One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
I just heard a snippet on the radio news which made me lol: People are being criticised for taking selfies with the dead pope. Hilariously disrespctful and a cherishably ridiculous mental image.
I don't think he'll mind.
He probably wouldn’t have minded in life either!
He'll be too busy getting to know the Borgias to worry about what's happening up here.
I just heard a snippet on the radio news which made me lol: People are being criticised for taking selfies with the dead pope. Hilariously disrespctful and a cherishably ridiculous mental image.
Things only happen if there's a picture. Not that a picture guarantees things happened.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
When a future Gibbon writes a decline and fall of the West - or perhaps a decline and fall of humanity - the “trans debate” will deserve a chapter all of it own. That so many educated people became obsessed with such a niche issue - even as the world collapsed around them - and eagerly sought to believe obviously stupid things…
It will be a bleak chapter, as welll as bizarre
(narrator: when Leon refers to "Gibbon" it's a reference to the historian Edward Gibbon, not the long-armed furry ape. Try not to confuse the two, especially in a library)
I also did, for the first four words at least. I imagined a sort of Planet of the Apes scenario.
I'm also heartened that @viewcode is reading this in a public library - singlehandedly and nobly keeping the old technologies alive. (Talking of which, I attempted to pay a cheque* into a bank today and was mildly taken aback that they appear no longer to have cashiers and such a thing is not possible. I was directed instead to the cashpoint outside for the purpose, which seemed to work fine.
*A thing now apparently so archaic that my browser's spellcheck appears not to recognise it, and suggests 'quench' instead.
DVLA still send cheques when you terminate car tax early, it seems. So at least one arm of government still uses them.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
Don't catechise me, Carlotta. Your comment effectively calls my son a liar.
Unfair, the amount of mildly grifty self-interest shown by Labour indicates that they care for very ordinary people.
lol. Yes
A government by the mediocre for the mediocre. A government so dedicated to aiding the mediocre the entire cabinet is composed of mediocrities and the mediocre leader himself puts the meh in mediocre
I'll take mediocre over orange clownshow Reform redux, which seems to be the alternative.
I will take reform because at least they care about Britain and British people. Labour care about anyone but the British and Britain, and strive to make sure we always get the worst possible deal, favouring foreigners wherever they can - to the extent they are paying random third countries tens of billions to take away our territory - even as they invite in tens of thousands of illegal migrants and put them in the Savoy. On our shilling
"I will take reform because at least they care about Britain and British people."
They really don't. And too many of their supporters care for only a rather limited subset of "British people".
My main issue with Reform on a practical level is they insist they are not normal politicians but they look pretty regular to me.
Sure certain policy positions may be different, which some will like and others hate, but they want to present as some transformative new force you can trust, when they seem to be made up of...the same type of people who usually become politicians, saying the same basic things - x is bad, you can't trust y to solve it but I'm on the level.
I just don't see on what basis they'd magically have more integrity and competence when they spin and obfuscate and simplify just like other parties and say they care like others, even if you prefer their policies.
If they stop the boats and get immigration down under 100,000 that will be an overwhelming triumph. Then we can talk about removing ILR for the boriswave - and move from there
Just doing that will be an enormous boost to the UK’s fiscal position
"Stop the boats" may be some kind of symbolic talisman to the fash-curious, but has bugger all to to do with anything fundamental in the UK. It is basically an unserious dog whistle.
It really isn’t. Because the sums are far from trivial
You know how much we spend a year on asylums seekers? Around £5 BILLION and the number is rising every week - in 2-3 years it could hit £10 bn
£5Bn is 0.42% of government expenditure.
Hardly an avalanche of money…
£5bn a year can't simply be shrugged off, and is significant. It's near enough a penny on income tax.
The issue here is both the lack of control, the cost, and the perception the rights of asylum seekers are better guarded than those of domestic citizens.
Liberals dismiss it all because they don't like or agree with borders anyway.
Yes, the money is huge, but is because of the policy of warehousing asylum seekers rather than processing the applicants. People lose their right to accommodation after the determination of their application, whether granted or refused. At that point they become homeless or deported.
So to cut the financial and political cost the best approach is to process applicants more speedily and to deport those refused asylum. That is broadly what the current government is attempting, the warehousing being a legacy of the last governments policy.
That's part of it. The other part is that at present far too many qualify, fuelling numbers: if you cross the channel you're very likely to get asylum if you play your cards right. Because the rights are so broad, and legal advice highly accessible, so you can launch endless appeals.
So the criteria and appeals process needs tightening too.
The rate of being granted asylum (on initial application) was 52% in the year ending September 2024. This is significantly down on the 75% of the previous 12 month period, but still higher than it was back in 2019.
When a future Gibbon writes a decline and fall of the West - or perhaps a decline and fall of humanity - the “trans debate” will deserve a chapter all of it own. That so many educated people became obsessed with such a niche issue - even as the world collapsed around them - and eagerly sought to believe obviously stupid things…
It will be a bleak chapter, as welll as bizarre
(narrator: when Leon refers to "Gibbon" it's a reference to the historian Edward Gibbon, not the long-armed furry ape. Try not to confuse the two, especially in a library)
I also did, for the first four words at least. I imagined a sort of Planet of the Apes scenario.
I'm also heartened that @viewcode is reading this in a public library - singlehandedly and nobly keeping the old technologies alive. (Talking of which, I attempted to pay a cheque* into a bank today and was mildly taken aback that they appear no longer to have cashiers and such a thing is not possible. I was directed instead to the cashpoint outside for the purpose, which seemed to work fine.
*A thing now apparently so archaic that my browser's spellcheck appears not to recognise it, and suggests 'quench' instead.
DVLA still send cheques when you terminate car tax early, it seems. So at least one arm of government still uses them.
I managed to sort it out in a Post Office.
I can photograph them on my phone, but only for one of my current accounts
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you believe that dysphoria is the physical condition of being in the wrong body or the psychological condition of believing that you are?
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
In specific settings - like informed consent for patients as to the sex of their carer there should be no ambiguity - something a witness in the NHS Fife case rejected.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
I find your relentless trans posting very tiresome, although as much as I would like to, I can't disagree with that post.
Unfair, the amount of mildly grifty self-interest shown by Labour indicates that they care for very ordinary people.
lol. Yes
A government by the mediocre for the mediocre. A government so dedicated to aiding the mediocre the entire cabinet is composed of mediocrities and the mediocre leader himself puts the meh in mediocre
I'll take mediocre over orange clownshow Reform redux, which seems to be the alternative.
I will take reform because at least they care about Britain and British people. Labour care about anyone but the British and Britain, and strive to make sure we always get the worst possible deal, favouring foreigners wherever they can - to the extent they are paying random third countries tens of billions to take away our territory - even as they invite in tens of thousands of illegal migrants and put them in the Savoy. On our shilling
"I will take reform because at least they care about Britain and British people."
They really don't. And too many of their supporters care for only a rather limited subset of "British people".
My main issue with Reform on a practical level is they insist they are not normal politicians but they look pretty regular to me.
Sure certain policy positions may be different, which some will like and others hate, but they want to present as some transformative new force you can trust, when they seem to be made up of...the same type of people who usually become politicians, saying the same basic things - x is bad, you can't trust y to solve it but I'm on the level.
I just don't see on what basis they'd magically have more integrity and competence when they spin and obfuscate and simplify just like other parties and say they care like others, even if you prefer their policies.
If they stop the boats and get immigration down under 100,000 that will be an overwhelming triumph. Then we can talk about removing ILR for the boriswave - and move from there
Just doing that will be an enormous boost to the UK’s fiscal position
"Stop the boats" may be some kind of symbolic talisman to the fash-curious, but has bugger all to to do with anything fundamental in the UK. It is basically an unserious dog whistle.
Talking of dog whistles, what do you think of the Lib Dem policy on “headphone dodgers”?
If the Lib Dems extended this policy to include penalties for amplified buskers in town centres they would get a 100 seat majority at the next General Election.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
Don't catechise me, Carlotta. Your comment effectively calls my son a liar.
Your child may thank you later in life for the path you have overseen.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
In specific settings - like informed consent for patients as to the sex of their carer there should be no ambiguity - something a witness in the NHS Fife case rejected.
Then give them colour coded name badges or ones that specify sex. No need to impinge on people's rights to dress and look how they want.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
Don't catechise me, Carlotta. Your comment effectively calls my son a liar.
Your child may thank you later in life for the path you have overseen.
I hope they do.
But they may not.
Good luck.
Is that an example of "compassion and respect" your side of the debate routinely drops in a same sort of disclaimer ?
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
I find your relentless trans posting very tiresome, although as much as I would like to, I can't disagree with that post.
Only On PlanetPB.com could the rights of women be seen as a minority issue.
The volunteers who brought the Supreme Court action that (most) politicians are belatedly and furiously rowing in behind were ForWomenScotland not “FarRightBigotChristianAmericans” as some seem to believe.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
Don't catechise me, Carlotta. Your comment effectively calls my son a liar.
Your child may thank you later in life for the path you have overseen.
I hope they do.
But they may not.
Good luck.
Is that an example of "compassion and respect" your side of the debate routinely drops in a same sort of disclaimer ?
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
The end state of TERFism is the rigid enforcement of the gender presentation & dress of women.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
And, in very rare cases, some produce sperm and eggs.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
I largely agree. Part of why gender issues are so much to the fore are because the stereotypical gender roles pushed by Social Media are very narrow and restrictive.
Yes, although 'pushed by social media' and 'the more people try to pigeonhole men and women' (to paraphrase JJ) make it sound like there is some sort of villain behind this, either in the form of some sort of Mark Zuckerberg supervillain or a conservative-society-as-a-whole is wrong idea. I don't think either are true (and I'm not suggesting either of you do either). I don't think many people, and certainly not many people in any sort of position of power, think men and women should be how I stereotyped them above - inasmuch as such an idea is driven at all, it's by a) a relatively small number of people who've been able to get some social media traction, and b) the nebulous concept of 'fashion', which despite appearances is never a thing much followed by the masses of us.
I think where I'm going with this is that this isn't an idea anyone ought to feel the need to react against, because it's not an idea with any sort of currency to start with.
It's complicated. Gender dysphoria genuinely is a thing, and we can only understand it by listening to those who experience it. There is no other way as we have no window into souls...
This remark would suggest that some believe otherwise. .."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
Do you support “transient away the gay” among children?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
I find your relentless trans posting very tiresome, although as much as I would like to, I can't disagree with that post.
Only On PlanetPB.com could the rights of women be seen as a minority issue.
The volunteers who brought the Supreme Court action that (most) politicians are belatedly and furiously rowing in behind were ForWomenScotland not “FarRightBigotChristianAmericans” as some seem to believe.
A lot of women don't agree with you, more men agree with you than women.
You are taking victory laps over a decision that will hurt some cis women. Yes, an organisation can call itself whatever it likes, it doesn't make the name true, they can be judged by their actions instead. They are for some women and woe betide any woman that stands up and disagrees with them, they have been bullied and hounded all over the place.
Remember what you said about the female MPs like Sarah Owen and Christine Jardine who didn't follow the Gender Critical script in the Commons on Tuesday. You're not championing women by crushing and trying to silence them.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
There are at least two more in some Intersex conditions: 'none' - where they produce neither eggs nor sperm, or 'both', where they can produce both. That's the point: it's complex and far from binary. Just like everything else.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
There are at least two more in some Intersex conditions: 'none' - where they produce neither eggs nor sperm, or 'both', where they can produce both. That's the point: it's complex and far from binary. Just like everything else.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
Cass also pointed out that the evidence of its treatment is poorly evidenced, but that doesn't mean that it is not appropriate. Cass supported a proper longitudinal study of the use of puberty blockers, not banning them. That study has not yet commenced, indeed has been refused, so we will be no further forward in the future in terms of knowing either the benefits or harms of treatment.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
“Transing away the gay” referred to children at the Tavistock.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
There are at least two more in some Intersex conditions: 'none' - where they produce neither eggs nor sperm, or 'both', where they can produce both. That's the point: it's complex and far from binary. Just like everything else.
But there is no third gamete, so no “third sex”.
As I said, none or both. It's messy and complex - like all biology.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
What did you think of the Cass review?
Do you support Cass's proposed longitudinal study of puberty blockers in children?
The majestic mountains and the Kyrgyz barista's foam art have gone to my head, as I keep everyone back home in Blighty abreast of my profound cogitations on how Labour is in the service of foreigners and fails to defend even the basic principles of whiteness.
I am a Dr Leon, mixed up, for a crappy journal author. (6,4).
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
There are at least two more in some Intersex conditions: 'none' - where they produce neither eggs nor sperm, or 'both', where they can produce both. That's the point: it's complex and far from binary. Just like everything else.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
Cass also pointed out that the evidence of its treatment is poorly evidenced, but that doesn't mean that it is not appropriate. Cass supported a proper longitudinal study of the use of puberty blockers, not banning them. That study has not yet commenced, indeed has been refused, so we will be no further forward in the future in terms of knowing either the benefits or harms of treatment.
The failure to start a study does seem an egregious breach of the Cass report's recommendations.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
What did you think of the Cass review?
Do you support Cass's proposed longitudinal study of puberty blockers in children?
Interesting non-answer - I’m not a Doctor - do you?
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
“Transing away the gay” referred to children at the Tavistock.
What did you think of the Cass review?
What do you think of the Cass review? Let's take puberty blockers. The Cass Review said that the clinical evidence supporting using blockers for children with gender dysphoria was weak so they should only be prescribed as part of a clinical trial. Do you support there being a clinical trial on if puberty blockers save children's lives? Because Sex Matters have successfully blocked the clinical trial that was meant to start over a year ago.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
The end state of TERFism is the rigid enforcement of the gender presentation & dress of women.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
I dunno. As a man who doesn't fit traditional male stereotypes I've always felt that the ideology of some trans advocates has threatened my identity as a non-traditional male. Something they have in common with the right-wing bigots.
Terfs have never threatened my identity in the same way.
India suspends visa services for Pakistani nationals with immediate effect.
All existing visas have been revoked.
I will happily welcome an Indo-Pakistani war, perhaps even a nuclear exchange across the Indus, if it stops PB talking about fucking Trans
And yet I also know that wouldn’t do it. After the Asian nuke war goes global, and the Chinese and Americans and Brits and Israelis and Koreans all launch their nukes, and the world is plunged into a howling and desolate nuclear winter, and I am gnawing a rat in the smoking ruins of Newent, someone with melted eyeballs and their skin peeling off will approach me and say “NO, gender is a social construct, we need new cubicles!”
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
What did you think of the Cass review?
Do you support Cass's proposed longitudinal study of puberty blockers in children?
Interesting non-answer - I’m not a Doctor - do you?
Yes, I do support it, with all the usual provisions on informed consent etc.
Do you support it? Or do you oppose this bit of the Cass review?
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
“Transing away the gay” referred to children at the Tavistock.
What did you think of the Cass review?
What do you think of the Cass review? Let's take puberty blockers. The Cass Review said that the clinical evidence supporting using blockers for children with gender dysphoria was weak so they should only be prescribed as part of a clinical trial. Do you support there being a clinical trial on if puberty blockers save children's lives? Because Sex Matters have successfully blocked the clinical trial that was meant to start over a year ago.
SexMatters do not have the power to block a clinical trial - if they have asked questions clinicians have been unable to answer that’s down to clinicians.
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
IMV the more people try to pigeonhole man and women into very defined groups, the more the concept of gender is required for the rest of us. I'm increasingly of the view that nothing in biology or society is binary: sex certainly is not, given those with intersex conditions (which the debate widely ignores or tries to hand-wave away). Sexuality certainly is not binary, and again, this is something some people - not you - have great trouble with.
The way this is heading, roles will regress and become more binary, becoming "men do this, women do this" This would be a very backwards move, but I think will be the next battleground if some have their way.
Sex is binary. People with DSDs (Differences of Sexual Development) were developing down either the male or female route when something went wrong, so all DSDs are either from a male or female base. (By the way "intersex" is regarded by some with DSDs as an outdated and offensive term.)
I agree on sexuality.
I think people have i) a sex, determined shortly after conception, and with them for life, ii) a sexuality, which is no one's business but their own and any other consenting adult they wish to interact sexually with and iii) a personality, of which there are as many variants as there are people.
It's the "born in the wrong body" believers who are proponents of "gender" and all the regressive stereotypes that relies on.
"when something went wrong"...
Wording that says a heck of a lot. Perhaps, from their perspective, nothing 'went wrong', but 'went right' ?
Intersex people exist. Their existence shows that sex is not binary.
List the different gametes they produce.
AIUI intersex is a whole range of characteristics; some are infertile; some have ovaries or can produce sperm. But not all. So 'none' for some.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
No of course not.
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
Cass also pointed out that the evidence of its treatment is poorly evidenced, but that doesn't mean that it is not appropriate. Cass supported a proper longitudinal study of the use of puberty blockers, not banning them. That study has not yet commenced, indeed has been refused, so we will be no further forward in the future in terms of knowing either the benefits or harms of treatment.
The failure to start a study does seem an egregious breach of the Cass report's recommendations.
If there is one thing both sides can agree on, it is that we do not need evidence.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
“Transing away the gay” referred to children at the Tavistock.
What did you think of the Cass review?
What do you think of the Cass review? Let's take puberty blockers. The Cass Review said that the clinical evidence supporting using blockers for children with gender dysphoria was weak so they should only be prescribed as part of a clinical trial. Do you support there being a clinical trial on if puberty blockers save children's lives? Because Sex Matters have successfully blocked the clinical trial that was meant to start over a year ago.
SexMatters do not have the power to block a clinical trial - if they have asked questions clinicians have been unable to answer that’s down to clinicians.
You are being increasingly evasive. Do you support the study that Cass recommended?
(Worthy of note that of course evidence can emerge from other sources and other countries, but a robustly run prospective trial is the strongest evidence)
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
What did you think of the Cass review?
Do you support Cass's proposed longitudinal study of puberty blockers in children?
Interesting non-answer - I’m not a Doctor - do you?
Yes, I do support it, with all the usual provisions on informed consent etc.
Do you support it? Or do you oppose this bit of the Cass review?
I don’t know enough about the issues around the clinical trial. How would you address the issues around informed consent?
Yesterday he was saying Russia was ready for peace. He's so full of crap.
This is all a performance so that he can walk away from supporting Ukraine and not be blamed for the consequences.
This is rapidly becoming existential for Europe now. If Europe isn't able to defend a European democracy from Russian attack then European democracy cannot survive..
I am now geekily addicted to making lists. Possibly because I am getting old and one day all too soon my travels will end
Here are my top ten mountain ranges (that i have seen)
1. Antarctic Peninsula Deathly, divine, the last cathedrals - ice and stone, silence and awe
2. Tibetan Himalayas (Yunnan frontier) Where the gods descend, wind horses flutter; and snowcapped peaks fall into jungle
3. The Dolomites Alpine perfection, fairytale meadows beneath spires of rock
4. Tien Shan (Kyrgyz Ala-Too) Unyielding, dreamlike, mountain as judgment. Foreboding beauty
5. Andes (Atacama & Bolivia borderlands) Where I stood at 18,386 feet among the dead volcanoes and frozen salt! I did it. Every breath a pain and a curse
6. Zagori / Pindus Mountains Stone and shadow, Ottoman bridges: green-shaded gods. Tuscany meets the Grand Canyon
7. Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta The only place on earth where snowy summits watch a tropical sea
8. Alps around Chamonix Iconic, dramatic - also a lovely cafe by the glacier
9. The Cuillins (Isle of Skye) Gaelic swathes of mist, where the dark loch lies still and the mountains skirl
10. Eastern Icelandic Mountains Jagged basalt rising from moss and lava - no trail, no tree, and whale for tea
Have I missed any? The Rockies in Canada nearly made it. Also it was hard to leave out the Pyrenees and the Andes at Patagonia
7. - Trivia-tastic: Also the longest (currently known) line of sight on Earth - across the Colombian plain to/from the Santa Marta. From the south of Paramillo, there is a 500km view from Paramo Santa Ines (W 75°41'33" N 6°46'22"). In perfect visibility, Pico Ojeda (503km) would be visible through binoculars; and with a telescope part of the ridge further east could be visible at 506km.
But if you have time and a mountain guide, there is a theoretical 538 km line of sight between Mount Dankova in Kyrgyzstan and the Hindu Tagh in China. Only a couple of hundred of miles from you as the crow flies
OOOOOOh
That’s a superb fact. SO much more interesting than trannies and khazis. Gratitude
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I agree people should be free to be whoever they believe they are - I don’t subscribe to gender identity theory.
How do you reconcile those two sentences? If people believe they are gender misaligned to their biological sex, and a significant number of people do, shouldn't they be free to be who they think they are?
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
They can - when they are adults.
What did you think of the Cass review?
Do you support Cass's proposed longitudinal study of puberty blockers in children?
Interesting non-answer - I’m not a Doctor - do you?
Yes, I do support it, with all the usual provisions on informed consent etc.
Do you support it? Or do you oppose this bit of the Cass review?
I don’t know enough about the issues around the clinical trial. How would you address the issues around informed consent?
The issues of informed consent in trials of treatment are well established in children for other treatments and applicable here.
This is, without question, the finest squirrel I have ever seen
He is apparently a Himalayan subspecies of the classic Eurasian red squirrel. But if so, he is a lordly subspecies. Those tufted ears!
Red squirrels coats and ear tufts grow in the winter, and moult in the late spring to a much thinner summer coat. Rather than being indicative of the sub-species those ear tufts are a feature of the local climate.
On Cap Ferrat I found a small colony of black ones which are apparently reds which have become black. They're not uncommon apparently.
I am down on the IoW this week and the reds here vary considerably in colour, from ginger to nearly black.
Reds in mainland Europe are less shy, and I have seen them in urban parks in Hamburg and Moscow. They are finer and more delicate than our introduced grey bushy tailed tree rats.
I saw a black squirrel on a visit to Munich, but assumed it was a different kind of squirrel.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
The end state of TERFism is the rigid enforcement of the gender presentation & dress of women.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
I very much hope that's not the case. And I support the SC judgement.
Gender critical people should support the ability of women to dress in a traditionally male style, and men in a traditionally female style. Because sex is immutable and doesn't require people to adhere to societal norms.
If they don't, they are no better than the transphobia that comes from some on the conservative right.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
The end state of TERFism is the rigid enforcement of the gender presentation & dress of women.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
I dunno. As a man who doesn't fit traditional male stereotypes I've always felt that the ideology of some trans advocates has threatened my identity as a non-traditional male. Something they have in common with the right-wing bigots.
Terfs have never threatened my identity in the same way.
I find your comment interesting - "As a man who doesn't fit traditional male stereotypes". There are surely many, many male stereotypes. Are you suggesting that the traditional ones would be 'manly' (strong, sporty, tough guy etc)?
Yesterday he was saying Russia was ready for peace. He's so full of crap.
This is all a performance so that he can walk away from supporting Ukraine and not be blamed for the consequences.
This is rapidly becoming existential for Europe now. If Europe isn't able to defend a European democracy from Russian attack then European democracy cannot survive..
It probably can but the question does arise as to whether it deserves to.
I am now geekily addicted to making lists. Possibly because I am getting old and one day all too soon my travels will end
Here are my top ten mountain ranges (that i have seen)
1. Antarctic Peninsula Deathly, divine, the last cathedrals - ice and stone, silence and awe
2. Tibetan Himalayas (Yunnan frontier) Where the gods descend, wind horses flutter; and snowcapped peaks fall into jungle
3. The Dolomites Alpine perfection, fairytale meadows beneath spires of rock
4. Tien Shan (Kyrgyz Ala-Too) Unyielding, dreamlike, mountain as judgment. Foreboding beauty
5. Andes (Atacama & Bolivia borderlands) Where I stood at 18,386 feet among the dead volcanoes and frozen salt! I did it. Every breath a pain and a curse
6. Zagori / Pindus Mountains Stone and shadow, Ottoman bridges: green-shaded gods. Tuscany meets the Grand Canyon
7. Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta The only place on earth where snowy summits watch a tropical sea
8. Alps around Chamonix Iconic, dramatic - also a lovely cafe by the glacier
9. The Cuillins (Isle of Skye) Gaelic swathes of mist, where the dark loch lies still and the mountains skirl
10. Eastern Icelandic Mountains Jagged basalt rising from moss and lava - no trail, no tree, and whale for tea
Have I missed any? The Rockies in Canada nearly made it. Also it was hard to leave out the Pyrenees and the Andes at Patagonia
Not so much a mountain range, but... I went to Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea maybe half a dozen times. Then one day, the weather had changed, and there in front of me in all its glory was Mount Cameroon, utterly dominating the view.
Oh, and the volcano upon which sits Edinburgh of the Seven Seas (and is all that comprises Tristan da Cunha) rears out of the Atlantic like a James Bond-baddy hideout.
Can I add - in all sincerity - the North Western Fells of the Lake District?
I was there at the weekend. And the week before I was in Croatia. And the cost of Croatia is stunningly good: as beautiful as the west coast of Scotland, but with better weather. But it did not make my heart sing and swell and soar like the Lake District did. We drove from Cockermouth down through Lorton to Crummock Water and the Kirkstile Inn. The sky was a bright, vivid blue, the mountains were a loving embrace. There was nowhere on earth I would have rather been. I've been thinking a lot about the concept of home recently, and no matter how beautiful, stark, amazing a bit of geography is, it will never sing to me like the North of England does. And the Lake District is the best of the North, and the North Western Fells are the best of the Lake District.
The Lakes are often exquisite, despite the overtourism. One of the loveliest landscapes in Europe, however despite my best intentions, I cannot see those hills as “mountain ranges”
However as I write this out it occurs to me that in my top ten mountain ranges, Europe - despite her diminutive size - still outpunches the world. Four out of the top ten mountain ranges in the world are in lil old Europa
The zeitgeist suggests to me that Reform will do splendidly well at the local elections, Labour and Conservatives terribly, and Libs, Greens and Independents okay. The turnout will be very low, though, and the Reform % vote not that high, so this won't mark a sufficiently huge groundswell for Farage to tell his fans to return to their coastal and market towns and prepare for government.
I suspect (hope?) though, that this will mark peak Reform, as they gradually unravel over the next few years and both Labour and the Tories get their act together.
I want them to win control of a few councils. They won't be able to carp from the sidelines with impunity then. Although I expect a titanic effort to do so.
Sorry, I just don't think they are strong enough on theground to get their vote out. A good "air war" and paid deliveries can get them so far, but if it's raining on Polling Day they are going to need good canvass returns and a Polling Day organisation to get their voters to the polls. For this reason, I think the Lib Dems (and the Greens) will do a bit better than expected - but only in the areas where they have worked in the past few months. Likewise, any remaining competent Labour and Conservative electoral machines will also help to see off any insurgents.
RefUK will get a lot of votes across the board, but not enough to get a stellar result.
The problem for Reform is what happens if they do win seats but not enough to win majority control of councils.
They could well "carp from the sidelines" and not go into administration with any other group and that's their right but it will lay them open to the charge of not being serious about power.
The other option is to get their hands dirty - will they support Conservative minority administrations, Labour minority administrations, Lib Dem minority administrations, Green minority administrations etc? If they choose to get involved, they will have to deal with responsibility and accountability (fine) but it will also impact on the national agenda - if Reform are working with Labour on this council, could they work with Labour nationally?
We see in Germany it's possible for parties to work at Land level in a different way to Federal level but we don't think in those terms (our fault).
That's the ideal position for them. They can promise the Moon on a stick, if only they had majority control.
Should they get control of councils, I don't think running them calamitously will be particularly bad for the Fukkers. All councils seem to be remorseless engines of dysfunction and Farage will be able to blame the woke brigade or just tell everyone they are being run brilliantly. His reality distortion field isn't at Trump's level but it is there.
Whether or not the council is effective or not isn’t really the issue, particularly as the council is run by officers and its staff anyway.
The issue for Reform will be having lots of individualistic types recently attracted to the party for its position on issues that aren’t relevant to local government, who are likely unprepared for the hard grind and grunt work of being a local councillor, faced with a stream of demands which you can’t meet because the council doesn’t have the money or the power, and who have little experience of the teamwork and compromises that being in politics involved.
If Reform leaps from nowhere to a large group or even control of a council, it is highly likely that some individuals will resign under the workload, others will fall out, and defections and disarray will follow.
At some point it will dawn on Trump that Putin doesn’t want the war in the Ukraine to end…
He very much does. He just doesn’t want it to end in its current state because that is not enough of a win to justify the very considerable cost. The Kursk incursion by the UAF and that idiot from Oxfordshire has helped Putin politically inside Russia and contributes to the sentiment that he can hold out for more. My opinion is that Odessa would make it all worthwhile until the next time.
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
The end state of TERFism is the rigid enforcement of the gender presentation & dress of women.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
I very much hope that's not the case. And I support the SC judgement.
Gender critical people should support the ability of women to dress in a traditionally male style, and men in a traditionally female style. Because sex is immutable and doesn't require people to adhere to societal norms.
If they don't, they are no better than the transphobia that comes from some on the conservative right.
This is the fear of my transsexual friend Julia, that the insane extremes of the Trans Rights Activists will undo decades of progress and create proper transphobia that was not there before. Clearly, I hope she is wrong, but the polling is not encouraging. There is evidence this is happening
The most important aspect of this graph is that the crossover where 'care about ordinary people' fell below 'select few' is a couple of weeks or so after the scrapping of winter fuel for pensioners.
I suspect the free clothes and tickets that were being discussed that month did not also help.
Dropping WFA must rank v high in the all time list of really stupid political mistakes by Chancellors.
Means testing relatively small benefits is almost always a bad idea. You increase the administration costs a lot for little savings. It would be smarter to abolish WFA and bump up the state pension instead.
At some point it will dawn on Trump that Putin doesn’t want the war in the Ukraine to end…
He very much does. He just doesn’t want it to end in its current state because that is not enough of a win to justify the very considerable cost. The Kursk incursion by the UAF and that idiot from Oxfordshire has helped Putin politically inside Russia and contributes to the sentiment that he can hold out for more. My opinion is that Odessa would make it all worthwhile until the next time.
No way the Ukes will cede Odessa, and Putin doesn’t have the military muscle to achieve it
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
The end state of TERFism is the rigid enforcement of the gender presentation & dress of women.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
I very much hope that's not the case. And I support the SC judgement.
Gender critical people should support the ability of women to dress in a traditionally male style, and men in a traditionally female style. Because sex is immutable and doesn't require people to adhere to societal norms.
If they don't, they are no better than the transphobia that comes from some on the conservative right.
This is the fear of my transsexual friend Julia, that the insane extremes of the Trans Rights Activists will undo decades of progress and create proper transphobia that was not there before. Clearly, I hope she is wrong, but the polling is not encouraging. There is evidence this is happening
AAARGH I’m talking about Trans
*slaps self in Boho summer cafe, Bishkek*
"create proper transphobia"
I cannot imagine a trans person not believing that there is real and 'proper' transphobia already out there.
At some point it will dawn on Trump that Putin doesn’t want the war in the Ukraine to end…
He very much does. He just doesn’t want it to end in its current state because that is not enough of a win to justify the very considerable cost. The Kursk incursion by the UAF and that idiot from Oxfordshire has helped Putin politically inside Russia and contributes to the sentiment that he can hold out for more. My opinion is that Odessa would make it all worthwhile until the next time.
"that idiot from Oxfordshire"
Can you be more specific? There are many idiots in Oxfordshire - after all, it includes the uni...
At some point it will dawn on Trump that Putin doesn’t want the war in the Ukraine to end…
He very much does. He just doesn’t want it to end in its current state because that is not enough of a win to justify the very considerable cost. The Kursk incursion by the UAF and that idiot from Oxfordshire has helped Putin politically inside Russia and contributes to the sentiment that he can hold out for more. My opinion is that Odessa would make it all worthwhile until the next time.
Yesterday he was saying Russia was ready for peace. He's so full of crap.
This is all a performance so that he can walk away from supporting Ukraine and not be blamed for the consequences.
This is rapidly becoming existential for Europe now. If Europe isn't able to defend a European democracy from Russian attack then European democracy cannot survive..
That's an odd framing. It's not democracy under attack but Ukraine specifically and our constitutional arrangements don't depend on the position of Russia's borders.
At some point it will dawn on Trump that Putin doesn’t want the war in the Ukraine to end…
He very much does. He just doesn’t want it to end in its current state because that is not enough of a win to justify the very considerable cost. The Kursk incursion by the UAF and that idiot from Oxfordshire has helped Putin politically inside Russia and contributes to the sentiment that he can hold out for more. My opinion is that Odessa would make it all worthwhile until the next time.
One of these has to be wrong, is it Ed or Wilfred?
Sky's @WilfredFrost questions the Energy Secretary Ed Miliband on whether UK gas prices would decrease if the tax rate of 78% on energy companies was lowered by the government.
Actually quite an interesting question. I would guess - no, not really? The UK already has cheap domestic gas compared to our European neighbours, and there are already massive tax allowances for new development which means that energy companies simply shift profits into investment, avoiding the 78% windfall rate.
Ultimately, the price of gas is set by global demand and supply, not a particular tax regime, and 50% of UK consumption is imported from Norway, the US and Qatar.
This is mostly correct.
The price of gas in the UK is set at the margin, and the marginal ... therm ... is imported. The UK therefore pays the international (spot) price for imported gas.
India suspends visa services for Pakistani nationals with immediate effect.
All existing visas have been revoked.
I will happily welcome an Indo-Pakistani war, perhaps even a nuclear exchange across the Indus, if it stops PB talking about fucking Trans
And yet I also know that wouldn’t do it. After the Asian nuke war goes global, and the Chinese and Americans and Brits and Israelis and Koreans all launch their nukes, and the world is plunged into a howling and desolate nuclear winter, and I am gnawing a rat in the smoking ruins of Newent, someone with melted eyeballs and their skin peeling off will approach me and say “NO, gender is a social construct, we need new cubicles!”
Prohibit unsafe behaviours in the workplace including cross-dressing by male staff on duty, where this undermines professional boundaries, dignity, or the ability of patients to give informed consent.
How do you propose to let ill, confused or elderly patients give informed consent to intimate care if they are not clear on the sex of the carer?
I'm generally in agreement with you, but here is where I'm going to strongly disagree.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
The end state of TERFism is the rigid enforcement of the gender presentation & dress of women.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
I very much hope that's not the case. And I support the SC judgement.
Gender critical people should support the ability of women to dress in a traditionally male style, and men in a traditionally female style. Because sex is immutable and doesn't require people to adhere to societal norms.
If they don't, they are no better than the transphobia that comes from some on the conservative right.
This is the fear of my transsexual friend Julia, that the insane extremes of the Trans Rights Activists will undo decades of progress and create proper transphobia that was not there before. Clearly, I hope she is wrong, but the polling is not encouraging. There is evidence this is happening
AAARGH I’m talking about Trans
*slaps self in Boho summer cafe, Bishkek*
Brave Leon. You will let me know when those Trans stop screaming, won't you?
Shame that it took the Supreme Court to reaffirm the facts of life - A biological man is a man and a biological woman is a women - I hear next week the Supreme Court will be ruling on whether the moon is actually made of cheese or not...
Gas and grocery prices are WAY DOWN, just like I said they would be. Eggs are plentiful, and down 87%. NICE!
You should be censured for reposting Trump bollocks.
Reliable citation needed.
It appears they are now being sold for $10 a dozen in some stores, although the wholesale price is down a bit on March when they hit record highs (I'm assuming that will take time to work through the system).
One of these has to be wrong, is it Ed or Wilfred?
Sky's @WilfredFrost questions the Energy Secretary Ed Miliband on whether UK gas prices would decrease if the tax rate of 78% on energy companies was lowered by the government.
Actually quite an interesting question. I would guess - no, not really? The UK already has cheap domestic gas compared to our European neighbours, and there are already massive tax allowances for new development which means that energy companies simply shift profits into investment, avoiding the 78% windfall rate.
Ultimately, the price of gas is set by global demand and supply, not a particular tax regime, and 50% of UK consumption is imported from Norway, the US and Qatar.
This is mostly correct.
The price of gas in the UK is set at the margin, and the marginal ... therm ... is imported. The UK therefore pays the international (spot) price for imported gas.
(Actually, it's a little more complicated than that, because IIRC the contract with Statoil/Equinor has a slightly weird blended price formula that uses a combination of the oil price and the TTF price.)
One under-perceived thing (among many no doubt) we have in the UK about the US is the prevalence of the Gilead world view. It doesn’t seem a direct transfer to our angry incel movement here yet, though who knows after the recent convulsion of excited righties acclaiming a resurgence of church going.
Margaret Atwood is a very wise woman, she might turn out to be the Orwell of our age.
I think our alt-right follow so much US Social Media that they are moving down the same track on religion. In some Pentacostal style churches they are probably correct, but by and large British Christians are more socially than politically minded, albeit often from a sense of noblesse oblige.
When you hear alt-righties speak of Christian culture, their view of that culture is rarely formed or informed by attending church, but rather is a euphemism for white European culture.
I had a strange night in the pub at the weekend where a friend of my wife's family was trying to tell me that Russia is the last bastion of Christianity, and that the Nazis were Socialists (i think he meant this pejoratively!). He was clearly treading in the shallow end at least of the delusional right.
Social Media is leading into a new dark age of incels, misogyny and conspiracy theory paranoia.
When JD Vance was interviewed by Joe Rogan pre the US election, he was laughing about how left wing people were now calling keeping in good physical shape "Right Wing"... but I think there is a kernel of truth in that there is a trend now on social media for "lift weights, don't drink alcohol, get 8 hours sleep, take supplements, wake up early, take responsibility for yourself & family..." and so on, that is all good advice, but is also mixed in with a kind of right wing attitude somehow I think. A bit of a strongman model perhaps, that is anti the more left wing feminisation of men
It's something we see frequently in various areas: the binarification of things. In this case: to be a 'man' in the eyes of some on the right, you have to be fit. But not just fit: you need to be visibly fit: muscly and manly. The 'take care of your family' is meant only in a very traditional your-wife-stays-at-home-whilst-you-provide way.
I have seen a couple of these 'men' take the p*ss out of people who are fit but do not life weights: e.g. runners. They are aparently not manly men, despite being fit.
Basically: Vance's ideal of fitness will be a very muscular, weight-lifting idea of fitness. Which is only one form of fitness. But a very manly one.
I find it regrettable that kids will make up and adopt new gender identities. But when you see the concept of 'masculine = gym-bodied, tattooed and scowling: feminine = lip-fillered, false-eyelashed, heavily make-upped and pouting', youcan kind of see why other alternatives are sought.
(tbc, my view is that gender is a myth, there are two sexes, but no 'right' way for individuals of either of those sexes to present themselves - though I reserve the right to tut or roll my eyes like the old man I almost am at appearance or lifestyle choices the youth might make.)
As I've mentioned before, I have colleagues who were involved in studies commissioned to support the Cass Review. One thing that came out of the qualitative work was this kind of idea among some who had either de-transitioned or gone straight to a non-binary identity - the idea that what your bits are is less important if society is less hung up on what is a man and what is a woman.
That was only some people, of course. Others had a very strong longstanding discomfort with their physical sex. But I suspect some of the explosion in diagnoses has been more about people being pushed into societal norms, where the answer is to identify as opposite to birth sex rather than simply as an atypical person of birth sex.
ETA: Someone like Grayson Perry is interesting here - he seems very comfortable as identifying as 'he' but presenting, often, as a (stereotypical version of a) woman. My own cousin's journey to transition started with similar cross-dressing, but she (born he) has taken a very different route (and seems far more content with a female identity). I do wonder what different routes they might each have taken if born in each other's times or whether they are inherently different.
The zeitgeist suggests to me that Reform will do splendidly well at the local elections, Labour and Conservatives terribly, and Libs, Greens and Independents okay. The turnout will be very low, though, and the Reform % vote not that high, so this won't mark a sufficiently huge groundswell for Farage to tell his fans to return to their coastal and market towns and prepare for government.
I suspect (hope?) though, that this will mark peak Reform, as they gradually unravel over the next few years and both Labour and the Tories get their act together.
I want them to win control of a few councils. They won't be able to carp from the sidelines with impunity then. Although I expect a titanic effort to do so.
Sorry, I just don't think they are strong enough on theground to get their vote out. A good "air war" and paid deliveries can get them so far, but if it's raining on Polling Day they are going to need good canvass returns and a Polling Day organisation to get their voters to the polls. For this reason, I think the Lib Dems (and the Greens) will do a bit better than expected - but only in the areas where they have worked in the past few months. Likewise, any remaining competent Labour and Conservative electoral machines will also help to see off any insurgents.
RefUK will get a lot of votes across the board, but not enough to get a stellar result.
The problem for Reform is what happens if they do win seats but not enough to win majority control of councils.
They could well "carp from the sidelines" and not go into administration with any other group and that's their right but it will lay them open to the charge of not being serious about power.
The other option is to get their hands dirty - will they support Conservative minority administrations, Labour minority administrations, Lib Dem minority administrations, Green minority administrations etc? If they choose to get involved, they will have to deal with responsibility and accountability (fine) but it will also impact on the national agenda - if Reform are working with Labour on this council, could they work with Labour nationally?
We see in Germany it's possible for parties to work at Land level in a different way to Federal level but we don't think in those terms (our fault).
That's the ideal position for them. They can promise the Moon on a stick, if only they had majority control.
Should they get control of councils, I don't think running them calamitously will be particularly bad for the Fukkers. All councils seem to be remorseless engines of dysfunction and Farage will be able to blame the woke brigade or just tell everyone they are being run brilliantly. His reality distortion field isn't at Trump's level but it is there.
Whether or not the council is effective or not isn’t really the issue, particularly as the council is run by officers and its staff anyway.
The issue for Reform will be having lots of individualistic types recently attracted to the party for its position on issues that aren’t relevant to local government, who are likely unprepared for the hard grind and grunt work of being a local councillor, faced with a stream of demands which you can’t meet because the council doesn’t have the money or the power, and who have little experience of the teamwork and compromises that being in politics involved.
If Reform leaps from nowhere to a large group or even control of a council, it is highly likely that some individuals will resign under the workload, others will fall out, and defections and disarray will follow.
Don't know who runs the council in Walton-on-the-Naze, but I was there last week, it is Farage's constituency, and the roads are the worst I've seen. So putting them right could see him get more votes, not that he needs them there I guess. But it would be something to point at and say "before and after" if he fixed them
Kemi did rather well at PMQ's yesterday, didn't she?
Perhaps her best outing as LOTO so far?
Sir Kier all over the place (bit like Labour's position on trans/sex/gender/, etc)
It was a classic case of not answering the questions asked, although the questions asked were along the lines of "Do you agree you are weak?", "Why are you scared to say what you really think?" etc
Find Out Now has Ref UK 28%, Con 20%, Lab 20%, Lib Dem 14%, Green 13%.
The gives 340 seats, 50, 199, 62, 5.
Kaboom
Find out now! So no kaboom.
However, both MIC and YG have found (small) Reform leads this week, so it does seem there is a swing to Reform going on (probably driven by the local elections)
Find Out Now has Ref UK 28%, Con 20%, Lab 20%, Lib Dem 14%, Green 13%.
The gives 340 seats, 50, 199, 62, 5.
Kaboom
Find out now! So no kaboom.
They were the first pollsters to discover that Labour were more likely to poll 33% than the 45% the others misled us into believing, albeit they overestimated Reform as well
Comments
.."Born in the wrong body" is one of the wickedest lies that young, impressionable (often same-sex attracted, though they won't have worked that out yet or autistic) children have been told...
My wider point was William should be more careful to caveat the Trump or pro-Trump reposts he uses to troll the likes of you and me.
People should be able to dress how they want, within laws on public decency, regardless of their sex. What does cross dressing even mean? Women can wear suits, is that cross dressing? Why should men not be able to do the reverse and wear traditionally female clothing? As for a hospital setting, everyone is in scrubs in any case.
A patient should be able to request someone of their same sex treats them and staff members respect that. That has no bearing on how staff choose to present themselves.
People do not have a right to know what sex someone is by looking at them. That's just ridiculous and infringing on the rights of men and women everywhere to dress how they see fit.
I managed to sort it out in a Post Office.
Can we please have a Labour Government?
What adults do is their business.
What some of them have done to children is wicked.
Your comment effectively calls my son a liar.
In specific settings - like informed consent for patients as to the sex of their carer there should be no ambiguity - something a witness in the NHS Fife case rejected.
Here's an object lesson in how to clean a bowler.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGPoqfvaNOc
Ed Miliband 'considering' regional energy pricing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp91md1lj92o
I hope they do.
But they may not.
Good luck.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DI07pTpoIG-/?igsh=MTZ5bzZ1dGRuYXd4aA==
The volunteers who brought the Supreme Court action that (most) politicians are belatedly and furiously rowing in behind were ForWomenScotland not “FarRightBigotChristianAmericans” as some seem to believe.
If a man has an accident and loses his testicles, so he can no longer produce sperm (i.e. gametes), does that mean he is no longer a man?
But the point is that there are only two gametes and only two sexes.
People with DSDs are differences of sexual development from either the male path or the female path.
This has nothing to do with gender dysphoria and “trans” - which is a clinical presentation, the treatment of which is not well understood -Foxy had a good explainer earlier.
As Cass explained, its treatment in children has been poor.
It gives me no joy whatsoever to be predicting more attacks on non-feminine presenting women as a consequence of the rise of anti-trans rhetoric following the SC judgement.
It is at least as offensive to "gay away the Trans" as to "Trans away the gay" why can't both exist?
You are taking victory laps over a decision that will hurt some cis women. Yes, an organisation can call itself whatever it likes, it doesn't make the name true, they can be judged by their actions instead. They are for some women and woe betide any woman that stands up and disagrees with them, they have been bullied and hounded all over the place.
Remember what you said about the female MPs like Sarah Owen and Christine Jardine who didn't follow the Gender Critical script in the Commons on Tuesday. You're not championing women by crushing and trying to silence them.
“Transing away the gay” referred to children at the Tavistock.
What did you think of the Cass review?
I am a Dr Leon, mixed up, for a crappy journal author. (6,4).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c787r15xngyo
Terfs have never threatened my identity in the same way.
And yet I also know that wouldn’t do it. After the Asian nuke war goes global, and the Chinese and Americans and Brits and Israelis and Koreans all launch their nukes, and the world is plunged into a howling and desolate nuclear winter, and I am gnawing a rat in the smoking ruins of Newent, someone with melted eyeballs and their skin peeling off will approach me and say “NO, gender is a social construct, we need new cubicles!”
Do you support it? Or do you oppose this bit of the Cass review?
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114392923237368367
(Worthy of note that of course evidence can emerge from other sources and other countries, but a robustly run prospective trial is the strongest evidence)
This is all a performance so that he can walk away from supporting Ukraine and not be blamed for the consequences.
This is rapidly becoming existential for Europe now. If Europe isn't able to defend a European democracy from Russian attack then European democracy cannot survive..
That’s a superb fact. SO much more interesting than trannies and khazis. Gratitude
I am genuinely surprised this is not in Australia
So do you support the trial?
Gender critical people should support the ability of women to dress in a traditionally male style, and men in a traditionally female style. Because sex is immutable and doesn't require people to adhere to societal norms.
If they don't, they are no better than the transphobia that comes from some on the conservative right.
However as I write this out it occurs to me that in my top ten mountain ranges, Europe - despite her diminutive size - still outpunches the world. Four out of the top ten mountain ranges in the world are in lil old Europa
The issue for Reform will be having lots of individualistic types recently attracted to the party for its position on issues that aren’t relevant to local government, who are likely unprepared for the hard grind and grunt work of being a local councillor, faced with a stream of demands which you can’t meet because the council doesn’t have the money or the power, and who have little experience of the teamwork and compromises that being in politics involved.
If Reform leaps from nowhere to a large group or even control of a council, it is highly likely that some individuals will resign under the workload, others will fall out, and defections and disarray will follow.
AAARGH I’m talking about Trans
*slaps self in Boho summer cafe, Bishkek*
I cannot imagine a trans person not believing that there is real and 'proper' transphobia already out there.
Can you be more specific? There are many idiots in Oxfordshire - after all, it includes the uni...
The price of gas in the UK is set at the margin, and the marginal ... therm ... is imported. The UK therefore pays the international (spot) price for imported gas.
Perhaps her best outing as LOTO so far?
Sir Kier all over the place (bit like Labour's position on trans/sex/gender/, etc)
The gives 340 seats, 50, 199, 62, 5.
That was only some people, of course. Others had a very strong longstanding discomfort with their physical sex. But I suspect some of the explosion in diagnoses has been more about people being pushed into societal norms, where the answer is to identify as opposite to birth sex rather than simply as an atypical person of birth sex.
ETA: Someone like Grayson Perry is interesting here - he seems very comfortable as identifying as 'he' but presenting, often, as a (stereotypical version of a) woman. My own cousin's journey to transition started with similar cross-dressing, but she (born he) has taken a very different route (and seems far more content with a female identity). I do wonder what different routes they might each have taken if born in each other's times or whether they are inherently different.
Trump: U.S. doing very well on trade deal with China.
China: That's a lie, we never even spoke to you.
https://x.com/acnewsitics/status/1915371463978476031