[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The media will report on what sells - you're the one who taught me that LT. It's not a conspiracy, it's just clicks .

Also it's a bit daft as the Chinese spy balloon was widely reported on across the MSM and the banking collapse is all over the financial press - where anyone who finds it relevant will be reading about it. It means nothing to Joe Hick in his trailer, so it's not in his newspaper.

The Airborne Toxic Event is a bit of a weird one.

i just like that pic

[Alf]

The right is the best.

Team Right for the win.

[Beso]

Yes, right wing is the way forward.

The left are tied up with meaningless hogwash in their attempts at using the lgbt for their own gains.

Once its over they will stop cosying up to the nazi lgbt lot.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Yes, right wing is the way forward.

The left are tied up with meaningless hogwash in their attempts at using the lgbt for their own gains.

Once its over they will stop cosying up to the nazi lgbt lot.

Hard-right thinking has proven to be as unworkable in the real world as hard-left, the only reasonable and rational answers are robust socialist policies supporting strong consumer-driven economies (for the economics side) and rational discourse and compromise (for the social side) but look what happens when people try to make a call for those things . "Uhh that's too sensible you're just trying to look good, you communist nazi woke bigot!"

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Hard-right thinking has proven to be as unworkable in the real world as hard-left, the only reasonable and rational answers are robust socialist policies supporting strong consumer-driven economies (for the economics side) and rational discourse and compromise (for the social side) but look what happens when people try to make a call for those things . "Uhh that's too sensible you're just trying to look good, you communist nazi woke bigot!"

Does that have pink hair?

[Alf]

I wouldn't stand for that, Toy Soldier. He's done you up like a kipper there.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Not TS getting exposed for being a closet right-winger disguised as a "centrist"




The good Doctor is laughing

[Beso]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Not TS getting exposed for being a closet right-winger disguised as a "centrist"




The good Doctor is laughing

Well he did take a break from the forum because he was becoming that way.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Well he did take a break from the forum because he was becoming that way.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Tom4784

More bull**** prompted by the fact you're hurt that I'm not wowed by your shallow centrism.

Trying to make out that I'm tribalistic and lack self awareness is ultimately an own goal on your part. You have to keep making out that 'both sides' are beneath you to inflate your ego when in truth you identify with one side more than the other but it's all about your self-image so you delude yourself about your views to try to seem like you're operating from a neutral perspective when you aren't.

At the end of the day, I know bull**** when I see it, and centrists reek of it, and they always have. It's all about them trying to impress people with a level of intellect that isn't there. Centrists are just people suffering with delusions of grandeur and main character syndrome.

And transphobia is bigotry, if I was to take what you wrote before about gender and changed the words to equal terms representing race, you would be seen as a racist, what makes you think that it's not bigotry to approach gender in a similar fashion? Ego, that's what.

You're also engaging in more pageantry for the right wing side by making out that any opposition to transphobia is somehow not valid and is just pageantry in itself. Because any views that oppose yours can't be valid, right? Really an unfathomable lack of self awareness.

I just can't get ahead around you, of all people, chastising people for thinking that "any opposing views can't be valid" when you are literally the worst for that very thing on this forum and frankly one of the worst for it I've ever encountered. I take on all sorts of views on this forum; you brand anyone who doesn't hold the same views as you as either stupid, a bigot, or disingenuous. You're an aggressive zealot Dezzy and it's basically impossible for anyone to engage with in any meaningful way - and that's why no one really even tries at this point. I could try to engage with why I think race and gender are inherently different - because gender itself is a social construct, and one founded in oppression of women - but I know there's little if any point.

I don't make out that "both sides are beneath me" and I frequently take a side, I'm just willing to listen to moderate views on both. I'm not interested in dogma and extremism "on either side" because, yes, it's anti-intellectualism and a waste of everyone's time.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

I just can't get ahead around you, of all people, chastising people for thinking that "any opposing views can't be valid" when you are literally the worst for that very thing on this forum and frankly one of the worst for it I've ever encountered. I take on all sorts of views on this forum; you brand anyone who doesn't hold the same views as you as either stupid, a bigot, or disingenuous. You're an aggressive zealot Dezzy and it's basically impossible for anyone to engage with in any meaningful way - and that's why no one really even tries at this point. I could try to engage with why I think race and gender are inherently different - because gender itself is a social construct, and one founded in oppression of women - but I know there's little if any point.

I don't make out that "both sides are beneath me" and I frequently take a side, I'm just willing to listen to moderate views on both. I'm not interested in dogma and extremism "on either side" because, yes, it's anti-intellectualism and a waste of everyone's time.

I've never once said your views aren't valid, I've never even said the same even to the likes of LT, whose opinions are basically whoever's videos he's watching at the time. You're confusing my opposition for me saying your views aren't valid and that's entirely on you. Kind of like how you're making out that I'm an extreme zealot for not buying into your own hype. Shall we talk about extremes, shall we?

The GCs very recently had a rally, lead by Posie Parker that saw nazis stand with them, doing nazi salutes for the cameras. To me, siding with nazis is extreme. If Nazis began to support something I believed in, I'd probably reconsider my position and truly assess if I was in the right, it's the shame the GC crowd are too extreme and radicalised to do the same.

But no, I'm the extreme one for not thinking the sun shines out your arse.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Tom4784

The GCs very recently had a rally, lead by Posie Parker that saw nazis stand with them, doing nazi salutes for the cameras. To me, siding with nazis is extreme. If Nazis began to support something I believed in, I'd probably reconsider my position and truly assess if I was in the right, it's the shame the GC crowd are too extreme and radicalised to do the same.

See I am perfectly aware of that and have talked about the far right and religious evangelical hijacking of women's concerns in the gender ideology landscape. I've talked about it on here. Recently.

I just don't believe that seeing and accepting that right wing opportunists using the debate to their own ends - as they will with anythibg they can - automatically means that the inverse stance must automatically be 100% correct. Because that isn't rational, or anything even approaching rational. It's reactionary.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Tom4784

The GCs very recently had a rally, lead by Posie Parker that saw nazis stand with them, doing nazi salutes for the cameras. To me, siding with nazis is extreme.

Do you expect a bunch of middle-aged women to forcibly remove a bunch of violent males from a public place? Just because the "GCs" had someone glomping onto their event, doesn't mean they support one another.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Do you expect a bunch of middle-aged women to forcibly remove a bunch of violent males from a public place? Just because the "GCs" had someone glomping onto their event, doesn't mean they support one another.

Because no demonstration ever has had others jumping on board to promote their own agendas....

Can you elaborate what GC stands for, I googled it but all I could get was Glasgow Coma....

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Because no demonstration ever has had others jumping on board to promote their own agendas....

Can you elaborate what GC stands for, I googled it but all I could get was Glasgow Coma....

Gender Critical, aka people (usually women) who think that gender is a social construct, and shouldn't trump biological sex when it comes to dictating sex-based rights.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Do you expect a bunch of middle-aged women to forcibly remove a bunch of violent males from a public place? Just because the "GCs" had someone glomping onto their event, doesn't mean they support one another.

Look up the event, you had GCs taking pictures with the nazis, and not all GCs are women. There's a deeply ironic photo of a male GC with their hands on a woman's throat in front of a sign that says something like 'let women speak', which doesn't apply to all women it seems....

There was also a heavy police presence so making out that the GCs were a bunch of 'helpless women' doesn't make your point stand up. Nazis showed up to support the GC agenda and the GCs didn't mind it until after the event when it went viral and it made them look bad rubbing shoulders with nazis.

Originally Posted by Cherie

Because no demonstration ever has had others jumping on board to promote their own agendas....

Again, if nazis show up in support of your beliefs, that alone should be enough to maybe reconsider your views. It's not the first time that GC and Nazi ideology has overlapped and it won't be the last.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Because no demonstration ever has had others jumping on board to promote their own agendas....

Can you elaborate what GC stands for, I googled it but all I could get was Glasgow Coma....

I googled it aswell , But i got something called 'Google classroom' instead .

[Alf]

Who are the GCs?

Has Gemma Collins got her own political movement going?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Alf

Who are the GCs?

Has Gemma Collins got her own political movement going?

Gammon control?

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Gammon control?

Led by nosey Posie Parker

[Crimson Dynamo]

[Alf]

"if you're 21 and not a Liberal, then you don't have a heart. If you're 40 and not a Conservative, then you don't have a brain"

I think that was Winnie who sad that.

Maybe TS is going through a transitional period?

[user104658]

Posie Parker has distinct Nazi vibes and happily flirts with the far-right, there's really no denying that. She's a liability.

Any mob gathering demonstration is going to be hijacked by extremists though - that's an inevitability... the double standard is rather interesting though... I vividly remember that when the BLM marches and demonstrations were used as a cover for mindless violence and looting, there was a clear understanding that those people were not a genuine part of the original demonstration, and were there for their own ends and thus it shouldn't take away from the genuine message of real BLM protesters. When "M.A.P" paedophiles corrupt and use the language of LGBT oppression to attempt to legitimise themselves, we must all understand that they are a fringe extreme and that most people don't agree with those abhorrent views. I agree with ALL of this, by the way.

And yet when the Nazis turn up to piggyback on women's genuine concerns, "everyone should reconsider what they're supporting"? No everyone should be aware of and call out the extremists who want to disingenuously hijack a movement for their own purposes.

There is literally no difference between saying "If nazis show up in support of your beliefs, that alone should be enough to maybe reconsider your views" and "If paedophiles show up in support of your beliefs, that alone should be enough to maybe reconsider your views". Which many people do - completely wrongly.

So no.

We should just accept that the Nazis and Paedophiles are opportunistic vultures and not representative.

I'm DEEPLY concerned about the way these things are being leveraged by the far right and the evangelists to pull more people over into their thinking. To the extent that at this point I genuinely think it's the larger concern (because as we know, those people do NOT actually give a stuff about the rights of women or children, and those will be out the window as soon as they've served their purpose).

To put it in simple terms; despite being accused of "my real feelings being clear" as to which side I come down on, take a look at the current SNP situation. I'm worried about who the future leader of scotland will be. I think we have terrible choices. But I would take Humza Yousaf (fully on board the identity politics train) over Kate Forbes (thinly-veiled evangelist nutjob) ANY day of the week.

I just wish there was a better set of options.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Posie Parker has distinct Nazi vibes and happily flirts with the far-right, there's really no denying that. She's a liability.

Any mob gathering demonstration is going to be hijacked by extremists though - that's an inevitability... the double standard is rather interesting though... I vividly remember that when the BLM marches and demonstrations were used as a cover for mindless violence and looting, there was a clear understanding that those people were not a genuine part of the original demonstration, and were there for their own ends and thus it shouldn't take away from the genuine message of real BLM protesters. When "M.A.P" paedophiles corrupt and use the language of LGBT oppression to attempt to legitimise themselves, we must all understand that they are a fringe extreme and that most people don't agree with those abhorrent views. I agree with ALL of this, by the way.

And yet when the Nazis turn up to piggyback on women's genuine concerns, "everyone should reconsider what they're supporting"? No everyone should be aware of and call out the extremists who want to disingenuously hijack a movement for their own purposes.

There is literally no difference between saying "If nazis show up in support of your beliefs, that alone should be enough to maybe reconsider your views" and "If paedophiles show up in support of your beliefs, that alone should be enough to maybe reconsider your views". Which many people do - completely wrongly.

So no.

We should just accept that the Nazis and Paedophiles are opportunistic vultures and not representative.

I'm DEEPLY concerned about the way these things are being leveraged by the far right and the evangelists to pull more people over into their thinking. To the extent that at this point I genuinely think it's the larger concern (because as we know, those people do NOT actually give a stuff about the rights of women or children, and those will be out the window as soon as they've served their purpose).

To put it in simple terms; despite being accused of "my real feelings being clear" as to which side I come down on, take a look at the current SNP situation. I'm worried about who the future leader of scotland will be. I think we have terrible choices. But I would take Humza Yousaf (fully on board the identity politics train) over Kate Forbes (thinly-veiled evangelist nutjob) ANY day of the week.

I just wish there was a better set of options.

Hopefully Kate will win

Spoiler:

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Posie Parker has distinct Nazi vibes and happily flirts with the far-right, there's really no denying that. She's a liability.

Yeah? I've seen an odd livestream of hers, she certainly has a certain charisma, but I don't care enough about her specifically to seek her out beyond that.

In your opinion, is she enough of a liability to counteract the positives of shining a light on the women's issue?