[user104658]

Originally Posted by Liam-

There’s never an actual balanced debate or discussion about it and that comes from both sides of the aisle

Yes I agree on that and that the hijacking is ultimately on both sides as well. I do see & accept that the most recent, and rather worrying, development is that religious fundamentalists have very much reared their heads in the debate and of course, when it comes down to it, the last thing that group is interested in is women's rights (or anyone elses).

But just as disingenuous individuals use of Trans Rights dogma as protection from scrutiny doesn't mean that all trans people are dangerous, the presence of the hard right and religious groups hopping onto the "other side" doesn't mean that there aren't people with real, valid and reasonable safeguarding concerns.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Yes I agree on that and that the hijacking is ultimately on both sides as well. I do see & accept that the most recent, and rather worrying, development is that religious fundamentalists have very much reared their heads in the debate and of course, when it comes down to it, the last thing that group is interested in is women's rights (or anyone elses).

But just as disingenuous individuals use of Trans Rights dogma as protection from scrutiny doesn't mean that all trans people are dangerous, the presence of the hard right and religious groups hopping onto the "other side" doesn't mean that there aren't people with real, valid and reasonable safeguarding concerns.

Yeah agree with that. Matt Walsh is a prime example. JK Rowling however is not, she's always been very much on the left but she's also a survivor of domestic abuse, it make so much sense as to why she'd be concerned about the potential damage to women's rights because of her history yet people pretend that it's more likely she "just hates trans people"

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah agree with that. Matt Walsh is a prime example.

Kate Forbes (SNP hopeful) is a concern as well, she largely "says the right things" (i.e. that her own religious views and opinions would never affect her decision-making in politics) but I don't believe that can be true for anyone even if she means it -- and on top of that, I just don't trust that she means it.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Kate Forbes (SNP hopeful) is a concern as well, she largely "says the right things" (i.e. that her own religious views and opinions would never affect her decision-making in politics) but I don't believe that can be true for anyone even if she means it -- and on top of that, I just don't trust that she means it.

Well do you want Kate Forbes to do what Theresa May & Tim Farron did and backpedal their views to please people?? . Hardly genuine is it .

I would say Kate Forbes should focus more on education and other political issues, if she has conviction in her decisions and doesn't crumble then she might actually be a stronger leader than Nicole Sturgeon. But we'll see .

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah agree with that. Matt Walsh is a prime example.

Yes Matt Walsh is more hard right leaning,but everything he said about Dylan Mulvany was correct. And he has kids he wants to protect from all this ideology.

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Yes Matt Walsh is more hard right leaning,but everything he said about Dylan Mulvany was correct. And he has kids he wants to protect from all this ideology.

Yeah, the man that says girls should be having babies below the age of consent because that’s when they’re the most verile, definitely wants to protect kids

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Yeah, the man that says girls should be having babies below the age of consent because that’s when they’re the most verile, definitely wants to protect kids

What?!??

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

What?!??

Yeah, that’s the type of people being allowed to take over and become the face of the anti-trans movement, because they say things that people want to hear on the surface, but they’ve got their own ulterior motives based in fundamentalism and bigotry

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Yeah, that’s the type of people being allowed to take over and become the face of the anti-trans movement, because they say things that people want to hear on the surface, but they’ve got their own ulterior motives based in fundamentalism and bigotry

They can become the face of the "anti-trans" movement, that doesn't represent me as I'm only interested in the Pro-Women & Children "movement" anyway, like I always have been, long before trans became part of that debate.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Yeah, that’s the type of people being allowed to take over and become the face of the anti-trans movement, because they say things that people want to hear on the surface, but they’ve got their own ulterior motives based in fundamentalism and bigotry

Well the only Matt Walsh videos I've seen are to do with de transitioners and Dylan Mulvany .

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Yes I agree on that and that the hijacking is ultimately on both sides as well. I do see & accept that the most recent, and rather worrying, development is that religious fundamentalists have very much reared their heads in the debate and of course, when it comes down to it, the last thing that group is interested in is women's rights (or anyone elses).

But just as disingenuous individuals use of Trans Rights dogma as protection from scrutiny doesn't mean that all trans people are dangerous, the presence of the hard right and religious groups hopping onto the "other side" doesn't mean that there aren't people with real, valid and reasonable safeguarding concerns.

The blatantl hypocrisy though is the anti-trans lot wanting lgbt people to publicly condemn all the hijackers and publicly speak out against them and make amends for behaviours that aren’t their own, but absolutely refuse to speak out themselves about the very obvious coattail riders that are the religious nutjobs and outright bigots that are becoming the faces and the voices of the movement, camouflaging as people that have actual concerns, if you’re happy to accept those people into the movement and let them represent you, you have no right to expect the other side to apologise for the fringe people on their side and that’s what’s happening

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Liam-

The blatantl hypocrisy though is the anti-trans lot wanting lgbt people to publicly condemn all the hijackers and publicly speak out against them and make amends for behaviours that aren’t their own, but absolutely refuse to speak out themselves about the very obvious coattail riders that are the religious nutjobs and outright bigots that are becoming the faces and the voices of the movement, camouflaging as people that have actual concerns, if you’re happy to accept those people into the movement and let them represent you, you have no right to expect the other side to apologise for the fringe people on their side and that’s what’s happening

I mean, that's tribalism and that's unfortunately the world we live in (and possibly just wide-scale human nature). I don't disagree but that's why I wish the activities and debates of academics and professionals could be left separate to the mind-numbing rabble of the proletariat press.

Unfortunately the Social Media generation means that enough dumb voices shouting in unison about wanting "everything right now" (or alternatively, "nothing at all to change ever") can over-ride a handful of thoughtful, intelligent thinkers who are genuinely seeking careful, considered progress in a reasonable timeframe.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Yes I agree on that and that the hijacking is ultimately on both sides as well. I do see & accept that the most recent, and rather worrying, development is that religious fundamentalists have very much reared their heads in the debate and of course, when it comes down to it, the last thing that group is interested in is women's rights (or anyone elses).

But just as disingenuous individuals use of Trans Rights dogma as protection from scrutiny doesn't mean that all trans people are dangerous, the presence of the hard right and religious groups hopping onto the "other side" doesn't mean that there aren't people with real, valid and reasonable safeguarding concerns.

Of course there are hijackers on both sides but the only one destined for a womens prison was Isla Bryson

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Of course there are hijackers on both sides but the only one destined for a womens prison was Isla Bryson

yep.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Of course there are hijackers on both sides but the only one destined for a womens prison was Isla Bryson

It isn't just Isla Bryson either , there's been other incidents of men pretending to be women as they think they can get away with it. As they get closer to their victims. Laws needs to be brought in to make it harder for predators to sneak into womens spaces.

This is why Scotland will now end up with a stricter political leader ,with views not everyone will agree. But if Forbes sticks to important social issues like this and education etc ,then she might actually be better than Sturgeon. But who knows.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Of course there are hijackers on both sides but the only one destined for a womens prison was Isla Bryson

I would genuinely be remiss if I didn't caution against underestimating how awful some of the individuals looking to use/abuse the current situation from the other angle are though. I do believe that the LGBTQ community has unfortunately been asleep at the wheel when it comes to disingenuous individuals essentially using them to their own ends - but it would be very ironic to then not acknowledge that there are some actual bigots and people with genuinely dangerous views and sleepwalk into something even more sinister.

I'm always mindful that the "backlash to the backlash" and most "tribal social stuff" is frequently used as a distraction from other things.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Youtube video

[Cherie]

Childen were encouraged to shout out slang words for genetalia which were written on the white board including the c...word

This was in a science class....nothing to do with the drag queen...

This seems a very strange school

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Childen were encouraged to shout out slang words for genetalia which were written on the white board including the c...word

This was in a science class....nothing to do with the drag queen...

This seems a very strange school

A Father of a pupil from that class is currently on with Nick. The school is now carrying out a second "enquiry" about this and the head has already said sorry to this family.

He said the 11 year olds come back into the family home and tell their 5,6,7 year old siblings

He is utterly disgusted and rightly so

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

A Father of a pupil from that class is currently on with Nick. The school is now carrying out a second "enquiry" about this and the head has already said sorry to this family.

He said the 11 year olds come back into the family home and tell their 5,6,7 year old siblings

He is utterly disgusted and rightly so

Yeah listening to that ...some parents have been called bigots for disagreeing

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Childen were encouraged to shout out slang words for genetalia which were written on the white board including the c...word

"Clunge"

[GoldHeart]

That school sounds unhinged,they definitely need investigating by Ofsted.

[Crimson Dynamo]