Sian Berry

If I was 'Big Oil', and I wanted to hobble the ecology movement, what could I do that wouldn't land me in court? I'd seek to divert the energy they put into controlling me and my activities... into something else

That's absolutely right. I just think they didn't have to bother, though. The Green Party has been subverted by too many people who wanted to play luxury politics more than they wanted to protect the environment.

Does seem this issue causes organisations and institutions to melt down on contact with reality. In five years time what will have collapsed? Stonewall, Mermaids and their ilk obviously. Fawcett society? Possibly.

And then there will be those that may survive but been through the absolute wringer and trashed their reputations in the process. I'd put the greens in that category. The RA. All of the birthing/childcare charities that are TWAW. The SNP, Labour. And so many health and psychiatry organisations. Child protection orgs. It is a long list.

My bet is that she's polishing up her CV for Stonewall after Kelly's disastrous last interview.

We know they pay well.....and frankly she'd have more clout and a bigger platform there than as a co-chair of minor party.

It's a public "I'm free, pick me" flounce.....

So instead of staying to fight/lobby on environment issues (something I would hope she and Ali could find much common ground) she's flounced off over trans ideology because he got elected spokesperson and isn't on board the TWAW gravy train?

I can only interpret that as her believing Trans ideology top trumps her environmental concerns.

In which case, as the latter should be the clear focus of the Green Party, I'd suggest they are better off without a co-leader whose commitment to reducing/ending climate change (and uses sciences such as biology to prove their point and offer solutions) is subservient to a denial of biological reality.

@WhereYouLeftIt
If I was 'Big Oil', and I wanted to hobble the ecology movement, what could I do that wouldn't land me in court? I'd seek to divert the energy they put into controlling me and my activities, taxing me, guiding my customers towards other suppliers of non-carbon energy - I'd have to divert that energy into something else

Hmm so getting the Green Party activists to fill the “useful idiots” role… sounds plausible!
www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/careers/life-at-bp/our-stories/bps-pride-at-stonewall-success.html

... although, as others have pointed out, I'd need them to change their view on whether sex should be a protected characteristic.

Just to nitpick, stepsibling above should be half-sibling. I believe the person in question is one of the two male children removed from Tina Challenor by Social Services before she met David and had three children with him (with Social Services paying close attention, for obvious reasons). At least one of the two made contact with her as an adolescent. It's not clear to me when the furry/adult baby stuff began - before or after the contact with the Challenor household. Quite a coincidence if they developed this interest independently, though.

Glad she's gone. Hopefully the rest of the Greens will push back on the TWAW nonsense and get back to environmentalism like they're supposed to.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, I swear! Whilst I can see all the finger-pointing at Big Pharma and still think it's opportunism rather than design; this thought just occurred to me about the Greens.

If I was 'Big Oil', and I wanted to hobble the ecology movement, what could I do that wouldn't land me in court? I'd seek to divert the energy they put into controlling me and my activities, taxing me, guiding my customers towards other suppliers of non-carbon energy - I'd have to divert that energy into something else. I wouldn't have to tie them up completely, infighting will be just as good a diversion of energy as some other trendy cause. If I, as Big Oil/Gas/Coal could just find some cause that they'd run with. It would have to all be under the counter, maybe channel some money to towards activists, not enough to be noticeable but enough to allow them to be full-time activists. The way of all activists is to start a purity spiral/witchhunt, so I'd only need to manoeuvre a few into position, then let the rabbits run. The ecology movement would be effectively out of the game, and I can keep making money and the planet can burn.

What do you think of my conspiracy theory?

Sign was very pleased with the result. I can't quite believe this is true, but it's true.

This was her idiotic tweet about women's rights being left out of Green Party equality policy:

“My party voted for inclusive women’s rights and someone is having a big old cry. Thank you Greens”.

Anyone who believes TWAW cannot support the sex based rights of women and girls. They are completely incompatible concepts.

SB is plain evil in the glee with which she has fought against the protection of sex based rights. Never mind the amount of time and effort concentrating on this minority, while the planet burns. And who suffers the most during environmental catastrophe? People in the developing world, women and children at the bottom of the pile, who don't have the middle class, white western, capitalist centric means to suddenly start identifying out of their oppression.

Look at the rot SB has helped create by propping up the Challenors, the legitimacy leant to Aimee Challenor that has allowed them to destroy the reputation of an institution like Girl Guides, and destroy the principles of free speech for women on platforms like Reddit. Never mind the smokescreen of legitimacy the Greens gave the evil father. Fuck off SB. Don't come back.

From Suzanne`s article: Inclusive means including women and children. Without this, the Greens are just another compost heap of fringe concerns , virtue signalling and bad clothes

Good write up on the subject from Suzanne Moore

suzannemoore.substack.com/p/if-the-green-party-does-not-know?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoyOTk4MDQ4MiwicG9zdF9pZCI6Mzg3OTI3MzAsIl8iOiIrd1BUSSIsImlhdCI6MTYyNjM1MjAzNSwiZXhwIjoxNjI2MzU1NjM1LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMjIzNTY2Iiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.m8ncG-FyJ97XZJaZcpMSn36D5lRqXfxpUbIZDy0JRPI

Next time I'm feeling rueful about my own less than stellar career I shall remind myself that at least I have never supported the removal of women's and girls' rights.

gript.ie/nature-is-queer-extinction-rebellion/

And that makes their ridiculous toytown policy out of step with U.K. law where they have a duty to treat all 9 protected characteristics fairly, not just the ones they fancy or which don't challenge their ideology.

twitter.com/ExtinctionR/status/1411468822339481600

Sign was very pleased with the result. I can't quite believe this is true, but it's true.

She's a complete disgrace. Imagine cheering on women's sex based rights not being considered.

Hard to believe Manderley, I agree, and also the reason why a lot of women left the Green Party. SB leaving has to be a step in the right direction. There are many good local Green councillors but this gender ideology stuff just puts people off and more people are cottoning on to it now.

Poor little rich girls

littlbrowndog

Probably, yes.

*Sian not Sign!

In March Some members of the GP put forward a motion at conference to add sex to the list of protected characteristics in their anti discrimination policy. From the spectator:

"All the motion aimed to do was simply add a paragraph to the Green party’s ‘Our Rights and Responsibilities Policy’. The motion reads:

‘This is to include the protected characteristic of sex as currently our Record of Policy statements supports the other eight characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, sexual orientation, race, maternity, religion/belief, marriage/civil partnership) but not that of sex discrimination – aimed primarily at women…’ "

The GP voted against the motion. They chose not to be against sex discrimination. They are only against discrimination of the other 8 characteristics. Spectator again:

"The motion was opposed because, in essence, it is considered ‘transphobic’ to recognise that women are targeted by male oppression precisely because of their female sex."

Sign was very pleased with the result. I can't quite believe this is true, but it's true.