politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Case Not Proven: The suggestion that there’s been a LAB>CON sh
Comments
-
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)0 -
Traditional names for two sizes of cider flagon.OldKingCole said:
The Telegraph story suggests it's a single sheet of paper with 24 options...... 24...... including 'rather not say'. I only hope that they have to fill it in individually, without anyone else being involved. Otherwise I can see lots of crossings out and pencilling ins.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's rather unlikely to be a single question on a form; presumably the school isn't doing this as some kind of elaborate practical joke (although I agree it sounds like one, so maybe I'm wrong on that).Stereotomy said:
Well it asked about gender, not sex.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
I also think it's a little hysterical to say that asking a single question about gender on a form is "like giving them untested psychoactive drugs". And I don't see why it's "deliberately trying" to make them doubt their identity any more than asking them what their sexual preferences are would be deliberately trying to make them doubt that.
And, TBH, I'm not at all sure what some of the terms mean! What's a demi-boy? Or girl?0 -
Somerset Maugham said he preferred to travel on Italian cruise liners as there was none of that nonsense about women and children first.AlastairMeeks said:
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/182/660/58e.jpgLennon said:
In general for things like this you should just provide an empty box and ask people something like 'describe your gender'. That way you aren't 'prompting' them in any way, but neither are you restricting any potential options for answers.OldKingCole said:Richard_Nabavi said:
It's rather unlikely to be a single question on a form; presumably the school isn't doing this as some kind of elaborate practical joke (although I agree it sounds like one, so maybe I'm wrong on that).Stereotomy said:
Well it asked about gender, not sex.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
I also think it's a little hysterical to say that asking a single question about gender on a form is "like giving them untested psychoactive drugs". And I don't see why it's "deliberately trying" to make them doubt their identity any more than asking them what their sexual preferences are would be deliberately trying to make them doubt that.0 -
-
What on earth is "Tri-gender" supposed to mean?Richard_Nabavi said:
It's rather unlikely to be a single question on a form; presumably the school isn't doing this as some kind of elaborate practical joke (although I agree it sounds like one, so maybe I'm wrong on that).Stereotomy said:
Well it asked about gender, not sex.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
I also think it's a little hysterical to say that asking a single question about gender on a form is "like giving them untested psychoactive drugs". And I don't see why it's "deliberately trying" to make them doubt their identity any more than asking them what their sexual preferences are would be deliberately trying to make them doubt that.0 -
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)0 -
This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
I think she's better than that. She has a kind of lady-who-runs-the-village-post-office bonhomie. That could compete well against Boris's sloaney dishevelment. Against the guarded oddness of Rees-Mogg it might prove deadly.HYUFD said:
Thornberry is Ed Miliband in a skirtCasino_Royale said:
Either Burnham or Cooper would have made remarkably insipid leaders.stevef said:
I think if Burnham (but not Smith or Cooper) had been leader there would have been no Brexit and he would be prime minister.
I also think someone like Thornberry would ensure a Labour victory next time. But Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott are the obstacles to victory. The young (18-25) are much less important electorally than some seem to think.They are outnumbered hugely by the over 55s. 25-45 are much more important.
The fact remains, Labour must win Tory marginals in Middle England in 2022, marginals which Labour failed to win in 2017. I do not believe that a 73 year old Marxist will win those marginals.
Ironically history shows that when there is economic uncertainty the Tories benefit, even when they are in power. People may not be willing to gamble on a Labour leadership which they have no confidence in economically at a time of economic uncertainty following Brexit.
As for Tory negative campigning about Labour and the economy, it didnt exist in 2017 -yet Labour is still behind. The Tories wont make that mistake next time and if you think voters wont listen you are in for a rude shock. I am a Labour supporter and I think Corbyn and McDonnell will crash the economy. If someone like me on the mainstream (non Blairite left thinks that, how do you think wavering voters in marginals will react?
Thornberry is a bit better, to be fair.0 -
Some things don't change however
https://www.roughguides.com/gallery/most-beautiful-country-in-the-world/0 -
I don't buy the UKIP as a slumbering titan mythology. The political landscape has radically changed now and the conditions that led UKIP to metastasize in the first place no longer exist. The resistance to the apostasy of BINO would be led by the criminally insane wing of the tories (JRM, etc) and the ever opportunistic Corbyn.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and regulatory alignment, staying in the Customs Union with all FTAs agreed through the EU and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)0 -
You're male, female and the type of gender that is neither of the two.Sean_F said:
What on earth is "Tri-gender" supposed to mean?Richard_Nabavi said:
It's rather unlikely to be a single question on a form; presumably the school isn't doing this as some kind of elaborate practical joke (although I agree it sounds like one, so maybe I'm wrong on that).Stereotomy said:
Well it asked about gender, not sex.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
I also think it's a little hysterical to say that asking a single question about gender on a form is "like giving them untested psychoactive drugs". And I don't see why it's "deliberately trying" to make them doubt their identity any more than asking them what their sexual preferences are would be deliberately trying to make them doubt that.0 -
She is too metropolitan liberal to be the lady who rubs the post officeStark_Dawning said:
I think she's better than that. She has a kind of lady-who-runs-the-village-post-office bonhomie. That could compete well against Boris's sloaney dishevelment. Against the guarded oddness of Rees-Mogg it might prove deadly.HYUFD said:
Thornberry is Ed Miliband in a skirtCasino_Royale said:
Either Burnham or Cooper would have made remarkably insipid leaders.stevef said:
I think if Burnham (but not Smith or Cooper) had been leader there would have been no Brexit and he would be prime minister.
I also think someone like Thornberry would ensure a Labour victory next time. But Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott are the obstacles to victory. The young (18-25) are much less important electorally than some seem to think.They are outnumbered hugely by the over 55s. 25-45 are much more important.
The fact remains, Labour must win Tory marginals in Middle England in 2022, marginals which Labour failed to win in 2017. I do not believe that a 73 year old Marxist will win those marginals.
Ironically history shows that when there is economic uncertainty the Tories benefit, even when they are in power. People may not be willing to gamble on a Labour leadership which they have no confidence in economically at a time of economic uncertainty following Brexit.
As for Tory negative campigning about Labour and the economy, it didnt exist in 2017 -yet Labour is still behind. The Tories wont make that mistake next time and if you think voters wont listen you are in for a rude shock. I am a Labour supporter and I think Corbyn and McDonnell will crash the economy. If someone like me on the mainstream (non Blairite left thinks that, how do you think wavering voters in marginals will react?
Thornberry is a bit better, to be fair.0 -
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.0 -
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..0 -
The conditions which led to the rise of UKIP were free movement without transition controls and concerns over lost sovereignty, failing to resolve any of those issues by the Tories or Labour would leave them with the 'true' Brexit voters all to themselves, much as the SNP largely has a monopoly on pro independence voters in ScotlandDura_Ace said:
I don't buy the UKIP as a slumbering titan mythology. The political landscape has radically changed now and the conditions that led UKIP to metastasize in the first place no longer exist. The resistance to the apostasy of BINO would be led by the criminally insane wing of the tories (JRM, etc) and the ever opportunistic Corbyn.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and regulatory alignment, staying in the Customs Union with all FTAs agreed through the EU and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)0 -
Wow. 'New trading opportunities beyond the EU' is at 1%. That's a non-issue. The agenda of Dan Hannan and his followers is up there with Odin worship.AlastairMeeks said:This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
Nigel Farage isn't the man he was.Dura_Ace said:I don't buy the UKIP as a slumbering titan mythology. The political landscape has radically changed now and the conditions that led UKIP to metastasize in the first place no longer exist. The resistance to the apostasy of BINO would be led by the criminally insane wing of the tories (JRM, etc) and the ever opportunistic Corbyn.
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/9633896078858444800 -
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..0 -
Depends what you call small businesses but I would suggest generally no. Big business clearly does and importantly so do public services. But my personal experience is there are a lot fewer migrants working in small businesses.Benpointer said:
Big business? Are not small businesses benefiting just as much?Mortimer said:
Agreed. It's another reason why Freedom of Movement has to end; big business get an easy ride with the supply of low-wage, public subsidised labour, presently...DavidL said:
Bit disappointing. Expected to edge down a bit. Puts off the day when wages catch up just a little longer. The real wages situation is another reason why the current Tory polling is so remarkable. Under normal circumstances a government that had delivered real wages like this one would either have been out on its ear or on borrowed time.Mortimer said:Inflation didn't move, I see.
That said, personally I would prefer FoM to continue as a matter of principle. Nit that I expect mine to be a popular view.0 -
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.0 -
I do, and I am pretty certain they would regard the questionnaire as risible twattery; then again, I don't make the mistake of assuming that being their parent gives me irrefutable insight into their thought processes.Nigelb said:
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.0 -
Betting Post
Elise Christie has two more events left, the 1000 and 1500 where she is around 11-2 and 4-1 for the golds.
A better punt however might well be to take the 20-1 Hills are offering 1/4 odds, 3 places each way for SPOTY.
Anthony Joshua and Harry Kane look far too short in the betting, and going from tears to a gold (Or even perhaps just a medal) would surely set Elise up well for the competition.
Anyway I think 20-1 is good value right now, DYOR.0 -
One of Fox jr's flatmates was gender fluid, and would sometimes dress as male, and sometimes as female. It didn't really seem to touble anyone. UEA has unisex toiletstin the Union, which again didn't seem to bother people.Nigelb said:
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.0 -
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.0 -
That is quite possible - but doubt their own identity ?Ishmael_Z said:
I do, and I am pretty certain they would regard the questionnaire as risible twattery....Nigelb said:
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.
If inclined to use the term, I might describe that equally as risible twattery.0 -
What?Nigelb said:
That is quite possible - but doubt their own identity ?Ishmael_Z said:
I do, and I am pretty certain they would regard the questionnaire as risible twattery....Nigelb said:
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.
If inclined to use the term, I might describe that equally as risible twattery.0 -
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.0 -
I think 'rather more aware' is an understatement. Gender fluidity is a massive topic in the lives of older teenagers. The world has definitely shifted massively in the last decade and with the exception of those from strict religious backgrounds I think you would be hard pressed to find many kids - certainly from the middle classes - for whom gay and transgender was not considered to be an absolute norm. As you say, I doubt many teenagers would even blink at this questionnaire.Nigelb said:
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.0 -
So Customs Union would be fine by nearly everyone, as long as there is a decent wedge spent on the Nash.AlastairMeeks said:This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
The Winter Olympians haven't done too well in SPOTY. Obviously it depends on what happens elsewhere, but Yarnold got 3.7% of vote in 2014 and Williams got 6.2% of the vote in 2010.Pulpstar said:Betting Post
Elise Christie has two more events left, the 1000 and 1500 where she is around 11-2 and 4-1 for the golds.
A better punt however might well be to take the 20-1 Hills are offering 1/4 odds, 3 places each way for SPOTY.
Anthony Joshua and Harry Kane look far too short in the betting, and going from tears to a gold (Or even perhaps just a medal) would surely set Elise up well for the competition.
Anyway I think 20-1 is good value right now, DYOR.0 -
Is Marine Le Pen still in with a chance?AlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.0 -
I think the fascism resides in the Remoaner desire to frustrate democracy.Foxy said:
So Customs Union would be fine by nearly everyone, as long as there is a decent wedge spent on the Nash.AlastairMeeks said:This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
Funny. It was only a few weeks ago that the Remainers on here were claiming the £100 billion was a myth and that May had got a terribly bad deal.williamglenn said:0 -
There is not the slightest evidence that leaving the Customs Union is an inevitable element of Brexit in the minds of the general public, however much the extremists like to claim otherwise.Foxy said:
So Customs Union would be fine by nearly everyone, as long as there is a decent wedge spent on the Nash.AlastairMeeks said:This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
Gove was advocating the Customs Union in the campaign . If anyone is frustrating democracy it's the hard Brexiteers.stevef said:
I think the fascism resides in the Remoaner desire to frustrate democracy.Foxy said:
So Customs Union would be fine by nearly everyone, as long as there is a decent wedge spent on the Nash.AlastairMeeks said:This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
Brexit in name only means free movement continuing uncontrolled, ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and continued payments to Brussels, it would revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.0 -
I never understand the concern. If you think gender is biologically inherent, how can giving people options confuse them. If it isn't biologically inherent and is a social construct, then that construct can expand and change when society does, just like all other social norms do. If it's somewhere in between, similar. The only way the "could confuse" children argument could make sense is with a worldview that accepts gender is somewhat socially constructed. Then you just have to (radical suggestion coming) talk to your children.Nigelb said:
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.0 -
I expect you're right. In the context of a gender/sex survey that makes as much sense as some of the other descriptionsIshmael_Z said:
Traditional names for two sizes of cider flagon.OldKingCole said:
The Telegraph story suggests it's a single sheet of paper with 24 options...... 24...... including 'rather not say'. I only hope that they have to fill it in individually, without anyone else being involved. Otherwise I can see lots of crossings out and pencilling ins.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's rather unlikely to be a single question on a form; presumably the school isn't doing this as some kind of elaborate practical joke (although I agree it sounds like one, so maybe I'm wrong on that).Stereotomy said:
Well it asked about gender, not sex.Richard_Nabavi said:
(and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
I also think it's a little hysterical to say that asking a single question about gender on a form is "like giving them untested psychoactive drugs". And I don't see why it's "deliberately trying" to make them doubt their identity any more than asking them what their sexual preferences are would be deliberately trying to make them doubt that.
And, TBH, I'm not at all sure what some of the terms mean! What's a demi-boy? Or girl?0 -
He might retire. He will be 72 by the time of the next election.HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possible
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.0 -
Daniel Hannan said that only "tendentious British pro-Europeans" claimed we wouldn't have a deal like Switzerland.stevef said:
I think the fascism resides in the Remoaner desire to frustrate democracy.Foxy said:
So Customs Union would be fine by nearly everyone, as long as there is a decent wedge spent on the Nash.AlastairMeeks said:This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
As he states in most interviews he is fighting fit and has no intention of going anywhere plus of course the longer he stays the tighter grows Momentum's grip on the party membership, apparatus and the eventual successionAlastairMeeks said:
He might retire. He will be 72 by the time of the next election.HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possible
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.0 -
17 or 18 year olds is one thing, but this questionnaire has gone to 13 year olds as well. I've got to admit that it probably would have troubled me all those years ago.Foxy said:
One of Fox jr's flatmates was gender fluid, and would sometimes dress as male, and sometimes as female. It didn't really seem to touble anyone. UEA has unisex toiletstin the Union, which again didn't seem to bother people.Nigelb said:
Do you have teenage kids, Richard ?Richard_Nabavi said:
Because it's a bizarre psychological experiment, based on who knows what, which deliberately tries to make children doubt their own identity. It's like giving them untested psychoactive drugs. Doing that to potentially vulnerable children, who might already be coming to terms with their developing sexuality, is completely irresponsible. It's also logical nonsense: the sex of a child is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of objective fact based on chromosomes (and externally rather obvious features).Pong said:
Why is it a problem?Richard_Nabavi said:
Really? So why do they need nonsense like this?Pong said:
Did conservatives learn nothing from section 28?Richard_Nabavi said:
I fear that the deliberate attempts by some to promote gender-confusion amongst children and adolescents is a major mental-health timebomb. It amounts to child cruelty.Sean_F said:As an aside, I predict that giving puberty-blocking drugs to children who think that they're the wrong sex will generate a mass of litigation in 10-15 years time.
It's going to happen again, isn't it? We're going to have "An act to refrain public bodies from promoting gender confusion" on the statute book...
FFS. There's nothing wrong with these kids. They're fine. Take them as they come.
They know themselves far better than anyone else.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12127280/Government-asks-schoolchildren-to-define-their-gender-and-gives-them-24-options-to-choose-from.html
If you did, then likely you'd realise they are rather more aware, and considerably less bothered about any of this than are you. The likelihood of a questionnaire like this confusing teens as to their identity is somewhere between minimal and nil.
It's not a bizarre experiment; it is a simple, single questionnaire.0 -
ERM membership was supported by both main parties in the 1992 election yet we left a couple of months later. This might in some ways be a similar situation where the official policy of the government and opposition front bench obscures a large groundswell of differing opinion bubbling underneath. Depends also what is meant by "soft Brexit". There'll have to be some kind of change to FOM but the chance it'll be an empty and ineffective fudge must be quite high....would that be a soft or hard Brexit?TGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
0 -
Like he's going to say that he's feeling his age and he might hang his boots up in 18 months' time.HYUFD said:
As he states in most interviews he is fighting fit and has no intention of going anywhere plus of course the longer he stays the tighter grows Momentum's grip on the party membership, apparatus and the eventual successionAlastairMeeks said:
He might retire. He will be 72 by the time of the next election.HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possible
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.
Will he retire? Maybe not. But it's a live question to be considered in relation to any septuagenarian, especially one currently in line for an extremely demanding job.0 -
WHAT IF.....HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna wall a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
ld revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.
Those who elected him WOULD ALSO be happy with a softer Brexit?
Put that in your certain-o-graph and let's see the results.0 -
I gather the first Labour response to the Oxfam scandal is to blame the Charity Commission and the Government rather than the abusers. I wonder why. Not!0
-
I think this is right, or at least that an arrangement whereby we left the Single Market (and therefore were not subject to FoM) but entered into a customs union would respect the letter and spirit of the referendum result, whilst minimising the economic damage to ordinary people. As I've posted previously, IMO opponents of Theresa May's proposals should have concentrated on this possible option, which I think she was too quick to rule out. However, I think they've blown it, because opposition to her proposals has been all over the place.AlastairMeeks said:There is not the slightest evidence that leaving the Customs Union is an inevitable element of Brexit in the minds of the general public, however much the extremists like to claim otherwise.
Whether the EU would be happy with such a deal, and if so on what terms, is another matter, of course.0 -
Heh - good spot.HHemmelig said:
ERM membership was supported by both main parties in the 1992 election yet we left a couple of months later. This might in some ways be a similar situation where the official policy of the government and opposition front bench obscures a large groundswell of differing opinion bubbling underneath. Depends also what is meant by "soft Brexit". There'll have to be some kind of change to FOM but the chance it'll be an empty and ineffective fudge must be quite high....would that be a soft or hard Brexit?TGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
Of course ERM was a European straightjacket which wasn't working for the Uk and was easy to ditch.
Meanwhile
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/02/13/punishing-uk-brexit-talks-would-backfire-eu-france-admits/
"Benjamin Griveaux told the Telegraph there was "no question of punishing anyone with regards to Brexit," when asked about the controversial "punishment clause" in draft guidelines for the transition period.
"We must never humiliate and never punish. That'd the worst thing that could happen and I think it would reinforce the anti-European sentiment in many countries where we have elections coming up in a year," Mr Griveaux said."
0 -
Corbyn knows the only way he becomes PM is if he gains enough Leave voting Tory marginals and holds Labour working class Leave seats, getting huge majorities in Remain voting inner city and university seats will not get him to Number 10TOPPING said:
WHAT IF.....HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most at periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna wall a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
ld revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.
Those who elected him WOULD ALSO be happy with a softer Brexit?
Put that in your certain-o-graph and let's see the results.0 -
The President of the United States is currently a septuagenerian, our Head of State is over 90 years of ageAlastairMeeks said:
Like he's going to say that he's feeling his age and he might hang his boots up in 18 months' time.HYUFD said:
As he states in most interviews he is fighting fit and has no intention of going anywhere plus of course the longer he stays the tighter grows Momentum's grip on the party membership, apparatus and the eventual successionAlastairMeeks said:
He might retire. He will be 72 by the time of the next election.HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna was PM it might be but that is unlikely for at least a decade, both May and Corbyn are committed to leaving the single market and ending free movement even if they want a FTA with the EU, Boris and especially JRM want as full a Brexit as possible
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.
Will he retire? Maybe not. But it's a live question to be considered in relation to any septuagenarian, especially one currently in line for an extremely demanding job.0 -
There is also the fact (and it is a fact) that some people are biologically intersex to some degree or another- perhaps between 0.5% and 2% of the general population, though research is sparse. Physical gender is not just 'male' and 'female', and attempts to pigeonhole intersex children into gender roles has caused real harm in the past, including some fairly nasty forced operations.148grss said:
I never understand the concern. If you think gender is biologically inherent, how can giving people options confuse them. If it isn't biologically inherent and is a social construct, then that construct can expand and change when society does, just like all other social norms do. If it's somewhere in between, similar. The only way the "could confuse" children argument could make sense is with a worldview that accepts gender is somewhat socially constructed. Then you just have to (radical suggestion coming) talk to your children.
Leaving that aside, some people, not intersex, think they are of the other gender. I've known a few, including one from school right up and through his change. It wasn't a fad; it wasn't a confusion: he *knew* he was female in a male body. The abuse he got for this was terrible, and he wasn't particularly overt about it.
If a child is confused or upset by such a questionnaire, the issue is probably with them, rather than the questionnaire.0 -
Good Call on SPOTY.Pulpstar said:Betting Post
Elise Christie has two more events left, the 1000 and 1500 where she is around 11-2 and 4-1 for the golds.
A better punt however might well be to take the 20-1 Hills are offering 1/4 odds, 3 places each way for SPOTY.
Anthony Joshua and Harry Kane look far too short in the betting, and going from tears to a gold (Or even perhaps just a medal) would surely set Elise up well for the competition.
Anyway I think 20-1 is good value right now, DYOR.
Surely she will medal in the 1500.
A gold would make 20/1 very generous.0 -
Elise Christie potentially has a better 'story' than Yarnold with the whole crash to crash to gold (Hopefully !) thing going on though. SPOTY loves a good storytlg86 said:
The Winter Olympians haven't done too well in SPOTY. Obviously it depends on what happens elsewhere, but Yarnold got 3.7% of vote in 2014 and Williams got 6.2% of the vote in 2010.Pulpstar said:Betting Post
Elise Christie has two more events left, the 1000 and 1500 where she is around 11-2 and 4-1 for the golds.
A better punt however might well be to take the 20-1 Hills are offering 1/4 odds, 3 places each way for SPOTY.
Anthony Joshua and Harry Kane look far too short in the betting, and going from tears to a gold (Or even perhaps just a medal) would surely set Elise up well for the competition.
Anyway I think 20-1 is good value right now, DYOR.
0 -
I'm starting to wonder if HYUFD is my 5 year old posting in disguise....the evidence is mountingAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that period
0 -
Can you give us a citation for that please? I can find no evidence of it at all.Jonathan said:
Gove was advocating the Customs Union in the campaign . If anyone is frustrating democracy it's the hard Brexiteers.stevef said:
I think the fascism resides in the Remoaner desire to frustrate democracy.Foxy said:
So Customs Union would be fine by nearly everyone, as long as there is a decent wedge spent on the Nash.AlastairMeeks said:This fascist (and I mean the word literally) attempt to deduce the People's Will from a referendum vote is the latest extremely worrying development.
A reminder: the only two things that people now remember as arguments for Brexit were controlling immigration and more money for the NHS:
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/9619087288019763200 -
Jezza gaining Leave voting Tory marginals??HYUFD said:
Corbyn knows the only way he becomes PM is if he gains enough Leave voting Tory marginals and holds Labour working class Leave seats, getting huge majorities in Remain voting inner city and university seats will not get him to Number 10TOPPING said:
WHAT IF.....HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most at periodTGOHF said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna wall a Brexit as possibleBenpointer said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.HYUFD said:
ld revive UKIP quicker than Lazarus which is why neither the Tories nor Corbyn will do itBenpointer said:
Brexit in name only* is still Brexit... we would still have left the EU, and therefore satisfied the referendum mandatestevef said:
Then it can campaign to rejoin the EU after we have left. But it must not be allowed to frustrate a democratic referendum either by stopping Brexit or imposing Brexit in name only.TGOHF said:
Will this movement be standing many candidates in the May election ?williamglenn said:
Brexit has triggered an assertive pro-European movement that is growing stronger all the time.
(* Which is pretty much where I expect us to end up)
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.
Those who elected him WOULD ALSO be happy with a softer Brexit?
Put that in your certain-o-graph and let's see the results.
What were we saying about psychoactive drugs?0 -
Corbyn in 2017 winning about the same number of seats as Gordon Brown in 2010 has granted an extension to his deluded supporters who right up to the next general election night will be able to convince themselves that their hapless Messiah is en route to power and historical immortality.
In reality, there is nothing ahead but disapointment for the Corbynistas. Their man is old and aging fast and although he was able to escape the meltdown he deserved in 2017 he cannot escape Old Father Time and the ravages he brings with him. The inevitable atrophy of his own body will bring him down if nothing else does.
If that alone were the problem things would be rescuable. Corbytrons could just find a younger version of the Messiah to sing their mindless songs about.
Alas they are heading for more disappointment.0 -
And in any case Jezza has already won multiple "Leave voting Tory marginals"....Bury North, Warrington South, Canterbury, Peterborough, Keighley for example and there are a fair few more.TOPPING said:
Jezza gaining Leave voting Tory marginals??HYUFD said:
Corbyn knows the only way he becomes PM is if he gains enough Leave voting Tory marginals and holds Labour working class Leave seats, getting huge majorities in Remain voting inner city and university seats will not get him to Number 10
What were we saying about psychoactive drugs?
0 -
WHAT IF.....HYUFD said:
It is not very contentious, given the Labour membership have twice elected Corbyn by a landslide the only way he is likely to be removed and Labour move to a softer Brexit position is for Corbynism to be defeated at the ballot boxTOPPING said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:
It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most at periodAlastairMeeks said:
The only realistic pathway for soft or no Brexit is for Corbyn to be overthrown.HYUFD said:
As long as the LDs remain on their back and Corbyn leads Labour it will not be soft BrexitTGOHF said:
Can anyone think of a policy which came into being despite both Labour and Conservative being openly against it at the previous general election ?HYUFD said:
It won't be soft Brexit, if Chuka Umunna wall a Brexit as possibleTGOHF said:
Fair point, so let's remember that definition when the soft Brexit this government ends up with is labelled BINO by JRM, Farage and their fellow europhobes.
Because that's what Soft or no Brexit is at..
That would require a lot of spine implants for moderate Labour MPs.
Those who elected him WOULD ALSO be happy with a softer Brexit?
Put that in your certain-o-graph and let's see the results.
Corbyn knows the only way he becomes PM is if he gains enough Leave voting Tory marginals and holds Labour working class Leave seats, getting huge majorities in Remain voting inner city and university seats will not get him to Number 10
But the Conservative and Labour Party aren't the same thing with different coloured rosettes. The Labour Party has an active democratic party conference. It is entirely possible for the leadership not to get its way on the conference floor and on Brexit it probably wouldn't. For the last couple of years members have chosen not to bring the issue up. I imagine they'll do the same this year. But at some point it will be voted through, voted on and there is every chance the Labour Party could end up as the anti-Brexit party regardless of what Corbyn wants or thinks wise. And the left of the party have always made a big deal of party democracy. He would not be able to fudge his way out.
Okay so maybe that would lose Labour a chunk of its working class support. I don't know. But neither does anyone else. If it doesn't we could have the first general election after leaving fought with one of the two main parties committed to rejoining.
0 -
You continue to underestimate him.stevef said:Corbyn in 2017 winning about the same number of seats as Gordon Brown in 2010 has granted an extension to his deluded supporters who right up to the next general election night will be able to convince themselves that their hapless Messiah is en route to power and historical immortality.
In reality, there is nothing ahead but disapointment for the Corbynistas. Their man is old and aging fast and although he was able to escape the meltdown he deserved in 2017 he cannot escape Old Father Time and the ravages he brings with him. The inevitable atrophy of his own body will bring him down if nothing else does.
If that alone were the problem things would be rescuable. Corbytrons could just find a younger version of the Messiah to sing their mindless songs about.
Alas they are heading for more disappointment.
How many times so far.0 -
@HYUFD is correct, almost all the top Labour Tory targets voted to leave the EU:HYUFD said:
Jezza gaining Leave voting Tory marginals??TOPPING said:
Corbyn knows the only way he becomes PM is if he gains enough Leave voting Tory marginals and holds Labour working class Leave seats, getting huge majorities in Remain voting inner city and university seats will not get him to Number 10
What were we saying about psychoactive drugs?
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
0 -
If I had underestimated him he would be prime minister.bigjohnowls said:
You continue to underestimate him.stevef said:Corbyn in 2017 winning about the same number of seats as Gordon Brown in 2010 has granted an extension to his deluded supporters who right up to the next general election night will be able to convince themselves that their hapless Messiah is en route to power and historical immortality.
In reality, there is nothing ahead but disapointment for the Corbynistas. Their man is old and aging fast and although he was able to escape the meltdown he deserved in 2017 he cannot escape Old Father Time and the ravages he brings with him. The inevitable atrophy of his own body will bring him down if nothing else does.
If that alone were the problem things would be rescuable. Corbytrons could just find a younger version of the Messiah to sing their mindless songs about.
Alas they are heading for more disappointment.
How many times so far.
But he isnt is he?0 -
I'd gently note that England are about 11/4 to make the World Cup semi-final, which would probably be enough for a football winner - QF (around 5/6) would be a maybe and final (8/1) would be almost definite. 20/1 sounds ok but it will be a very faded memory by December, not helped by the time-of-day that she is winning the medal at. Contrast the curlers who loads of people still remember.Pulpstar said:
Elise Christie potentially has a better 'story' than Yarnold with the whole crash to crash to gold (Hopefully !) thing going on though. SPOTY loves a good storytlg86 said:
The Winter Olympians haven't done too well in SPOTY. Obviously it depends on what happens elsewhere, but Yarnold got 3.7% of vote in 2014 and Williams got 6.2% of the vote in 2010.Pulpstar said:Betting Post
Elise Christie has two more events left, the 1000 and 1500 where she is around 11-2 and 4-1 for the golds.
A better punt however might well be to take the 20-1 Hills are offering 1/4 odds, 3 places each way for SPOTY.
Anthony Joshua and Harry Kane look far too short in the betting, and going from tears to a gold (Or even perhaps just a medal) would surely set Elise up well for the competition.
Anyway I think 20-1 is good value right now, DYOR.0 -
Just consider how very very very bad you have to be as a Labour leader for even someone as inept as Theresa May running the worst Tory campaign of all time to beat him and his party into its third successive general election defeat.0
-
And the curlers still didn't get Team of the Year (Europe's Ryder Cup winning team won it).Tissue_Price said:
I'd gently note that England are about 11/4 to make the World Cup semi-final, which would probably be enough for a football winner - QF (around 5/6) would be a maybe and final (8/1) would be almost definite. 20/1 sounds ok but it will be a very faded memory by December, not helped by the time-of-day that she is winning the medal at. Contrast the curlers who loads of people still remember.Pulpstar said:
Elise Christie potentially has a better 'story' than Yarnold with the whole crash to crash to gold (Hopefully !) thing going on though. SPOTY loves a good storytlg86 said:
The Winter Olympians haven't done too well in SPOTY. Obviously it depends on what happens elsewhere, but Yarnold got 3.7% of vote in 2014 and Williams got 6.2% of the vote in 2010.Pulpstar said:Betting Post
Elise Christie has two more events left, the 1000 and 1500 where she is around 11-2 and 4-1 for the golds.
A better punt however might well be to take the 20-1 Hills are offering 1/4 odds, 3 places each way for SPOTY.
Anthony Joshua and Harry Kane look far too short in the betting, and going from tears to a gold (Or even perhaps just a medal) would surely set Elise up well for the competition.
Anyway I think 20-1 is good value right now, DYOR.0 -
You dont even admit to underestimating him in 2 leadership campaigns and a GE.stevef said:
If I had underestimated him he would be prime minister.bigjohnowls said:
You continue to underestimate him.stevef said:Corbyn in 2017 winning about the same number of seats as Gordon Brown in 2010 has granted an extension to his deluded supporters who right up to the next general election night will be able to convince themselves that their hapless Messiah is en route to power and historical immortality.
In reality, there is nothing ahead but disapointment for the Corbynistas. Their man is old and aging fast and although he was able to escape the meltdown he deserved in 2017 he cannot escape Old Father Time and the ravages he brings with him. The inevitable atrophy of his own body will bring him down if nothing else does.
If that alone were the problem things would be rescuable. Corbytrons could just find a younger version of the Messiah to sing their mindless songs about.
Alas they are heading for more disappointment.
How many times so far.
But he isnt is he?
I am sorry but there is no way you expected him to win in 2015 see off a chicken coup in 2016 and avoid wipeout (let alone gain seats) in 2017
Have you a denial problem?
Perhaps you will tell us how you voted in GE 2017 now (decides not to hold breath)0 -
838/838stevef said:Just consider how very very very bad you have to be as a Labour leader for even someone as inept as Theresa May running the worst Tory campaign of all time to beat him and his party into its third successive general election defeat.
Would be much easier just to post
JCWNBPM
If only there were an ignore button.0 -
There is an ignore button. Its in your head. Use it.bigjohnowls said:
838/838stevef said:Just consider how very very very bad you have to be as a Labour leader for even someone as inept as Theresa May running the worst Tory campaign of all time to beat him and his party into its third successive general election defeat.
Would be much easier just to post
JCWNBPM
If only there were an ignore button.
Ooops I just advised a Corbynista to use his head.0 -
SteveF's classmateHHemmelig said:
I'm starting to wonder if HYUFD is my 5 year old posting in disguise....the evidence is mountingAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that period
0 -
Has anyone from the Winter Olympics won SPOTY since Torvill and Dean?tlg86 said:
And the curlers still didn't get Team of the Year (Europe's Ryder Cup winning team won it).Tissue_Price said:
I'd gently note that England are about 11/4 to make the World Cup semi-final, which would probably be enough for a football winner - QF (around 5/6) would be a maybe and final (8/1) would be almost definite. 20/1 sounds ok but it will be a very faded memory by December, not helped by the time-of-day that she is winning the medal at. Contrast the curlers who loads of people still remember.Pulpstar said:
Elise Christie potentially has a better 'story' than Yarnold with the whole crash to crash to gold (Hopefully !) thing going on though. SPOTY loves a good storytlg86 said:
The Winter Olympians haven't done too well in SPOTY. Obviously it depends on what happens elsewhere, but Yarnold got 3.7% of vote in 2014 and Williams got 6.2% of the vote in 2010.Pulpstar said:Betting Post
Elise Christie has two more events left, the 1000 and 1500 where she is around 11-2 and 4-1 for the golds.
A better punt however might well be to take the 20-1 Hills are offering 1/4 odds, 3 places each way for SPOTY.
Anthony Joshua and Harry Kane look far too short in the betting, and going from tears to a gold (Or even perhaps just a medal) would surely set Elise up well for the competition.
Anyway I think 20-1 is good value right now, DYOR.0 -
When I was at school and learning about politics, you did a lap of honour after you had won an election, not just after you had lost one.bigjohnowls said:
SteveF's classmateHHemmelig said:
I'm starting to wonder if HYUFD is my 5 year old posting in disguise....the evidence is mountingAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that period
0 -
There be a new thread over that a'way ----->0
-
Your 5 year old is obviously brighter than you areHHemmelig said:
I'm starting to wonder if HYUFD is my 5 year old posting in disguise....the evidence is mountingAlastairMeeks said:
I wish I was as certain of anything as you are of everything.HYUFD said:It would also provoke a civil war in the Labour Party and most likely Momentum inspired mass deselections of moderate Labour MPs. Unless the Tories win a majority at the next general election Corbyn and Corbynism are not going anywhere for the best part of the next decade which means the UK will not be in the single market for most of that period
0 -
Wait, I know this one!bigjohnowls said:
You dont even admit to underestimating him in 2 leadership campaigns and a GE.
I am sorry but there is no way you expected him to win in 2015 see off a chicken coup in 2016 and avoid wipeout (let alone gain seats) in 2017
Have you a denial problem?
Perhaps you will tell us how you voted in GE 2017 now (decides not to hold breath)
and I've been a Labour supporter for 40 years...
Corbyn fans are in for a real shock in 2022...
Old people queuing around the block....
0 -
Does not change the fact that you only get men or women, no matter how many fancy names you make up for it two genders is your lot.JosiasJessop said:
There is also the fact (and it is a fact) that some people are biologically intersex to some degree or another- perhaps between 0.5% and 2% of the general population, though research is sparse. Physical gender is not just 'male' and 'female', and attempts to pigeonhole intersex children into gender roles has caused real harm in the past, including some fairly nasty forced operations.148grss said:
I never understand the concern. If you think gender is biologically inherent, how can giving people options confuse them. If it isn't biologically inherent and is a social construct, then that construct can expand and change when society does, just like all other social norms do. If it's somewhere in between, similar. The only way the "could confuse" children argument could make sense is with a worldview that accepts gender is somewhat socially constructed. Then you just have to (radical suggestion coming) talk to your children.
Leaving that aside, some people, not intersex, think they are of the other gender. I've known a few, including one from school right up and through his change. It wasn't a fad; it wasn't a confusion: he *knew* he was female in a male body. The abuse he got for this was terrible, and he wasn't particularly overt about it.
If a child is confused or upset by such a questionnaire, the issue is probably with them, rather than the questionnaire.0
