[Siderite]

My comment wasn’t about the UK being horrible or whatever. I don’t know why you think I give a damn about being called a usual suspect by you, since you display the very behaviour you criticise others for.

You quite clearly took exception to me making what should be an inane comment about how these people have been treated badly. If you found my comment ridiculous it means you think it’s ridiculous to criticise humans living in squalor, when it’s preventable, it’s ridiculous to call them human, you misunderstood my intention or are twisting my words yet again. There are no other possibilities.

I wasn’t saying anyone arguing against immigration is evil, xenophobic, racist or whatever straw man you want to throw at me. I was making a specific point about the treatment of people who have crossed the channel once arrived. Like it or not, they should be treated humanely.

If you make a comment which makes it seem like you think it’s ridiculous to say humans should be treated humanely, then don’t start complaining when my opinion is not positive and I make scathing comments. I couldn’t give a damn about being politically correct about someone who told me it’s ridiculous to be concerned about welfare of humans. It could be you misunderstanding, but you can’t blame someone for calling you out for what is a deeply inhumane implication; that it’s ridiculous to want acceptable living standards for refugees, migrants or whoever.

None of this means I think the UK is horrible or beyond redemption. I just think we can treat these people better and that this is a stain on our record. I have gone through wh the UK has some great points previously. I am not doing so again, because someone who has to demonise others remotely to the left of Reagan understands (and probably won’t anyway, because it doesn’t suit their agenda).

Stop moaning that people have a different opinion to you. I am allowed to criticise Braverman’s disgusting language and lack of care to others. This is not the real crime. Disregard to others and how they live is.

[Siderite]

The net zero argument is odd given the cost of natural gas, which has always been reliant on Russia, and their politicisation of gas usage started before the invasion of Ukraine. It would have been mitigated if Germany and others didn’t hinder nuclear. The problem is low energy security, with over-reliance on gas.

Given gas use is at highs in many countries, it’s odd to suggest that the cause is relying too much on other sources.

[Siderite]

There’s the whatabout.

[Siderite]

Yes, Bucks, it’s ridiculous to complain about people with preventable diseases in terrible conditions.

Perhaps I should call them invading hordes, and you might not call critics ridiculous.

I wasn’t aware that the French were responsible for how people are treated in the UK.

I made no comment on this other than how they are being treated, but please jump to assumptions based on your straw men. It shows your tribal nature and why it’s pointless me bothering to give a fuller answer.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Heath

[Siderite]

I was pointing out that men, as a whole, are a risk to women. This does not mean every man, or every male member of a subset of men, is a sex offender. It does mean that men should be treated as a risk, like we do for every male, regardless of their identity. A male doesn’t become magically not a risk because he says he identifies as a woman. Gender neutral spaces and self-id allow men to be in a position to put women at risk.

I was mentioning things like sexual offences, because that is relevant for why women do not feel safe from men, regardless of how they identify. Opening up their spaces to men puts them at risk, as the data suggests. If there was no risk of women being harmed, and sexual offences are a huge part of this, we’d have much less need for female spaces (changing rooms, toilets, crisis centres etc). That men, no matter their gender identity, cause a risk is why this issue needs to be taken seriously, not flippantly dismissed, as if women’s rights don’t matter compared to male feelings.

[Siderite]

Writing what together? Transwomen and men? Transwomen are male, so are therefore men. No dog whistling there. By saying men pose a risk to women? Given that sex based violence is predominantly male to female, there is nothing untoward here, I think. Unless you’re arguing that it’s wrong to call out male violence, like every other MRA.

[Siderite]

Way to avoid the argument. It would be dog whistling if I was trying to imply that transwomen are all sex pests. I am not saying this, hence why your argument is a straw man.

[Siderite]

64 wrote:

“Sexual crimes have risen by 11% in Scotland with gender neutral changing rooms”,dog whistle bollocks,how many have been committed by transpeople? Also sexual crime is up in general not just changing rooms. Sexual crimes are running at record rates in all the UK not just Scotland
nobody is saying it’s easy and there are no easy solutions and psycological harm done to people being forced into binary solutions is not something any of us can possibly gauge and to just put it down to hurt feelings is ridiculous.
“There is no evidence that transgender identified men pose less risk than any other man”.
More dog whistling ,there’s no evidence that they pose a risk greater or equal too either. But you know that putting an idea in minds by how you word something creates an issue. Iam not surprised at the use of these tools though,it’s how opinion polls get rigged

It’s no point me pretending there are no practical difficulties and that I understand these people ,which is why I usually shy away from such a difficult area but I do know that we live in a world where it’s possible to accommodate people safely and it’s perfectly possible that the physical self does not match the mind.Greater minds than me will work through it but the hysteria around vulnerable people from so called Christians is sickening. It’s not new, people of my age will remember Vanessa the pianist in town .
Binary people judging things they have no idea about is like ,men telling women they cannot abort .

Why is it a dog whistle to say men pose a risk to women? How do you stop non-trans identified men from abusing women in their own spaces if you open them up to anyone male who says they’re a woman? It’s pretty obvious we can’t, since many revert to not being trans post-prison after their sentence. https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/anger-trans-inmates-revert-males-25840252. It’s clear self-id is not fit for purpose in protecting women from violent men. Frankly, it’s not women’s job to be a sponge for men deemed not manly enough to be in men’s spaces.

Again, why is it dog whistling to point out that transgender identified men pose as much risk to women as any other men? This whole movement is geared on rubbishing women’s fears of men, just like all other sexist MRA movements. You only have to look at the inmate stats to see that the offence rates for transwomen are similar to non-trans male counterparts. None of this is saying that all or the majority of transpeople are sex pests, but the fact is they are men and men pose a risk to women, regardless of their gender identities. It’s not anti-man to state that men pose a risk to women, it’s not anti-trans to say that transwomen pose a risk to women for the same reason as other men.

Your straw manning my argument as a means to pick on a minority is a common tactic which misses the point. Transpeople do face issues from society, but they do not from those who want to protect women’s rights, it’s from men. They do not have rights to stomp over women’s or gay rights because of their ‘inner feelings’. Women have a right to go to a rape crisis centre without men, they have a right to not be searched by men, they have a right to compete in sport without men. It’s not picking on a vulnerable minority to say this, nor is it to say that some members of minority groups are not angels.

[Siderite]

64 wrote:

A woman is whatever she wants to be.
God made man in his own image and also gave us free will,therefore we can be what we like.
The gotcha nature of gutter politics in such personal questions is exactly where bigots make themselves look stupid.Most of us are not qualified to know what is happening in the minds of transgender people and its ridiculous to try understand.I do know using vulnerable people to make a crass political point in Parliament is peak Tory caring

This is a circular definition which does not make sense. The implications are problematic and sexist too. Eddie Izzard says he’s a woman because sometimes he feels he has a girl mode. In other words, he’s a woman because he has feminine stereotypes. This is reductive and sexist.

Not only this, allowing self-id creates problematic situations, because humans are a sexed species, just like every other mammal. Men and women require different health responses, there is disparity in sport which goes beyond just hormones, and women have had spaces of their own to avoid potential male violence. There is no evidence that transgender identified men pose less risk than any other man. Sexual crimes have risen by 11% in Scotland with gender neutral changing rooms, there are reports of girls skipping the restrooms in school to avoid boys, female rape and sexual assault victims are being made out to be bigoted for wanting female only staff to be with them when they are vulnerable. Some have implied it’s bigoted for lesbians to have an aversion to penis, where Stonewall hosted a workshop on how to overcome the ‘cotton ceiling’ so lesbians can consider dating transwomen.

I could think of many more conflicts of rights, but in all cases the only harm to transpeople through saying no are hurt feelings from being made out to not be their preferred gender identity. Meanwhile, the implications of saying yes is far more serious for women here.

I am all for treating others with equity and fairness, but that doesn’t mean every activist group’s demands are reasonable, and I don’t think the demands from transactivists are reasonable a lot of the time. There is no consideration to women, homosexuals or any others as to what they want. Worse, they make out it’s bigotry to focus on anything other than what they want, and any acquiescence is sacrilege.

Gender non-conformity is perfectly fine by me. However, gender non-conformity doesn’t make you the opposite sex. Man and woman are sexed terms, so no man can become a woman based on inner feelings. We’re no different to other mammals, and are a sexed species. It’s anti-scientific to suggest otherwise and making out men can become women, and vice versa, is only humouring people.

1 user thanked author for this post.

TwoWrights

[Siderite]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

Eddie Izzard- How can you vote for Labour when Starmer won’t even say “He is a man.”

Because there are several issues relevant when making a decision besides just this.

[Siderite]

Knowing what biological sex is should be a minimum for anyone in politics, like knowing the age of the Earth. Somehow it seems to baffle some in a mistaken belief it’s being kind. It isn’t so kind to the women who get told they’re bigoted for not sharing their spaces, which includes rape shelters, with men who say they’re women. It’s sheer entitlement.

This isn’t to say that dysphoric people shouldn’t be treated unsympathetically, but treating people with kid gloves over a belief isn’t going to work when there’s a conflict with reality.

1 user thanked author for this post.

TwoWrights

[Siderite]

You are grasping for gotchas, but the answer above should have given you some clue as to my answer to that, as female specifically refers to the sex which produces ova.

[Siderite]

Adult human female. Next

1 user thanked author for this post.

TwoWrights

[Siderite]

Of course he can. Kanye West is, for example. Next.

[Siderite]

WonderGoals wrote:

Matt will know if it’s happening or not. He hinted on twitter it’s off by his statement.

First it was cans on a Monday ?. Now it’s changed to cans back to tesco so it’s collapsed going by that.

Not 100% though because with Matt and his cryptic clues you can never be too sure.

I think you’re reading too much into that. It could just mean that it wasn’t going ahead today, so put the celebrations on hold for today. We don’t know how much SST knows, and we have nothing much to go on either way, so all we can do is wait and see.

I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s off, but I am not going to base opinions off scant evidence.

[Siderite]

Yes, yawn. God forbid someone criticise the way humans are being treated.

No whining about poll legitimacy from me. I am sure the Tories are going to claw back and maintain a 30+ percentage difference given everything. :-)

[Siderite]

Yes, Bucks, saying I agree with you is dubious. You can’t trust us ultra-left pinko commie Blairites. ;-)

[Siderite]

You note I didn’t use the term communist. However, the idea that Biden is in league with the Cuban solidarity lot is still hilarious.

[Siderite]

Bucksiron wrote:

Not huffing and puffing at all, Siderite. I don’t give a toss what you or the usual suspects think. I’d have been very surprised had any of the comments been any different.

You just don’t get it.

Yet you regularly do if someone disagrees with you, even civilly, and agreeing is not good enough if you’re a centrist or left leaning. So, despite your self-declarations I will stick to my own interpretation of your character and ability to accept others who have different opinions, as is my right.

Whether it’s accurate or not, it’s my own interpretation and I am free to call it out as you do with others based on your own.

[Siderite]

Sarcasm might work there if those you support didn’t pal around with the Cuban solidarity movement. ;-)

[Siderite]

Do they need to pal around with the Cuba solidarity mob to be a moderate in your eyes?:-)

[Siderite]

Hmmmm. I am not so sure. He would probably fit in with the Lib Dems and moderate Labour, but none of these are ultra-left outside of the skewed libertarian right bubble which sees reds under every bed.

[Siderite]

Await the huffing and puffing for being critical of the usual suspect, with accusations of bullying and abuse, when the critique is no more offensive or attacking than what he levels at others all the time for doing so much as disagree with him (God forbid).

Ridiculing the right for not fitting a certain political profile is bad, ridiculing centrists and the left is acceptable, seemingly. :-)

2 users thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe, TwoWrights

[Siderite]

[Siderite]

Also, Mao supporters are the ultra left. If you acknowledge Biden isn’t among them, it’s a tacit admission you were bullshitting when calling Biden such. Otherwise I might as well call Truss an ultra rightist and excuse it that I don’t mean she was like neo-Nazis.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[Siderite]

I love how Bucks gets irate at me saying how his ideas are ridiculous, while saying the same back and expecting to be taken as some sage voice of wisdom.

Anyone who thinks Biden is some ultra leftist is bonkers and has no clue as to what left wing politics actually is, frankly. The only one who has been fooled is Bucks, by his own ideological blindness.

64, who is further to the left, must be guffawing at the idea of Biden as a raging ultra-lefty. As would any actual strong leftist. This is just the inverse of lefties calling anyone to the right of Tony Benn a fascist. To Bucks, anyone to the left of Cameron is a raging pinko commie. What next? Tony Blair the ultra leftist? Biden is hardly greatly to the left of him. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blinded by their own tribal dogma.

It’s amusing how Bucks wails about others demonising Tories while demonising others. Hypocrisy at its finest and a perfect example while debate is not possible.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe, Heath, Deereyme66

[Siderite]

billpuntonsghost wrote:

..it is the same! The government elites still have a remain agenda.

Rishi Sunak was a Brexiteer.

[Siderite]

That’s what the Corbynites said when they didn’t get polling indications they liked.

[Siderite]

If you aren’t going to get involved, don’t come and make out criticism of his conspiracies, which are OTT, are out of order. I am not saying anything to be nasty to him. He is free to spout it, but I am free to critique. This is supposed to be a free society.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe, TwoWrights

[Siderite]

The idea that Biden is ultra-left is hilarious and only made by people whose view of the world is skewed by a heavy right wing bias, with a belief that anyone to the left of Regan is a pinko commie.

Actual ultra-leftists hate Biden and see him as a capitalist shill.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron

[Author]

Posts