and gets a worthy successor (unless I've missed it and its been named already).
But to be honest I've never been entirely certain why Foreign Secretary even is a Great Office nowadays. Without wanting to be ignorant, it seems all 'serious' foreign policy issues are done by the PM not the Foreign Secretary anyway. How much credibly foreign policy actually originates in the Foreign Office and not Downing Street?
Agree. Hard to remember who Blair's FS was, in a period overshadowed by foreign affairs.
Robin Cook, who famously resigned. Jack Straw after him I think.
Don't forget Margaret Beckett who was also Foreign Secretary under Blair.
Very much forgettable. Did she achieve anything in office?
There is something to be said for being a forgettable foreign secretary. Normally used in other context, but primum non nocere should be a guiding principle of foreign affairs
Mad Nad for Education! Dolores Umbridge made real.
Is that confirmed?
I imagine @ydoethur has steam coming out of his ears like a cartoon character right now.
No - Culture Secretary
Does Nad have any Culture?
I have no clue where she stands on Culture etc issues - like should the BBC Licence Fee be scrapped which I think is her department then? It would be good to see that dealt with.
“ Licence Fee scrapped “
And replaced with what funding mechanism for state broadcaster?
If it were up to me I'd grant the BBC Trust complete independence to determine that themselves. They could go for a Netflix style subscription fee would be my recommendation, but that should be up to them.
The days of needing a "state broadcaster" are long since over in my eyes. We're not Russia, we don't need an RT state broadcaster.
The Rt Hon Michael Gove @MichaelGove has been appointed Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government @MHCLG He takes on cross-government responsibility for levelling up. He retains ministerial responsibility for the Union and elections. #Reshuffle
The argument is not about trans rights. The reality is that there are no legal rights which other groups have which trans people lack. Women have no issue with people with gender dysphoria getting the help, resources and kindness and care they need.
The argument is about women's rights which will be seriously harmed and diminished if the gender ideologists gets their way, gender ideologists who care little for doing anything practical for people with gender dysphoria.
One final point gender ideology is, when you think about it, based on very old-fashioned stereotypes. It assumes that if you are a "butch" girl, a tomboy you must therefore be a boy. Or that if you are a more "feminine" sort of man you must be a girl. This is of course nonsense. These are the sorts of stereotypes which feminism has tried to move away from. Quite why they should now be seen as something to be applauded let alone used as the basis for legislation and medical experimentation on children of a most gruesome kind is beyond me.
I stand for the rights of women. I stand for the rights of people who have gender dysphoria. I stand for the rights of gay people whose sexuality is based on sex not on gender. I do not stand for trans activists who seek attack women and gay people and who do nothing for those with gender dysphoria.
And the reason I feel strongly about this is not just because I am a woman and a feminist. But because I have a gay child and one who went through some of the issues which some gay adolescents go through (worrying about whether he might be trans etc). He is now happily gay and probably quite a feminine sort of man. But who cares? Plus I am a trustee of a primary school and there are some very serious issues around safeguarding which are raised by this ideology.
So apologies for boring you all. But this is an important issue and one which will affect my vote. I will not vote for a party which makes self-ID part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which does not make the maintenance of women's' rights and the sex-based rights under the various Acts which women have had to fight for long and hard over decades a fundamental part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which adopts policies undermining the reality of same sex attraction. I will not vote for a party which thinks that being a woman "is an attitude". Womanhood is a reality not a "feeling".
This is a very male forum. I make no apologies for occasionally bringing a female perspective to it.
Excellent post. I don't think you are bringing a female perspective into it. I think you are bringing rationality into it.
Oddly, many women and feminists disagree with Ms Free's views on this. Including Mrs J. Ms Free does speak from her own perspective, not that of all women or feminists.
The problem is not that this forum is too male: it's that we don't have many trans voices. I know we had one openly-trans poster, whom I sadly don't think has posted for a while. (As I recall, his views were not always as I'd expect, which was brilliant.)
I have known trans people, and one - a good friend - committed suicide. I still miss him. I have also directly seen others being bullied sniggered at etc in offices and on the street. This is the other side of the equation that Ms Free always rejects, e.g. when she outhandedly rejects Stonewall's figures. Behaviour that would be socially unacceptable towards gays or lesbians is fine against too many trans people. I have witnessed this first hand over the years.
I am not a 'gender idealist'. It's just that I accept the world is non-binary; and not just in the case of intersex people. The world is not as neat and tidy as some people want. So we can either accept that it is not tidy, or try to force people into pigeonholes. That latter approach is the one used throughout history, and has led to all sorts of pain for individuals who are different. I prefer the former approach.
I have sympathy for some of her points. Growing up is confusing for many people, and encouraging people to convert as children makes me very uneasy. I don't think changing gender should be made easier. The use of chemicals on children - especially pre-puberty - is wrong IMO.
But too many trans people don't face real issues and dangers that the rest of us do not.
I am not trans. I have no inclination to be, and never have. I am also not a woman. So perhaps I should have no voice in the matter. But those are my views.
And yet - in this one particular respect - the world IS neat and tidy. Everyone is born either a male or a female. They may not want to live a stereotypically male or female life, and we should not force them to do so - but biological non-binarism(?) is a fiction.
"Everyone is born either a male or a female."
Not everyone is born either male or a female. Biologically, there are intersex people.
Gosh, that one is fast becoming an old chestnut. This is incredibly rare. Are you suggesting that transgender people are "intersex" people?
Of course not, although the groups might intersect (*)
Intersex people may be 'Incredibly' rare, or just rare, depending on definition. But they still exist. And deserve a little more understanding than being ignored with "Everyone is born either a male or a female."
(*) Goodness, how I hate using 'intersect' nowadays...
I could believe that 0.02% or 1.7% might be correct, depending on the definition. Intersex is probably a range of things, not all of which might be immediately physically obvious.
I'd love to see other figures.
But it isn't zero.
That's the population of Leicester. A ridiculous figure taken from a unpublished dissertation. So somewhere between zero and the population of :Leicester. I'm betting much closer to zero.
But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality. The "not everyone is either male sex or female sex" gambit is like me saying that a coin toss will result in a heads or a tails outcome and them saying "No, no you are wrong, it could land on its edge".
"But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality."
Wow. You're trying to say intersex people are so vanishingly close to zero that they might as well live in Haiti (*), and then you come out with that?
I don't know the true number of intersex people. Which, you might think, is actually a symptom of the problem. People like to pigeonhole others; say they fit into nice little categories. Well, it seems humans are not that simple to pigeonhole. Whether it is boys wanting to date other boys, boys wanting to be girls, or people born with a confusing gender, people are messy and confusing.
We need to start accepting that.
(*) For anyone reading this morning's thread...
What? We need to *start* accepting boys wanting to date other boys?
The transgender people I know are happy getting on with life and anywhere between neutral and seriously hostile to people purporting to activise on their behalf. It's like the anti apartheid stuff in the 70s and 80s: go down to a South African township, and the quickest way to get severely beaten or killed, other than wear a Rolex, is to start giving it large about how you stood shoulder to shoulder with them in the fight against racial injustice. People are just sooooo ungrateful.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say.
I'm not trying to activise on their behalf. I'm just giving my view, based on the experiences I've had in life, and the people I've known. I don't go onto the streets to campaign for them, or onto any specialist websites. As I said this morning, many pro-trans activists go to far, as do anti-trans ones.
But I'll state my views on here, and argue strongly with others when I think they're wrong. And that is the nature of PB.
I am not talking about you, sorry if you thought I was.
It may be just that I'm out of touch with the zeitgeist here out west, but I didn't think being anti-trans was a big thing. I'm not aware of any insulting expressions equivalent to faggot, poofter etc. And you can see why there wouldn't be. It is relatively easy to understand (meaning solely understand, not in a million years empathize with) some elements of being anti gay: it is deprecated in the Bible, just about, if you squint enough, and it's a thing people do as well as just are. Neither of which applies to trans people So my impression of the activists is that they are hysterically seeking out anti transism just as the HUAC sought out un American activities.
Fairy nuff.
But a question: in a post above, you say you know transgender people. When I knew a few transgender people (I don't at the moment, as it happens), I frequently heard comments directed against them - even from people in the same office. Nastiness disguised as 'jokes'. It was really bad for a friend of mine at school (who has now had the op).
Have you heard and experienced similar?
And a corollary question if I may - was this specifically against trans? As opposed to, say, just mistaking them for being LGB?
Oh yes, in most cases I think it was, especially when it was people who knew they were trans, e.g. people in the office.
That is an odd appointment to my mind. He doesn't strike me as a rubber chicken circuit fellow happy listening to wild rabid rantings of crap every night at member associate dinners.
AIUI she’s spent quite a bit of the past 18 months as a nurse as well as a Health minister. She’s been the government’s eyes on the front line, hence being lined up for a promotion.
Mad Nad for Education! Dolores Umbridge made real.
Is that confirmed?
I imagine @ydoethur has steam coming out of his ears like a cartoon character right now.
No - Culture Secretary
Does Nad have any Culture?
I have no clue where she stands on Culture etc issues - like should the BBC Licence Fee be scrapped which I think is her department then? It would be good to see that dealt with.
“ Licence Fee scrapped “
And replaced with what funding mechanism for state broadcaster?
OfCom chair is the big one sitting in her in-tray.
Johnson seems to want Dacre for some reason known only to himself.
Happy to see Truss get a promotion though I always felt she was doing more for our foreign relations as Trade Secretary than Raab did as Foreign Secretary. I hope she can keep up the good work and gets a worthy successor (unless I've missed it and its been named already).
But to be honest I've never been entirely certain why Foreign Secretary even is a Great Office nowadays. Without wanting to be ignorant, it seems all 'serious' foreign policy issues are done by the PM not the Foreign Secretary anyway. How much credibly foreign policy actually originates in the Foreign Office and not Downing Street?
Liz Truss deserves her promotion in a way. No minister has ever self-promoted more and she seems popular with Conservative Party members.
It is a good idea for a country to have a foreign policy, even if the PM ignores it. Formulating and implementing the foreign policy would fall to the FM. Unfortunately the UK doesn't have a coherent foreign policy at the moment. I wouldn't look to Truss to come up with one, but we will see.
Who was the last Foreign Secretary that you think credibly formulated foreign policy?
As opposed to the PM doing it?
The PM possibly does less on foreign affairs than people think. He will make the big calls - whether to go to war and so on - and go to the interesting summits but he will delegate the rest because he doesn't have the time or the knowledge. I think there is scope for a capable minister to make their mark. Not least right now because the UK doesn't have an effective foreign policy.
Nadine Dorries very kindly offered to look after my then three year old son, when my daughter (then six) demanded I took her to the bathroom "to make a poop".
I would note that this was outside at a very fancy St James's restaraunt.
Did you accept?
Trying to think if there are any from the Con front line I would leave my children with. Williamson obviously a no-no (but no longer counts, I guess). Raab lacks the attention to detail ("I didn't realise the importance of keeping an eye on young children, not just expecting them to stay put"). Johnson isn't very good at keeping track of children, as far as we can tell. Patel would have the little love on the next plane out of the country. Grant Shapps would teach some dubious habits. Sunak would steal his pocket money. Gove would, unintentionally, leave the poor little guy traumatised. Truss would hold him the wrong way up. Rees Mogg would send him off to the workhouse...
I might actually consider Starmer. Not sure about the rest of the Labour front bench (not knowing who most of them are...)
I did not accept. She had had a few glasses of wine, and my son can be a handful. But it was very genuine gesture, and I've always thought well of her for it.
Still: not sure I'd have made her culture secretary, but that's another story altogether.
The argument is not about trans rights. The reality is that there are no legal rights which other groups have which trans people lack. Women have no issue with people with gender dysphoria getting the help, resources and kindness and care they need.
The argument is about women's rights which will be seriously harmed and diminished if the gender ideologists gets their way, gender ideologists who care little for doing anything practical for people with gender dysphoria.
One final point gender ideology is, when you think about it, based on very old-fashioned stereotypes. It assumes that if you are a "butch" girl, a tomboy you must therefore be a boy. Or that if you are a more "feminine" sort of man you must be a girl. This is of course nonsense. These are the sorts of stereotypes which feminism has tried to move away from. Quite why they should now be seen as something to be applauded let alone used as the basis for legislation and medical experimentation on children of a most gruesome kind is beyond me.
I stand for the rights of women. I stand for the rights of people who have gender dysphoria. I stand for the rights of gay people whose sexuality is based on sex not on gender. I do not stand for trans activists who seek attack women and gay people and who do nothing for those with gender dysphoria.
And the reason I feel strongly about this is not just because I am a woman and a feminist. But because I have a gay child and one who went through some of the issues which some gay adolescents go through (worrying about whether he might be trans etc). He is now happily gay and probably quite a feminine sort of man. But who cares? Plus I am a trustee of a primary school and there are some very serious issues around safeguarding which are raised by this ideology.
So apologies for boring you all. But this is an important issue and one which will affect my vote. I will not vote for a party which makes self-ID part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which does not make the maintenance of women's' rights and the sex-based rights under the various Acts which women have had to fight for long and hard over decades a fundamental part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which adopts policies undermining the reality of same sex attraction. I will not vote for a party which thinks that being a woman "is an attitude". Womanhood is a reality not a "feeling".
This is a very male forum. I make no apologies for occasionally bringing a female perspective to it.
Excellent post. I don't think you are bringing a female perspective into it. I think you are bringing rationality into it.
Oddly, many women and feminists disagree with Ms Free's views on this. Including Mrs J. Ms Free does speak from her own perspective, not that of all women or feminists.
The problem is not that this forum is too male: it's that we don't have many trans voices. I know we had one openly-trans poster, whom I sadly don't think has posted for a while. (As I recall, his views were not always as I'd expect, which was brilliant.)
I have known trans people, and one - a good friend - committed suicide. I still miss him. I have also directly seen others being bullied sniggered at etc in offices and on the street. This is the other side of the equation that Ms Free always rejects, e.g. when she outhandedly rejects Stonewall's figures. Behaviour that would be socially unacceptable towards gays or lesbians is fine against too many trans people. I have witnessed this first hand over the years.
I am not a 'gender idealist'. It's just that I accept the world is non-binary; and not just in the case of intersex people. The world is not as neat and tidy as some people want. So we can either accept that it is not tidy, or try to force people into pigeonholes. That latter approach is the one used throughout history, and has led to all sorts of pain for individuals who are different. I prefer the former approach.
I have sympathy for some of her points. Growing up is confusing for many people, and encouraging people to convert as children makes me very uneasy. I don't think changing gender should be made easier. The use of chemicals on children - especially pre-puberty - is wrong IMO.
But too many trans people don't face real issues and dangers that the rest of us do not.
I am not trans. I have no inclination to be, and never have. I am also not a woman. So perhaps I should have no voice in the matter. But those are my views.
And yet - in this one particular respect - the world IS neat and tidy. Everyone is born either a male or a female. They may not want to live a stereotypically male or female life, and we should not force them to do so - but biological non-binarism(?) is a fiction.
"Everyone is born either a male or a female."
Not everyone is born either male or a female. Biologically, there are intersex people.
Gosh, that one is fast becoming an old chestnut. This is incredibly rare. Are you suggesting that transgender people are "intersex" people?
Of course not, although the groups might intersect (*)
Intersex people may be 'Incredibly' rare, or just rare, depending on definition. But they still exist. And deserve a little more understanding than being ignored with "Everyone is born either a male or a female."
(*) Goodness, how I hate using 'intersect' nowadays...
I could believe that 0.02% or 1.7% might be correct, depending on the definition. Intersex is probably a range of things, not all of which might be immediately physically obvious.
I'd love to see other figures.
But it isn't zero.
That's the population of Leicester. A ridiculous figure taken from a unpublished dissertation. So somewhere between zero and the population of :Leicester. I'm betting much closer to zero.
But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality. The "not everyone is either male sex or female sex" gambit is like me saying that a coin toss will result in a heads or a tails outcome and them saying "No, no you are wrong, it could land on its edge".
"But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality."
Wow. You're trying to say intersex people are so vanishingly close to zero that they might as well live in Haiti (*), and then you come out with that?
I don't know the true number of intersex people. Which, you might think, is actually a symptom of the problem. People like to pigeonhole others; say they fit into nice little categories. Well, it seems humans are not that simple to pigeonhole. Whether it is boys wanting to date other boys, boys wanting to be girls, or people born with a confusing gender, people are messy and confusing.
We need to start accepting that.
(*) For anyone reading this morning's thread...
What? We need to *start* accepting boys wanting to date other boys?
The transgender people I know are happy getting on with life and anywhere between neutral and seriously hostile to people purporting to activise on their behalf. It's like the anti apartheid stuff in the 70s and 80s: go down to a South African township, and the quickest way to get severely beaten or killed, other than wear a Rolex, is to start giving it large about how you stood shoulder to shoulder with them in the fight against racial injustice. People are just sooooo ungrateful.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say.
I'm not trying to activise on their behalf. I'm just giving my view, based on the experiences I've had in life, and the people I've known. I don't go onto the streets to campaign for them, or onto any specialist websites. As I said this morning, many pro-trans activists go to far, as do anti-trans ones.
But I'll state my views on here, and argue strongly with others when I think they're wrong. And that is the nature of PB.
I am not talking about you, sorry if you thought I was.
It may be just that I'm out of touch with the zeitgeist here out west, but I didn't think being anti-trans was a big thing. I'm not aware of any insulting expressions equivalent to faggot, poofter etc. And you can see why there wouldn't be. It is relatively easy to understand (meaning solely understand, not in a million years empathize with) some elements of being anti gay: it is deprecated in the Bible, just about, if you squint enough, and it's a thing people do as well as just are. Neither of which applies to trans people So my impression of the activists is that they are hysterically seeking out anti transism just as the HUAC sought out un American activities.
Fairy nuff.
But a question: in a post above, you say you know transgender people. When I knew a few transgender people (I don't at the moment, as it happens), I frequently heard comments directed against them - even from people in the same office. Nastiness disguised as 'jokes'. It was really bad for a friend of mine at school (who has now had the op).
Have you heard and experienced similar?
And a corollary question if I may - was this specifically against trans? As opposed to, say, just mistaking them for being LGB?
Oh yes, in most cases I think it was, especially when it was people who knew they were trans, e.g. people in the office.
Thanks. Might be different for people out in the street nad being mistaken for LGB by the local neds and yobs out for some bashing, but what you say is pretty specific.
The Rt Hon Michael Gove @MichaelGove has been appointed Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government @MHCLG He takes on cross-government responsibility for levelling up. He retains ministerial responsibility for the Union and elections. #Reshuffle
Gove is a man who doesn't mind innovating, and who is happy to ruffle feathers.
Of course, he may come up with terrible answers, but at least they won't be the same answers we've heard so many times before.
He seems to take the responsibility of being a minister seriously - even if he yearns for the top job he'll put effort in wherever he is placed, not just be a time server.
Yes it can go wrong, but its better to have such people than those who never have an impact at all.
The Rt Hon Michael Gove @MichaelGove has been appointed Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government @MHCLG He takes on cross-government responsibility for levelling up. He retains ministerial responsibility for the Union and elections. #Reshuffle
The Rt Hon Michael Gove @MichaelGove has been appointed Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government @MHCLG He takes on cross-government responsibility for levelling up. He retains ministerial responsibility for the Union and elections. #Reshuffle
Speaking of which, a group calling themselves the Punjab Kings appear to be staying in the hotel next door to my office. Two or three team coaches (vehicles, rather than people) hanging around outside all day. https://twitter.com/PunjabKingsIPL/status/1435248502788005897
Mad Nad for Education! Dolores Umbridge made real.
Is that confirmed?
I imagine @ydoethur has steam coming out of his ears like a cartoon character right now.
No - Culture Secretary
Does Nad have any Culture?
I have no clue where she stands on Culture etc issues - like should the BBC Licence Fee be scrapped which I think is her department then? It would be good to see that dealt with.
“ Licence Fee scrapped “
And replaced with what funding mechanism for state broadcaster?
OfCom chair is the big one sitting in her in-tray.
Johnson seems to want Dacre for some reason known only to himself.
Is it, no matter what they have said their entire life, when given responsibility for BBC they tend to go all native and supportive of the thing?
And then the argument BBC funding can’t stay still in a changing climate that kills the license fee, state broadcaster will end up funded from income tax not a clever post license fee wheeze?
The argument is not about trans rights. The reality is that there are no legal rights which other groups have which trans people lack. Women have no issue with people with gender dysphoria getting the help, resources and kindness and care they need.
The argument is about women's rights which will be seriously harmed and diminished if the gender ideologists gets their way, gender ideologists who care little for doing anything practical for people with gender dysphoria.
One final point gender ideology is, when you think about it, based on very old-fashioned stereotypes. It assumes that if you are a "butch" girl, a tomboy you must therefore be a boy. Or that if you are a more "feminine" sort of man you must be a girl. This is of course nonsense. These are the sorts of stereotypes which feminism has tried to move away from. Quite why they should now be seen as something to be applauded let alone used as the basis for legislation and medical experimentation on children of a most gruesome kind is beyond me.
I stand for the rights of women. I stand for the rights of people who have gender dysphoria. I stand for the rights of gay people whose sexuality is based on sex not on gender. I do not stand for trans activists who seek attack women and gay people and who do nothing for those with gender dysphoria.
And the reason I feel strongly about this is not just because I am a woman and a feminist. But because I have a gay child and one who went through some of the issues which some gay adolescents go through (worrying about whether he might be trans etc). He is now happily gay and probably quite a feminine sort of man. But who cares? Plus I am a trustee of a primary school and there are some very serious issues around safeguarding which are raised by this ideology.
So apologies for boring you all. But this is an important issue and one which will affect my vote. I will not vote for a party which makes self-ID part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which does not make the maintenance of women's' rights and the sex-based rights under the various Acts which women have had to fight for long and hard over decades a fundamental part of its offering. I will not vote for a party which adopts policies undermining the reality of same sex attraction. I will not vote for a party which thinks that being a woman "is an attitude". Womanhood is a reality not a "feeling".
This is a very male forum. I make no apologies for occasionally bringing a female perspective to it.
Excellent post. I don't think you are bringing a female perspective into it. I think you are bringing rationality into it.
Oddly, many women and feminists disagree with Ms Free's views on this. Including Mrs J. Ms Free does speak from her own perspective, not that of all women or feminists.
The problem is not that this forum is too male: it's that we don't have many trans voices. I know we had one openly-trans poster, whom I sadly don't think has posted for a while. (As I recall, his views were not always as I'd expect, which was brilliant.)
I have known trans people, and one - a good friend - committed suicide. I still miss him. I have also directly seen others being bullied sniggered at etc in offices and on the street. This is the other side of the equation that Ms Free always rejects, e.g. when she outhandedly rejects Stonewall's figures. Behaviour that would be socially unacceptable towards gays or lesbians is fine against too many trans people. I have witnessed this first hand over the years.
I am not a 'gender idealist'. It's just that I accept the world is non-binary; and not just in the case of intersex people. The world is not as neat and tidy as some people want. So we can either accept that it is not tidy, or try to force people into pigeonholes. That latter approach is the one used throughout history, and has led to all sorts of pain for individuals who are different. I prefer the former approach.
I have sympathy for some of her points. Growing up is confusing for many people, and encouraging people to convert as children makes me very uneasy. I don't think changing gender should be made easier. The use of chemicals on children - especially pre-puberty - is wrong IMO.
But too many trans people don't face real issues and dangers that the rest of us do not.
I am not trans. I have no inclination to be, and never have. I am also not a woman. So perhaps I should have no voice in the matter. But those are my views.
And yet - in this one particular respect - the world IS neat and tidy. Everyone is born either a male or a female. They may not want to live a stereotypically male or female life, and we should not force them to do so - but biological non-binarism(?) is a fiction.
"Everyone is born either a male or a female."
Not everyone is born either male or a female. Biologically, there are intersex people.
Gosh, that one is fast becoming an old chestnut. This is incredibly rare. Are you suggesting that transgender people are "intersex" people?
Of course not, although the groups might intersect (*)
Intersex people may be 'Incredibly' rare, or just rare, depending on definition. But they still exist. And deserve a little more understanding than being ignored with "Everyone is born either a male or a female."
(*) Goodness, how I hate using 'intersect' nowadays...
I could believe that 0.02% or 1.7% might be correct, depending on the definition. Intersex is probably a range of things, not all of which might be immediately physically obvious.
I'd love to see other figures.
But it isn't zero.
That's the population of Leicester. A ridiculous figure taken from a unpublished dissertation. So somewhere between zero and the population of :Leicester. I'm betting much closer to zero.
But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality. The "not everyone is either male sex or female sex" gambit is like me saying that a coin toss will result in a heads or a tails outcome and them saying "No, no you are wrong, it could land on its edge".
"But anyway this is what I mean by the trans lobby lacking intelligence and rationality."
Wow. You're trying to say intersex people are so vanishingly close to zero that they might as well live in Haiti (*), and then you come out with that?
I don't know the true number of intersex people. Which, you might think, is actually a symptom of the problem. People like to pigeonhole others; say they fit into nice little categories. Well, it seems humans are not that simple to pigeonhole. Whether it is boys wanting to date other boys, boys wanting to be girls, or people born with a confusing gender, people are messy and confusing.
We need to start accepting that.
(*) For anyone reading this morning's thread...
What? We need to *start* accepting boys wanting to date other boys?
The transgender people I know are happy getting on with life and anywhere between neutral and seriously hostile to people purporting to activise on their behalf. It's like the anti apartheid stuff in the 70s and 80s: go down to a South African township, and the quickest way to get severely beaten or killed, other than wear a Rolex, is to start giving it large about how you stood shoulder to shoulder with them in the fight against racial injustice. People are just sooooo ungrateful.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say.
I'm not trying to activise on their behalf. I'm just giving my view, based on the experiences I've had in life, and the people I've known. I don't go onto the streets to campaign for them, or onto any specialist websites. As I said this morning, many pro-trans activists go to far, as do anti-trans ones.
But I'll state my views on here, and argue strongly with others when I think they're wrong. And that is the nature of PB.
I am not talking about you, sorry if you thought I was.
It may be just that I'm out of touch with the zeitgeist here out west, but I didn't think being anti-trans was a big thing. I'm not aware of any insulting expressions equivalent to faggot, poofter etc. And you can see why there wouldn't be. It is relatively easy to understand (meaning solely understand, not in a million years empathize with) some elements of being anti gay: it is deprecated in the Bible, just about, if you squint enough, and it's a thing people do as well as just are. Neither of which applies to trans people So my impression of the activists is that they are hysterically seeking out anti transism just as the HUAC sought out un American activities.
Fairy nuff.
But a question: in a post above, you say you know transgender people. When I knew a few transgender people (I don't at the moment, as it happens), I frequently heard comments directed against them - even from people in the same office. Nastiness disguised as 'jokes'. It was really bad for a friend of mine at school (who has now had the op).
Have you heard and experienced similar?
And a corollary question if I may - was this specifically against trans? As opposed to, say, just mistaking them for being LGB?
Oh yes, in most cases I think it was, especially when it was people who knew they were trans, e.g. people in the office.
Thanks. Might be different for people out in the street nad being mistaken for LGB by the local neds and yobs out for some bashing, but what you say is pretty specific.
There are some stories that are quite funny in a oh-god-that-didnt-happen-did-it?
My friend was badly affected by some of the stuff that happened. I worked with him at another, smaller company, where the atmosphere was far better. To confuse matters further, being gay, or tv, or ts, or different in any way, does not make you a good person. One of the TSs I knew was not, in my view, a particularly pleasant person - and not for any reason attached to her gender identity. It was sometimes hard to know if comments directed at her were due to her being ts, or because she was sometimes unpleasant herself. And then we get into a chicken-and-egg situation ...
Edit: it was slightly before my time so I didn't witness it, but apparently there was a Christmas party where one was in tears because of comments made about the bloke she had brought with her.
How many sacked Ministers immediately go into 'revenge' mode? I recall that Norman Lamont took his ousting from the Treasury by Major very badly indeed - and the bitterness has continued to the extent that they are not on speaking terms. It went so deep that Lamont refused the customary exchange of letters when a Minister leaves office.Had he known about Major's affair with Edwina, he would have been well placed to effectively blackmail Major. 'Sack me and I blow the whistle on you!'
Gavin Williamson and Robert Jenrick were both pointless answers on BBC's Pointless yesterday. (Question: Name members of Brois Johnson's first Cabinet) but so was Liz Truss. I am tempted to add: That is a disgrace.
Charles V: "I speak Spanish to God, Italian to women, French to men, and German to my horse"
@vonderleyen today: I use English for economics and health, French for social policy and German to warn the Poles to respect the rule of law and our values. #StateOfTheUnion
How many sacked Ministers immediately go into 'revenge' mode? I recall that Norman Lamont took his ousting from the Treasury by Major very badly indeed - and the bitterness has continued to the extent that they are not on speaking terms. It went so deep that Lamont refused the customary exchange of letters when a Minister leaves office.Had he known about Major's affair with Edwina, he would have been well placed to effectively blackmail Major. 'Sack me and I blow the whistle on you!'
You're the goto guy for historical political trivia, if you don't know who does?!
Charles V: "I speak Spanish to God, Italian to women, French to men, and German to my horse"
@vonderleyen today: I use English for economics and health, French for social policy and German to warn the Poles to respect the rule of law and our values. #StateOfTheUnion
Left wing snowflakes are killing comedy, tearing down historic statues, removing books from universities, dumbing down panto, removing Christ from Christmas and suppressing free speech. Sadly, it must be true, history does repeat itself. It will be music next.
What about Patel? is a good question. Why was she at Number 10 for no change? Was Raab bought off with a title originally meant for her? Priti as DPM even?
Portraits of the Queen rescued from Kabul to be a mandatory part of all news sets next to the union flag. Spitting Image to be banned. GBNews replaces Independent Radio News to supply non-woke news to commercial radio.
Charles V: "I speak Spanish to God, Italian to women, French to men, and German to my horse"
@vonderleyen today: I use English for economics and health, French for social policy and German to warn the Poles to respect the rule of law and our values. #StateOfTheUnion
In one day, Faroe Islanders managed to kill (for no reason) 2% of all the white sided dolphins on earth.
Good work, lads. Just another 49 days and they will all be gone
So the question becomes, should a community be allowed to make a species extinct because it has a right to maintain its traditional culture? A good example of humans putting themselves above everything else on the planet.
What about Patel? is a good question. Why was she at Number 10 for no change? Was Raab bought off with a title originally meant for her? Priti as DPM even?
Seems several ministers have gone into no 10 to be confirmed as no change
No major surprises from the reshuffle, Truss moves to Foreign Secretary as expected after a good stint getting trade deals and Raab replaces Buckland at Justice. Jenrick after being seen as a bit too supportive of developers is replaced by Gove, a safe pair of hands. Dowden, a media friendly figure, replaces Milling as Party co-chair with Dorries replacing him at culture.
Williamson finally leaves the Cabinet after falling popularity amongst party members and teachers alike, replaced by safe pair of hands Zahawi as Education Secretary.
Also notable that all those leaving the Cabinet backed Remain in the EU referendum, so the Cabinet further shifts towards Leavers
How many sacked Ministers immediately go into 'revenge' mode? I recall that Norman Lamont took his ousting from the Treasury by Major very badly indeed - and the bitterness has continued to the extent that they are not on speaking terms. It went so deep that Lamont refused the customary exchange of letters when a Minister leaves office.Had he known about Major's affair with Edwina, he would have been well placed to effectively blackmail Major. 'Sack me and I blow the whistle on you!'
Or, as Blair found with Brown, you also need to look out for the ones you do not sack ...
Charles V: "I speak Spanish to God, Italian to women, French to men, and German to my horse"
@vonderleyen today: I use English for economics and health, French for social policy and German to warn the Poles to respect the rule of law and our values. #StateOfTheUnion
In one day, Faroe Islanders managed to kill (for no reason) 2% of all the white sided dolphins on earth.
Good work, lads. Just another 49 days and they will all be gone
So the question becomes, should a community be allowed to make a species extinct because it has a right to maintain its traditional culture? A good example of humans putting themselves above everything else on the planet.
Yes, absolutely correct. And no, 50,000 barbarian wankers on a shitty archipelago do not have the ‘right’ to wipe out an entire species. Humanity as a whole does not have that ‘right’.
Ugh. Sickening.
The IWC must simply ban all Faroese whaling. End of. If they can’t control their blood-lust, then fuck their stupid ‘tradition’
What about Patel? is a good question. Why was she at Number 10 for no change? Was Raab bought off with a title originally meant for her? Priti as DPM even?
Seems several ministers have gone into no 10 to be confirmed as no change
I'm sure its all theatre and they knew going in, but I like the thought that they were sweating a bit - they knew they weren't sacked outright, but maybe they didn't know if they would be moved or not. Probably a good idea for a PM to keep them on edge.
How many sacked Ministers immediately go into 'revenge' mode? I recall that Norman Lamont took his ousting from the Treasury by Major very badly indeed - and the bitterness has continued to the extent that they are not on speaking terms. It went so deep that Lamont refused the customary exchange of letters when a Minister leaves office.Had he known about Major's affair with Edwina, he would have been well placed to effectively blackmail Major. 'Sack me and I blow the whistle on you!'
I think Lamont could be justifiably upset that he was sacked for trying to sort out the mess that his own boss had made in the first place. It was Major who pushed so hard for the UK to join the ERM and then when it all went tits up - as was inevitable - he blamed it all on Lamont.
How many sacked Ministers immediately go into 'revenge' mode? I recall that Norman Lamont took his ousting from the Treasury by Major very badly indeed - and the bitterness has continued to the extent that they are not on speaking terms. It went so deep that Lamont refused the customary exchange of letters when a Minister leaves office.Had he known about Major's affair with Edwina, he would have been well placed to effectively blackmail Major. 'Sack me and I blow the whistle on you!'
The enmity between Major and Lamont thawed several years ago I think.
Charles V: "I speak Spanish to God, Italian to women, French to men, and German to my horse"
@vonderleyen today: I use English for economics and health, French for social policy and German to warn the Poles to respect the rule of law and our values. #StateOfTheUnion
Left wing snowflakes are killing comedy, tearing down historic statues, removing books from universities, dumbing down panto, removing Christ from Christmas and suppressing free speech. Sadly, it must be true, history does repeat itself. It will be music next.
How many sacked Ministers immediately go into 'revenge' mode? I recall that Norman Lamont took his ousting from the Treasury by Major very badly indeed - and the bitterness has continued to the extent that they are not on speaking terms. It went so deep that Lamont refused the customary exchange of letters when a Minister leaves office.Had he known about Major's affair with Edwina, he would have been well placed to effectively blackmail Major. 'Sack me and I blow the whistle on you!'
I think Lamont could be justifiably upset that he was sacked for trying to sort out the mess that his own boss had made in the first place. It was Major who pushed so hard for the UK to join the ERM and then when it all went tits up - as was inevitable - he blamed it all on Lamont.
I agree with you. Lamont also had a big role in Major's 1990 leadership campaign. Not surprised he felt pissed off!
He did a bloody good job last week, getting all but two Tory MPs to line up and vote for a tax rise.
Under the circumstances I'm loathe to call that a good job but yes you're right. For a whip that is impressive.
Seems Williamson's days of knowing where the bodies are is long over.
Oh, I don’t agree with the rise, nor the specific tax used, nor the way it was presented. But I’m in awe of the Chief Whip for getting it through almost unanimously, against what must have been quite considerable private opposition from MPs.
Big drop in case numbers, but don't forget, 300k cases in a couple of weeks lads...according to modellers ;-)
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 11m Journalists still using this 7k hospitalisations/day figure. Not their fault - how are they to know how incredible it now is?
Big drop in case numbers, but don't forget, 300k cases in a couple of weeks lads...according to modellers ;-)
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 11m Journalists still using this 7k hospitalisations/day figure. Not their fault - how are they to know how incredible it now is?
Well we all know Prof Peston has superior knowledge of maths and science than the likes of JVT, and thus always ahead of the curve....
When he was an ed minister, I was always struck that when asking for a dept comment, it wd often come under his name rather than a "spokesperson" - more unusual than it sounds.
Not sure what this means, but seemed across the minutiae.
In one day, Faroe Islanders managed to kill (for no reason) 2% of all the white sided dolphins on earth.
Good work, lads. Just another 49 days and they will all be gone
So the question becomes, should a community be allowed to make a species extinct because it has a right to maintain its traditional culture? A good example of humans putting themselves above everything else on the planet.
Yes, absolutely correct. And no, 50,000 barbarian wankers on a shitty archipelago do not have the ‘right’ to wipe out an entire species. Humanity as a whole does not have that ‘right’.
Ugh. Sickening.
The IWC must simply ban all Faroese whaling. End of. If they can’t control their blood-lust, then fuck their stupid ‘tradition’
I don't think the Faroes will be making dolphins extinct any time soon. It's about the size of Perth, in ability to consume dolphins.
In one day, Faroe Islanders managed to kill (for no reason) 2% of all the white sided dolphins on earth.
Good work, lads. Just another 49 days and they will all be gone
So the question becomes, should a community be allowed to make a species extinct because it has a right to maintain its traditional culture? A good example of humans putting themselves above everything else on the planet.
Yes, absolutely correct. And no, 50,000 barbarian wankers on a shitty archipelago do not have the ‘right’ to wipe out an entire species. Humanity as a whole does not have that ‘right’.
Ugh. Sickening.
The IWC must simply ban all Faroese whaling. End of. If they can’t control their blood-lust, then fuck their stupid ‘tradition’
You are hours away from gluing yourself naked to the Faroese consulate, aren't you?
Comments
I have no clue where she stands on Culture etc issues - like should the BBC Licence Fee be scrapped which I think is her department then? It would be good to see that dealt with.
Would be a lot better than Nad or Williamson.
Trying to think if there are any from the Con front line I would leave my children with. Williamson obviously a no-no (but no longer counts, I guess). Raab lacks the attention to detail ("I didn't realise the importance of keeping an eye on young children, not just expecting them to stay put"). Johnson isn't very good at keeping track of children, as far as we can tell. Patel would have the little love on the next plane out of the country. Grant Shapps would teach some dubious habits. Sunak would steal his pocket money. Gove would, unintentionally, leave the poor little guy traumatised. Truss would hold him the wrong way up. Rees Mogg would send him off to the workhouse...
I might actually consider Starmer. Not sure about the rest of the Labour front bench (not knowing who most of them are...)
Who is going to Education
Nadhim Zahawi ?
She's written books.
What more do you want?
What could possibly be the reason 🤔
And replaced with what funding mechanism for state broadcaster?
The days of needing a "state broadcaster" are long since over in my eyes. We're not Russia, we don't need an RT state broadcaster.
And I am slow
Well done
Gove is a man who doesn't mind innovating, and who is happy to ruffle feathers.
Of course, he may come up with terrible answers, but at least they won't be the same answers we've heard so many times before.
Johnson seems to want Dacre for some reason known only to himself.
#Reshuffle
https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1438166425064157190?s=20
Still: not sure I'd have made her culture secretary, but that's another story altogether.
Yes it can go wrong, but its better to have such people than those who never have an impact at all.
https://twitter.com/PunjabKingsIPL/status/1435248502788005897
Yes, that’s pretty much the view from my office
Priti Patel stays on as home secretary and Liz Truss has been appointed as foreign secretary.
Two of the four great offices of state are now held by women - which has not been the case since Amber Rudd resigned as home secretary in 2018
https://twitter.com/instituteforgov/status/1438159275055058945?s=20
And then the argument BBC funding can’t stay still in a changing climate that kills the license fee, state broadcaster will end up funded from income tax not a clever post license fee wheeze?
Seems Williamson's days of knowing where the bodies are is long over.
My friend was badly affected by some of the stuff that happened. I worked with him at another, smaller company, where the atmosphere was far better. To confuse matters further, being gay, or tv, or ts, or different in any way, does not make you a good person. One of the TSs I knew was not, in my view, a particularly pleasant person - and not for any reason attached to her gender identity. It was sometimes hard to know if comments directed at her were due to her being ts, or because she was sometimes unpleasant herself. And then we get into a chicken-and-egg situation ...
Edit: it was slightly before my time so I didn't witness it, but apparently there was a Christmas party where one was in tears because of comments made about the bloke she had brought with her.
In one day, Faroe Islanders managed to kill (for no reason) 2% of all the white sided dolphins on earth.
Good work, lads. Just another 49 days and they will all be gone
The Rt Hon Oliver Dowden @OliverDowden has been appointed Minister without Portfolio, Cabinet Office.
https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1438166904967991307?s=20
Nadine Dorries MP @NadineDorries has been appointed Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport @DCMS
https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1438169372237959171?s=20
@vonderleyen today: I use English for economics and health, French for social policy and German to warn the Poles to respect the rule of law and our values. #StateOfTheUnion
https://twitter.com/lugaricano/status/1438049889787781122?s=20
Left wing snowflakes are killing comedy, tearing down historic statues, removing books from universities, dumbing down panto, removing Christ from Christmas and suppressing free speech. Sadly, it must be true, history does repeat itself. It will be music next.
https://twitter.com/NadineDorries/status/945973216778031110?s=20
Portraits of the Queen rescued from Kabul to be a mandatory part of all news sets next to the union flag. Spitting Image to be banned. GBNews replaces Independent Radio News to supply non-woke news to commercial radio.
That sort of thing.
Liz Truss Foreign Secretary....LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!
So Johnson has got a sense of humour!
https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/1438171652723023879?s=20
i) He'll do a good job and
ii) the Anti-vaxxers will go absolutely nuts (aren't they already? - ed.)
Williamson finally leaves the Cabinet after falling popularity amongst party members and teachers alike, replaced by safe pair of hands Zahawi as Education Secretary.
Also notable that all those leaving the Cabinet backed Remain in the EU referendum, so the Cabinet further shifts towards Leavers
Ooof, if so.
Ugh. Sickening.
The IWC must simply ban all Faroese whaling. End of. If they can’t control their blood-lust, then fuck their stupid ‘tradition’
Ben Wallace will remain as defence secretary
https://twitter.com/larisamlbrown/status/1438171277781606407?s=20
Big drop in case numbers, but don't forget, 300k cases in a couple of weeks lads...according to modellers ;-)
She's there to be the pantomime villain, which works with culture.
@andrew_lilico
·
11m
Journalists still using this 7k hospitalisations/day figure. Not their fault - how are they to know how incredible it now is?
This reshuffle doesn’t look totally mad.
On big key issues - housing, schools, NHS, even Tory Party machine - the PM now has sensible people with a track record of getting stuff done.
Liz Truss knows the globe. Trade used to be a big part of Foreign Office.
https://twitter.com/MattChorley/status/1438173357585874961?s=20
Injury to Mercedes’ Lewis Hamilton is for show, claims Red Bull adviser Helmut Marko
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/injury-to-mercedes-lewis-hamilton-is-for-show-claims-red-bull-adviser-helmut-marko-zrhxp88l9
*Did you see what I did there?
Honestly Red Bull is team full of utter Mark Recklesses.
When he was an ed minister, I was always struck that when asking for a dept comment, it wd often come under his name rather than a "spokesperson" - more unusual than it sounds.
Not sure what this means, but seemed across the minutiae.
https://twitter.com/michaelsavage/status/1438174047955791878?s=20
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nadine-Dorries/e/B00I4ZK0L2?ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1&qid=1631722555&sr=1-1