Given the speculation, not without some supporting indications, that a US strike package is on its way to Iran, it isnt a shock but it is a little surprising if Trump has ordered it.
The guy likes the idea of doing something decisive, history defining. The Iranian government appears to have gotten the better of the protests over last few days, even though they are ongoing, which may have made action a day late and a dollar short if its not overwhelming and sustained.
If the US does not go for a assassination strategy, and they have circulated their requests for intelligence widely to 3rd parties, there would be two devastating targets, Bandar Abbas and Kharg, Those would be a piece of piss to hit. Whether they'd go down that economic destruction to kill the regime is high tariff stuff in terms of potential impact and reaction.
So technically you are right and I am wrong. This has absolutely nothing to do with Donald Trump. He is a mere bystander...
It’s important to understand how such things work - it’s an old, old story. The Big Cheese makes his feelings known. And/or the underlings try and please him by doing something they know he’ll like.
That way the underlings are deniable if it goes wrong.
“If only the King/Emperor/etc knew what they do in his name…”
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
As much as I think he should go I don't think the fundamental problem is essentially that of one individual. It's been clear nationwide since the aftermath of 7 October 2023 when police were taking down pictures of the hostages.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
When the country is three trillion in debt nobody sees a reason why the £287m for their pet project shouldn't be spent.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
As much as I think he should go I don't think the fundamental problem is essentially that of one individual. It's been clear nationwide since the aftermath of 7 October 2023 when police were taking down pictures of the hostages.
It rather saddens me that something like Douglas Campbell's "Secret Society" wouldn't even be commissioned now. Not sure how legit this copy of the episode is - but it keeps coming to mind :
"BBC 2 | Secret Society | The Association of Chief Police Officers
ACPO have been making up their own law and policy. This episode investigates the Association of Chief Police Officers and how Government policy and actions are determined in the fields of law and order."
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
A hell of a lot of money, but I am compelled to point out the standard dodgy comparison of capital and yearly costs in the second paragraph. Tut tut.
As much as I think he should go I don't think the fundamental problem is essentially that of one individual. It's been clear nationwide since the aftermath of 7 October 2023 when police were taking down pictures of the hostages.
It rather saddens me that something like Douglas Campbell's "Secret Society" wouldn't even be commissioned now. Not sure how legit this copy of the episode is - but it keeps coming to mind :
"BBC 2 | Secret Society | The Association of Chief Police Officers
ACPO have been making up their own law and policy. This episode investigates the Association of Chief Police Officers and how Government policy and actions are determined in the fields of law and order."
ACPoo, under New Labour, conducted an illegal campaign of surveillance and infiltration of dangerous groups such as student and hippies climbing trees to protest about development.
As much as I think he should go I don't think the fundamental problem is essentially that of one individual. It's been clear nationwide since the aftermath of 7 October 2023 when police were taking down pictures of the hostages.
It rather saddens me that something like Douglas Campbell's "Secret Society" wouldn't even be commissioned now. Not sure how legit this copy of the episode is - but it keeps coming to mind :
"BBC 2 | Secret Society | The Association of Chief Police Officers
ACPO have been making up their own law and policy. This episode investigates the Association of Chief Police Officers and how Government policy and actions are determined in the fields of law and order."
ACPoo, under New Labour, conducted an illegal campaign of surveillance and infiltration of dangerous groups such as student and hippies climbing trees to protest about development.
The ensuing court cases are still going on today.
I have a faint memory of maybe a Timewatch documentary featuring someone who - as a kid - had waited around to see Harold Wilson at some local event. Then discovered their whole life had been monitored by the spooks as a 'person of interest'.
Another thing I reflect on when I think about the effectiveness or not of the 'Prevent' programme and related 'spookery'.
The administration is sending 1,000 more ICE agents to Minnesota. That's over 3,000 federal agents flooding our streets, almost triple the combined police forces of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
ICE is sowing chaos in our communities. They need to get off our streets immediately.
BREAKING: The UK is sending a single military officer to Greenland at the request of Denmark to participate in a multi-nation exercise
A token multinational force that the USA have to cross the Rubicon of actually shooting at or capturing raises the political risk of them acting, so I think this is sensible.
If they contest against other NATO troops we will be less able to brush it all under the carpet. Hopefully.
If they are truly committed nothing will dissuade them, and in practice not much would happen in the short term I am sure, which is part of their reasoning, but that is not to say such things are meaningless. The Americans are poisoning their reputation among allies, and we can have a chuckle about how they don't give two shits about that because they're a superpower, and that is true, but even an abused dog eventually bites, and long term that kind of dismissive or aggressive posture towards 'friends' will see changes happen.
How many 16 and 17 year olds drink alcohol free "booze"?
The proposed ban sounds absolutely fucking pointless to me
It sounds mental to me. Even if it was a gateway to real booze, which I doubt, and even if they can craft a ban properly, which I doubt, once they are adults it'll be up to them, and the plan is to make them all voters at 16 so can we not trust them to resist it?
The administration is sending 1,000 more ICE agents to Minnesota. That's over 3,000 federal agents flooding our streets, almost triple the combined police forces of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
ICE is sowing chaos in our communities. They need to get off our streets immediately.
Dear god, can we get HYUFD back to talk about roundabouts ?
An entire thread on a joke Starmer told is more than a chap can bear.
As TSE suggested earlier our prim wallflowers weren't quite so proper when it came to Penny Mordant's "cock" joke.
Mrs Flatlander's explanation for Starmer is that he's had Thick of It style rants from his own advisors and that perhaps this is their favourite analogy.
So when floundering, he found himself using the same phrase.
It seemed out of character, whereas Penny was entirely in character.
The PM just has to hold out until 2027 and then things will be easier (I jest, the HoL is not his biggest problem) The Observer's Whitehall Editor, Cat Neilan, recently cited my analysis for Hogan Lovells, projecting that the UK government could eliminate the risk of defeat in the House of Lords by 2027.
There are no limits on the Prime Minister's appointment powers, and the extent of No. 10's ambitions are unclear. Media and public scrutiny could influence how far things go, but both are currently quite subdued. The Lords’ ability to delay bills provides some leverage, potentially encouraging the government to act reasonably if cooler heads prevail.
Key stats: * Since the General Election, the government has been defeated 55 times in 119 Lords divisions, consistent with the previous Conservative government’s experience. * However, defeats are set to reduce significantly from 2026. * The Hereditary Peers Bill, progressing through the Lords, will remove 88 peers by this session’s end (only 4 are Labour), reducing defeats by 15% and lowering the average majority against the government from 75 to 55. * The Government has also been steadily increasing the number of Labour peers. There has been a 36 net gain since the General Election (45 new Labour peers but some are replacing retirees etc) * If appointments continue at this pace in 2025-26, defeats could halve. By 2026-27, they may vanish entirely, reducing the ability of the Lords to ask the Government to 'think again' * https://nitter.poast.org/nmdacosta/status/1996378088754594241#m
The Lords have at least been overegging it, arguably.
There have been a couple where they have voted down Manifesto Commitments aiui (Employment Rights Bill, Lords Reform), and there has been some dancing on pinheads to support non-violation of the Salisbury Convention.
I'm nuancing this as I'm not totally over the detail, but I have seen a couple of suggestions that the Salisbury Convention be put into law, and precedures revised to make sure it is respected.
A risk for a Lords that gets too pushy, to be sure, though with the hereditaries going maybe the rest think it time to formalise that up in any case, so don't see it as a concern.
The government is also seemingly trying to treat the private member's bill like a manifesto commitment with the hyperbole about how it must not be delayed. I'm very sure some Lords are trying to wreck it, but whilst there are good reasons to do such things as private bills that comes with some downsides in terms of parliamentary time and, indeed, convention expectations.
Greenland needs to hold firm and dare Trump to take military action . Although the GOP have generally been a spineless bunch this issue is one that might see a change there . You’ll still have the Trump fellators that will go along with it but I’d hope there’d be enough to say enough is enough .
Trump wants to buy Greenland, he doesn't actually want to invade it (which polls show over 3/4 of Americans oppose), that is just a typical Trump ruse so offering Greenlanders some billions to become American looks reasonable.
The classic 'ignore everything he is saying' tactic, even though plenty of times he demonstrates he means what he says. I'm sure he would rather buy, and many many people privately will be telling him not to invade, but the very things some people like him for is he contemplates doing what others will not, so it is clearly not off the table.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
A hell of a lot of money, but I am compelled to point out the standard dodgy comparison of capital and yearly costs in the second paragraph. Tut tut.
Aren't these pylons across an estuary? I can't imagine maintenance is fun.
As much as I think he should go I don't think the fundamental problem is essentially that of one individual. It's been clear nationwide since the aftermath of 7 October 2023 when police were taking down pictures of the hostages.
It rather saddens me that something like Douglas Campbell's "Secret Society" wouldn't even be commissioned now. Not sure how legit this copy of the episode is - but it keeps coming to mind :
"BBC 2 | Secret Society | The Association of Chief Police Officers
ACPO have been making up their own law and policy. This episode investigates the Association of Chief Police Officers and how Government policy and actions are determined in the fields of law and order."
ACPoo, under New Labour, conducted an illegal campaign of surveillance and infiltration of dangerous groups such as student and hippies climbing trees to protest about development.
The ensuing court cases are still going on today.
Considering how politically popular protesting development is I'm amazed such people were targeted. I guess when it is the more active kind of protest the authorities take a dimmer view.
Trump is going to seize Greenland. European leaders need to get their backsides out of that Egyptian river and decide what they're going to do about that.
What they are going to do about it is absolutely fuck all.
I wish I didn't agree with you, but I do. If they were going to mount a credible defence of Greenland the logistics for it would be underway by now. But all that's happened is a token force of Danish troops deployed.
It really is quite disheartening. Europe deserves its reputation as a bloc too sacred to use force, even when their own territory is being invaded.
You don't need a credible defence - none exists. You just need to put enough troops on so there is a chance some aggro squaddie from Grimsby [insert European equivalents] actually takes a shot at them. That is possibly the only thing that might deter Trump.
And the threat is a simple one: if you invade Greenland, then the chances of Europeans ever buying American products is basically zero.
Also NATO will be dissolved and American bases in Europe (and the UK) will be closed.
Countries leaving NATO would be just what Vance and co want of course.
The consequences of giving a clear answer are that she's seen to have taken a side in a cultural debate, and thus impact her professionally and socially- so she doesn't.
She knows men can't get pregnant. But many won't ever admit that until it's safe to say so.
The consequences of giving a clear answer are that she's seen to have taken a side in a cultural debate, and thus impact her professionally and socially- so she doesn't.
She knows men can't get pregnant. But many won't ever admit that until it's safe to say so.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
X Sam Coates Sky@SamCoatesSky·52m EXCLUSIVE I'm "ashamed" of Sir Keir Starmer, says rebel Labour MP - as the row over justice reforms escalates. Karl Turner tells me "I'm not going to be bullied" and attacks "pal" Starmer and called the justice secretary "lazy" as we visit one of London's busiest courts.
This is the most cross I've ever seen a mainstream Labour MP against Starmer.
But ministers are doubling down, not backing down, vowing to strip the right to a jury from those already facing trial to cut the backlog.
We saw broken justice at Snarkesbrook Crown Court, talked to the government, rebels, judges and lawyers.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
X Sam Coates Sky@SamCoatesSky·52m EXCLUSIVE I'm "ashamed" of Sir Keir Starmer, says rebel Labour MP - as the row over justice reforms escalates. Karl Turner tells me "I'm not going to be bullied" and attacks "pal" Starmer and called the justice secretary "lazy" as we visit one of London's busiest courts.
This is the most cross I've ever seen a mainstream Labour MP against Starmer.
But ministers are doubling down, not backing down, vowing to strip the right to a jury from those already facing trial to cut the backlog.
We saw broken justice at Snarkesbrook Crown Court, talked to the government, rebels, judges and lawyers.
How many 16 and 17 year olds drink alcohol free "booze"?
The proposed ban sounds absolutely fucking pointless to me
It sounds mental to me. Even if it was a gateway to real booze, which I doubt, and even if they can craft a ban properly, which I doubt, once they are adults it'll be up to them, and the plan is to make them all voters at 16 so can we not trust them to resist it?
Counter proposal: Send a six pack of stubbies to every sixteen year old on their birthday. Two at seventeen. Like the Scottish baby boxes, but more fun.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women, but what purpose is there in refusing to accept them as individuals with agency? Why not be courteous and kind about their lifestyle?
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
I do wonder if Labour membership will be looking for someone who really pisses off Trump. Maybe Sadiq Khan is going to be the prince across the water who gets the job.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
An interesting (Western) view with its emphasis on individual rights. Contrast that to an Eastern viewpoint particularly in Asia where conformance is everything. Sometimes we have to recognise that our views are conditioned both by era (e.g. views on slavery) and location (western democracy).
The present hiccup in the USA shows individualised democracy taken to some extreme lengths.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
I like Eryri but that isn’t a justifiable use of money
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
An interesting (Western) view with its emphasis on individual rights. Contrast that to an Eastern viewpoint particularly in Asia where conformance is everything. Sometimes we have to recognise that our views are conditioned both by era (e.g. views on slavery) and location (western democracy).
The present hiccup in the USA shows individualised democracy taken to some extreme lengths.
Yes, and the general trend of Western thought over the centuries has been towards greater individual freedom, and away from the oppressive social conformity.that we used to have.
I think that Eastern social norms are different historically, with roots in a desire for Confuscionist social order, but whether this is truly wanted by individuals is a different question. When given the opportunity of breaking free that desire for conformity is often obviously externally imposed. Take the endless inventive youth cults in Japan or Hong Kong for instance, or the 4B movement in Korea.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
This is/was my area - LV/MV with an occasional foray into HV. It's a very narrow base of expertise. If you are not doing HV in the UK, you'll be doing it in Malaysia or India or in one of the 'stans. They can command a premium as (working) infrastructure is key to economic development. Cut corners and you'll soon know it.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women
Thank you.
But what are your answers to the questions that I put afterwards?
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
I like Eryri but that isn’t a justifiable use of money
It's nearly three bat tunnels. And if one scrapes beneath the surface, there are probably loony regulations pushing the price up in this case too.
“Our findings tell us that young people’s choices around social media and gaming may be shaped by how they’re feeling but not necessarily the other way around,” said Prof Neil Humphrey, a co-author. “Rather than blaming technology itself, we need to pay attention to what young people are doing online, who they’re connecting with and how supported they feel in their daily lives.”
How many 16 and 17 year olds drink alcohol free "booze"?
The proposed ban sounds absolutely fucking pointless to me
It sounds mental to me. Even if it was a gateway to real booze, which I doubt, and even if they can craft a ban properly, which I doubt, once they are adults it'll be up to them, and the plan is to make them all voters at 16 so can we not trust them to resist it?
Counter proposal: Send a six pack of stubbies to every sixteen year old on their birthday. Two at seventeen. Like the Scottish baby boxes, but more fun.
Yes, if they can vote, they can drink.
Whenever I try to buy alcohol free booze at the self service check outs it raises a flag for someone to check my age. I thought therefore a ban was still in place?
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women, but what purpose is there in refusing to accept them as individuals with agency? Why not be courteous and kind about their lifestyle?
So if her professional belief, as a gynecologist testifying as an expert before a Senata committee, is that yes, men can get pregnant, why won’t she say that when asked?
Didn't someone once condemn the "doomsters and gloomsters"?
That was Labour doomsters and gloomsters, talking the country down. Totally different.
(Reality is that the random number generator continues to spit out numbers consistent with an average of 0.1 to 0.2% a month, with about 0.2% of noise either way. Over a year, 0.1% a month would be continued grey and 0.2% would be definite green shoots territory.)
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women
Thank you.
But what are your answers to the questions that I put afterwards?
These women have not only retained their female sex organs, but have decided to fulfil their biological purpose as women. They have not had a gender reassignment, and for me, that doesn't meet the bar for society and the law to class them politely as male. That should be reserved for people who have undergone a surgical reassignment following a rigorous medical process.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
Burying the cables means a tunnel, not just burying as we might think of it, and therefore a TBM:
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
I like Eryri but that isn’t a justifiable use of money
It's nearly three bat tunnels. And if one scrapes beneath the surface, there are probably loony regulations pushing the price up in this case too.
Yes. And they could probably get the Royal Engineers to do the job for a tenth as a contribution to new kit and money behind the mess bar. They would probably love blowing things up and burying the things.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
Burying the cables means a tunnel, not just burying as we might think of it, and therefore a TBM:
You can start to see how it adds up...
I don't see why it couldn't be a trench and then filled in over.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
Burying the cables means a tunnel, not just burying as we might think of it, and therefore a TBM:
You can start to see how it adds up...
The ones they buried on the east side of the Woodhead tunnel looked like cut and cover. They still built temp roads and everything tho.
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
I like Eryri but that isn’t a justifiable use of money
It's nearly three bat tunnels. And if one scrapes beneath the surface, there are probably loony regulations pushing the price up in this case too.
I've actually cycled right past this work on Lon Las Cymru (absolutely stunning btw, Wales is gorgeous). The cost will come from getting it across the estuary here. Agree with everyone else that the benefits certainly do not outweigh the cost; I'd suggest the topography here makes the pylons relatively unobtrusive compared with other infrastructure (particularly in Scotland).
It's something we could and should do as a much richer country - or perhaps if power was going in for the first time at a stretch. But the opportunity cost of £300 million is enormous. Just donate it to the John Muir Trust or equivalents instead if you're serious about landscape preservation.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women
Thank you.
But what are your answers to the questions that I put afterwards?
These women have not only retained their female sex organs, but have decided to fulfil their biological purpose as women. They have not had a gender reassignment, and for me, that doesn't meet the bar for society and the law to class them politely as male. That should be reserved for people who have undergone a surgical reassignment following a rigorous medical process.
What does society gain by that, apart from an out-group to ostracise?
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales. https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
The scandal to me is not that they're doing it, but that it's costing £287m. I admit to being a complete non-expert - not even a keen amateur, but 10% of that seems generous to me.
Burying the cables means a tunnel, not just burying as we might think of it, and therefore a TBM:
You can start to see how it adds up...
Nice colours!! At least it'll be through rock, it'd be several times more expensive if it was clay. Don't envy national grid trying to explain that in the home counties.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
An interesting (Western) view with its emphasis on individual rights. Contrast that to an Eastern viewpoint particularly in Asia where conformance is everything. Sometimes we have to recognise that our views are conditioned both by era (e.g. views on slavery) and location (western democracy).
The present hiccup in the USA shows individualised democracy taken to some extreme lengths.
Yes, and the general trend of Western thought over the centuries has been towards greater individual freedom, and away from the oppressive social conformity.that we used to have.
I think that Eastern social norms are different historically, with roots in a desire for Confuscionist social order, but whether this is truly wanted by individuals is a different question. When given the opportunity of breaking free that desire for conformity is often obviously externally imposed. Take the endless inventive youth cults in Japan or Hong Kong for instance, or the 4B movement in Korea.
Human beings in most societies worldwide, are incredibly individualistic now, compared to our ancestors.
Societies based upon low-productivity agriculture, could not survive, without people placing their family’s/village’s/clan’s survival, over and above their own individual wishes. Guarding against catastrophe made far more sense than trying to maximise profit.
Individualism was for the 1%.
That’s one reason why I’m such an enthusiast for the Industrial Revolution.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women
Thank you.
But what are your answers to the questions that I put afterwards?
These women have not only retained their female sex organs, but have decided to fulfil their biological purpose as women. They have not had a gender reassignment, and for me, that doesn't meet the bar for society and the law to class them politely as male. That should be reserved for people who have undergone a surgical reassignment following a rigorous medical process.
What does society gain by that, apart from an out-group to ostracise?
It is a necessary clarification if one is going to ban men from women's spaces, but retain the right of post-gender reassigment biological men to access these spaces - which I think is fair.
It is not making anyone an 'out group', simply saying that people may choose to radically alter their appearance, but legal changes have a higher bar. It solves (imo) a lot of the current problems (though not sport) and is fair.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
An interesting (Western) view with its emphasis on individual rights. Contrast that to an Eastern viewpoint particularly in Asia where conformance is everything. Sometimes we have to recognise that our views are conditioned both by era (e.g. views on slavery) and location (western democracy).
The present hiccup in the USA shows individualised democracy taken to some extreme lengths.
Yes, and the general trend of Western thought over the centuries has been towards greater individual freedom, and away from the oppressive social conformity.that we used to have.
I think that Eastern social norms are different historically, with roots in a desire for Confuscionist social order, but whether this is truly wanted by individuals is a different question. When given the opportunity of breaking free that desire for conformity is often obviously externally imposed. Take the endless inventive youth cults in Japan or Hong Kong for instance, or the 4B movement in Korea.
A gynecologist who is terrified that giving the truthful answer to a senate committee will ruin her career - no "oppressive social conformity" there.
As much as I think he should go I don't think the fundamental problem is essentially that of one individual. It's been clear nationwide since the aftermath of 7 October 2023 when police were taking down pictures of the hostages.
It rather saddens me that something like Douglas Campbell's "Secret Society" wouldn't even be commissioned now. Not sure how legit this copy of the episode is - but it keeps coming to mind :
"BBC 2 | Secret Society | The Association of Chief Police Officers
ACPO have been making up their own law and policy. This episode investigates the Association of Chief Police Officers and how Government policy and actions are determined in the fields of law and order."
ACPoo, under New Labour, conducted an illegal campaign of surveillance and infiltration of dangerous groups such as student and hippies climbing trees to protest about development.
The ensuing court cases are still going on today.
Considering how politically popular protesting development is I'm amazed such people were targeted. I guess when it is the more active kind of protest the authorities take a dimmer view.
Apparently, ACPO went after the hippies smoking weed. While totally ignoring the head choppy types - who eventually did 7/11
The cynical suggested that it was because undercover officers bigged up the threat - ‘cause Vanilla ISIS offer a lot less opportunities for casual sex and soft drugs while doing not much.
Though it did metastasise into something darker with some groups. Trying to turn Fathers For Justice into a violent group, for example, because their goal* was getting political traction.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women
Thank you.
But what are your answers to the questions that I put afterwards?
These women have not only retained their female sex organs, but have decided to fulfil their biological purpose as women. They have not had a gender reassignment, and for me, that doesn't meet the bar for society and the law to class them politely as male. That should be reserved for people who have undergone a surgical reassignment following a rigorous medical process.
I’m sure these ‘biological’ women will be grateful for the endless stream of clarification and wisdom from PB ‘biological’ males. I mean, if they’re being told how to live their lives by blokes, what more evidence do they need that they’re really women.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women
Thank you.
But what are your answers to the questions that I put afterwards?
These women have not only retained their female sex organs, but have decided to fulfil their biological purpose as women. They have not had a gender reassignment, and for me, that doesn't meet the bar for society and the law to class them politely as male. That should be reserved for people who have undergone a surgical reassignment following a rigorous medical process.
I’m sure these ‘biological’ women will be grateful for the endless stream of clarification and wisdom from PB ‘biological’ males. I mean, if they’re being told how to live their lives by blokes, what more evidence do they need that they’re really women.
Good morning, everyone.
You may as well assert that men know what makes someone a man, for all a snarky aside adds to a debate.
F1: 11 days until the first test. Unusually in F1, this will be private. But I'm sure there'll be much murmuring.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women
Thank you.
But what are your answers to the questions that I put afterwards?
These women have not only retained their female sex organs, but have decided to fulfil their biological purpose as women. They have not had a gender reassignment, and for me, that doesn't meet the bar for society and the law to class them politely as male. That should be reserved for people who have undergone a surgical reassignment following a rigorous medical process.
I’m sure these ‘biological’ women will be grateful for the endless stream of clarification and wisdom from PB ‘biological’ males. I mean, if they’re being told how to live their lives by blokes, what more evidence do they need that they’re really women.
Good morning, everyone.
You may as well assert that men know what makes someone a man, for all a snarky aside adds to a debate.
F1: 11 days until the first test. Unusually in F1, this will be private. But I'm sure there'll be much murmuring.
I’m suspicious of definitive assertions of what makes a man or a woman, though I suppose crowbarring some exciting F1 news into the ‘debate’ could be seen as a facet of a certain kind of maleness.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
One of my female friends has labelled herself as "agender" precisely because women throughout her life have not accepted that she does not conform to traditional expressions of feminity - make-up, clothing and the like.
The whole transgender thing looks to me a lot like a surrender to gender norms and societal hostility to social eccentricity. Instead of expanding the range of ways in which it is acceptable to be a man or a woman it narrows them.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
They are biologically women.
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
Certainly they are biologically women, but what purpose is there in refusing to accept them as individuals with agency? Why not be courteous and kind about their lifestyle?
We can be courteous and kind when we relate to them as individuals, but we do not have to rewrite biology to accommodate their individual preferences.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
One of my female friends has labelled herself as "agender" precisely because women throughout her life have not accepted that she does not conform to traditional expressions of feminity - make-up, clothing and the like.
The whole transgender thing looks to me a lot like a surrender to gender norms and societal hostility to social eccentricity. Instead of expanding the range of ways in which it is acceptable to be a man or a woman it narrows them.
I think that's a logical fallacy. On this very page we have examples of biological women removing breasts and taking testosterone to initiate male secondary sex characteristics, and yet retaining a womb and the capacity to concieve and bear children. Slice it how you like, that's overcoming gender norms in a pretty profound way.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
One of my female friends has labelled herself as "agender" precisely because women throughout her life have not accepted that she does not conform to traditional expressions of feminity - make-up, clothing and the like.
The whole transgender thing looks to me a lot like a surrender to gender norms and societal hostility to social eccentricity. Instead of expanding the range of ways in which it is acceptable to be a man or a woman it narrows them.
I think that's a logical fallacy. On this very page we have examples of biological women removing breasts and taking testosterone to initiate male secondary sex characteristics, and yet retaining a womb and the capacity to concieve and bear children. Slice it how you like, that's overcoming gender norms in a pretty profound way.
I think you have misunderstood me, and your comment also seems to be an example of confusing gender and sex.
I see gender as relating to behaviour and presentation. Things like which clothes you wear, the interests you have, how you act. While sex relates to biology and a person's physical body. So if someone is taking testosterone to initiate make secondary sex characteristics that looks to me like someone altering their physical biology in order to match the gender norms that they fit most closely to.
Since I consider gender norms to be largely bollocks it strikes me as a retrograde step to encourage people to alter their biology to fit societies current gender norms. It was only a few centuries ago that it was very normal for upper class men to engage in peacocking displays of clothing wear, so why do we now have people altering their bodies because they don't fit into the constrained gender norms of men wearing boring clothes?
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
One of my female friends has labelled herself as "agender" precisely because women throughout her life have not accepted that she does not conform to traditional expressions of feminity - make-up, clothing and the like.
The whole transgender thing looks to me a lot like a surrender to gender norms and societal hostility to social eccentricity. Instead of expanding the range of ways in which it is acceptable to be a man or a woman it narrows them.
I think that's a logical fallacy. On this very page we have examples of biological women removing breasts and taking testosterone to initiate male secondary sex characteristics, and yet retaining a womb and the capacity to concieve and bear children. Slice it how you like, that's overcoming gender norms in a pretty profound way.
I think you have misunderstood me, and your comment also seems to be an example of confusing gender and sex.
I see gender as relating to behaviour and presentation. Things like which clothes you wear, the interests you have, how you act. While sex relates to biology and a person's physical body. So if someone is taking testosterone to initiate make secondary sex characteristics that looks to me like someone altering their physical biology in order to match the gender norms that they fit most closely to.
Since I consider gender norms to be largely bollocks it strikes me as a retrograde step to encourage people to alter their biology to fit societies current gender norms. It was only a few centuries ago that it was very normal for upper class men to engage in peacocking displays of clothing wear, so why do we now have people altering their bodies because they don't fit into the constrained gender norms of men wearing boring clothes?
Two points
1) "it strikes me as a retrograde step to encourage people to alter their biology to fit societies current gender norms". The example I gave wasn't trying to fit current gender norms - quite the opposite. What gender norms does somebody with a beard, a receding hairline, a deep voice, no breasts, a functioning womb, and pregnant fit into?
2) "why do we now have people altering their bodies because they don't fit into the constrained gender norms of men wearing boring clothes" The example I gave were biological women.
My colleagues working in obstetrics get a small but regular number of pregnant Transgender men. They get the same standard of care, and are treated as autonomous individuals with agency. This includes using their preferred pronouns and gender roles.
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
One of my female friends has labelled herself as "agender" precisely because women throughout her life have not accepted that she does not conform to traditional expressions of feminity - make-up, clothing and the like.
The whole transgender thing looks to me a lot like a surrender to gender norms and societal hostility to social eccentricity. Instead of expanding the range of ways in which it is acceptable to be a man or a woman it narrows them.
I largely agree with your view, but I don't think the entirity of gender misalignment is explained this way, it is just one factor among many.
Comments
The guy likes the idea of doing something decisive, history defining. The Iranian government appears to have gotten the better of the protests over last few days, even though they are ongoing, which may have made action a day late and a dollar short if its not overwhelming and sustained.
If the US does not go for a assassination strategy, and they have circulated their requests for intelligence widely to 3rd parties, there would be two devastating targets, Bandar Abbas and Kharg, Those would be a piece of piss to hit. Whether they'd go down that economic destruction to kill the regime is high tariff stuff in terms of potential impact and reaction.
That way the underlings are deniable if it goes wrong.
“If only the King/Emperor/etc knew what they do in his name…”
https://bsky.app/profile/peterstefanovic.bsky.social/post/3mcfxynthu227
I am torn between Colonel Sharpe or Commander Bond, or better still Captain Blackadder. He would have a cunning plan...
Today I found out that Ofgem is spending £287 million – paid for by household electricity bills – to dismantle 10 pylons in Snowdonia & bury the cables.
That's more than twice the annual budget of *all* national parks in Britain (which have budgets of £135m pa). Rather than burying pylons, we could spend that money far more effectively to protect nature, while reducing energy bills.
Alternatively, about 3000 people live in the area. With the same budget, you could give every single one of them £100k, or pay for 3 years' worth of free school meals for every primary school kid in Wales.
https://x.com/dc_lawrence/status/2011479928701677929
https://policepromotion.blog/2024/08/11/exclusive-interview-with-west-mids-chief-craig-guildford-qpm/
£86k - a meter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuOrKO3_doI
"BBC 2 | Secret Society | The Association of Chief Police Officers
ACPO have been making up their own law and policy. This episode investigates the Association of Chief Police Officers and how Government policy and actions are determined in the fields of law and order."
The ensuing court cases are still going on today.
Another thing I reflect on when I think about the effectiveness or not of the 'Prevent' programme and related 'spookery'.
I know this is in actuality about more than that, but still.
So when floundering, he found himself using the same phrase.
It seemed out of character, whereas Penny was entirely in character.
The government is also seemingly trying to treat the private member's bill like a manifesto commitment with the hyperbole about how it must not be delayed. I'm very sure some Lords are trying to wreck it, but whilst there are good reasons to do such things as private bills that comes with some downsides in terms of parliamentary time and, indeed, convention expectations.
And so soon after new members too.
I went on it in September. I may have mentioned that.
https://x.com/xx_xyathletics/status/2011499246802125221
https://www.instagram.com/yuvaltoppererez/?hl=en
https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/seahorse-parents-transgender-men-pregnant-photo-series
She knows men can't get pregnant. But many won't ever admit that until it's safe to say so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUBAx8jbYNs
What possible advantage to anyone in refusing to do so? How does that help navigate to a successful birth?
There are many sides to gender misalignment, but there are some parallels with the desire for diagnosis as a label to validate an individuals life experience, similar to that we see in the proliferation of diagnoses of milder forms of autism, ADD, ADHD, and other aspects of neurodiversity.
Medicalising via a diagnostic label can be helpful in allowing a person to come to terms with their life and a degree of acceptance of being different. Whether there is any more objective benefit in terms of functioning is very much unevidenced. Often I think we would be better off with a broader acceptance of social eccentricity and difference. Why should we suppress our individuality in pursuit of a grudging social acceptance?
Sam Coates Sky@SamCoatesSky·52m
EXCLUSIVE I'm "ashamed" of Sir Keir Starmer, says rebel Labour MP - as the row over justice reforms escalates. Karl Turner tells me "I'm not going to be bullied" and attacks "pal" Starmer and called the justice secretary "lazy" as we visit one of London's busiest courts.
This is the most cross I've ever seen a mainstream Labour MP against Starmer.
But ministers are doubling down, not backing down, vowing to strip the right to a jury from those already facing trial to cut the backlog.
We saw broken justice at Snarkesbrook Crown Court, talked to the government, rebels, judges and lawyers.
Watch our deep dive
Film by @JoeCookJ
https://news.sky.com/story/im-asham
https://x.com/SamCoatesSky/status/2011678884991762903
If they weren't they wouldn't have a womb, nor could they conceive.
No ifs, no buts.
And then this will be Starmer's 14th U-turn.
The present hiccup in the USA shows individualised democracy taken to some extreme lengths.
I think that Eastern social norms are different historically, with roots in a desire for Confuscionist social order, but whether this is truly wanted by individuals is a different question. When given the opportunity of breaking free that desire for conformity is often obviously externally imposed. Take the endless inventive youth cults in Japan or Hong Kong for instance, or the 4B movement in Korea.
https://bsky.app/profile/financialtimes.com/post/3mcgzmygjzu2y
Didn't someone once condemn the "doomsters and gloomsters"?
“Our findings tell us that young people’s choices around social media and gaming may be shaped by how they’re feeling but not necessarily the other way around,” said Prof Neil Humphrey, a co-author. “Rather than blaming technology itself, we need to pay attention to what young people are doing online, who they’re connecting with and how supported they feel in their daily lives.”
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2026/jan/14/social-media-time-does-not-increase-teenagers-mental-health-problems-study?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Whenever I try to buy alcohol free booze at the self service check outs it raises a flag for someone to check my age. I thought therefore a ban was still in place?
(Reality is that the random number generator continues to spit out numbers consistent with an average of 0.1 to 0.2% a month, with about 0.2% of noise either way. Over a year, 0.1% a month would be continued grey and 0.2% would be definite green shoots territory.)
You can start to see how it adds up...
It's something we could and should do as a much richer country - or perhaps if power was going in for the first time at a stretch. But the opportunity cost of £300 million is enormous. Just donate it to the John Muir Trust or equivalents instead if you're serious about landscape preservation.
Apparently most are labour-led
At least it'll be through rock, it'd be several times more expensive if it was clay. Don't envy national grid trying to explain that in the home counties.
Societies based upon low-productivity agriculture, could not survive, without people placing their family’s/village’s/clan’s survival, over and above their own individual wishes. Guarding against catastrophe made far more sense than trying to maximise profit.
Individualism was for the 1%.
That’s one reason why I’m such an enthusiast for the Industrial Revolution.
Elections get postponed for war and pandemic, on a cross-party basis, not simply by request because the government is afraid of losing councils.
It is not making anyone an 'out group', simply saying that people may choose to radically alter their appearance, but legal changes have a higher bar. It solves (imo) a lot of the current problems (though not sport) and is fair.
The cynical suggested that it was because undercover officers bigged up the threat - ‘cause Vanilla ISIS offer a lot less opportunities for casual sex and soft drugs while doing not much.
Though it did metastasise into something darker with some groups. Trying to turn Fathers For Justice into a violent group, for example, because their goal* was getting political traction.
*equality in enforcement of judicial decisions.
NEW THREAD
You may as well assert that men know what makes someone a man, for all a snarky aside adds to a debate.
F1: 11 days until the first test. Unusually in F1, this will be private. But I'm sure there'll be much murmuring.
Susan Geckeloids seen in Burnley...
The whole transgender thing looks to me a lot like a surrender to gender norms and societal hostility to social eccentricity. Instead of expanding the range of ways in which it is acceptable to be a man or a woman it narrows them.
I see gender as relating to behaviour and presentation. Things like which clothes you wear, the interests you have, how you act. While sex relates to biology and a person's physical body. So if someone is taking testosterone to initiate make secondary sex characteristics that looks to me like someone altering their physical biology in order to match the gender norms that they fit most closely to.
Since I consider gender norms to be largely bollocks it strikes me as a retrograde step to encourage people to alter their biology to fit societies current gender norms. It was only a few centuries ago that it was very normal for upper class men to engage in peacocking displays of clothing wear, so why do we now have people altering their bodies because they don't fit into the constrained gender norms of men wearing boring clothes?
1) "it strikes me as a retrograde step to encourage people to alter their biology to fit societies current gender norms". The example I gave wasn't trying to fit current gender norms - quite the opposite. What gender norms does somebody with a beard, a receding hairline, a deep voice, no breasts, a functioning womb, and pregnant fit into?
2) "why do we now have people altering their bodies because they don't fit into the constrained gender norms of men wearing boring clothes" The example I gave were biological women.