James Kirkup being fab, again

[rightreckoner]

here

Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere - there's a lot of news this morning what with Jean at the fun Terf War event and the C4 documentary so I thought I'd post this as an example of what careful, thoughtful journalists do. They take their time, go through lots of boring footage and use it to skewer the total brainlessness of the TWAW gang.

Again thank you James for your diligence and intelligence.

That is brilliant.

And useful too that James Kirkup's main focus is the democratic process, and so his writing has a wide reach amongst decision makers and followers of politics.

I understand that Layla Moran is expected to be the next leader of the LibDems. She has a top flight educational background in science.

(Snigger.)

He is so fab.

Of course the irony (if I am using irony correctly...

is that when she said "I dare say that some women have beards" - she was quite obviously referring to - you know - women. i.e. the non penis folk - because the sentence or the logic doesn't work otherwise.

idiot.

Bravo James!

I know this is not the place, but can I just highlight that actual natal women with beards (even male pattern full on beards) do not get hair removal on the NHS, however trans women....
Despite the huge psychological distress, bullying and harassment those may women may endure, they s need to shell out thousands for permanent hair removal, as may I tell you a 5 o'clock shadow on a female 23 year old is not a good look....

I'm still gobsmacked at that "souls" comment. How can one of our elected representatives be so stupid? And so ignorant? Some of us have thought so long and so hard about this issue, and read the evidence, and she comes out with something that is just embarrassing in its naivety. If I knew so little about a subject, I'd choose to keep my mouth shut.

a 5 o'clock shadow on a female 23 year old is not a good look
I'm sure you know there's nothing objectively wrong with a beard on a woman. It's just that society tells us it is wrong and we internalise that viewpoint.

Page lead report on David Davis's speech in Daily Telegraph today
"MP hits out at transgender activists who stifle debate" but can't find it on the on line version.

That's a great article and yes to his comments about Victoria Atkins and her constructive comments. A relief to hear some sense coming from someone in government for a change, (which shows how pathetic they are as her comments aren't exactly ground breaking)

I’d like Ms Moran to define a soul.

Presumably its a skill she picked up whilst studying physics at Imperial. Their second year compulsory course in soul reading and woo.

Page lead report on David Davis's speech in Daily Telegraph today "MP hits out at transgender activists who stifle debate" but can't find it on the on line version.

I had to create a Press Reader account to access this:

www.pressreader.com/uk/the-daily-telegraph/20181122/281736975498515

The online MD at the Telegraph is super woke. Seems lots of GC stuff doesn't make it onto the website.

Brilliant. I love how she might be bothered by a man standing naked next to her but not by a trans woman standing naked next to her. In fact they could be identical twins, one identifying as trans and one not, and somehow it would magically be ok for one of them to be naked next to you and not the other. And you could never complain because how could you know which one it was.

The online MD at the Telegraph is super woke. Seems lots of GC stuff doesn't make it onto the website

Interesting. I wondered why they had been outflanked by The Times, Speccie, Mail and Sun. I wonder if that is a sensible commercial decision given so many of their readers will be GC.

JK's theme all along is the exposure of the malleable, ignorant, ill-informed and craven politicians, and government departments, that have enabled the absurdities inherent in the trans agenda.

Always balanced, always fair, always factual and laser sharp.

It's odd, Needmoresleep as they tend to not necessarily employ journalists who are in line with their readership but it is clear here that they're not doing what their readership would expect. I wonder if it's a case of them chasing a new demographic as their readership is, quite literally, dying. There was something about her appointment in Private Eye a few weeks back.

Whenever a piece gets online the comments are very critical of any transgender stuff, and there are more critical articles trickling through, but who knows what the editorial decisions are.

Women who might not subscribe to the fact-free, anti-evidence superstitious gibberish contained in talk of seeing souls? Women who might just consider material reality, biological fact and thousands of years of accumulated evidence about male violence, committed with male bodies, to actually matter?

True dat.

"Fact free, anti-evidence superstitious rubbish"

Love that quote.

Thankyou, James for another great piece.

Gibberish- getting the quote right makes it even better!

Sweary that's very interesting. I'd always wondered why the Torygraph carried so few GC articles, barring the throw-away comments in articles on other things which show quite a few of their columnists are GC - oh and of course the ongoing adventures of Steph in the Alex cartoons. I hadn't realised the print version was different.

inevitably a mixture of insight and cobblers

He's great.

Brilliant. I love how she might be bothered by a man standing naked next to her but not by a trans woman standing naked next to her.

How would she feel about a naked transman next to her? Logically, if TWAW then TMAM. If she doesn’t feel threatened then she can’t bekieve they are really Male.

aspie

Another stonkingly sensible and well written article