Baroness Nicholson on Regent Street flags

Great, ask her:

"Do you now support gay marriage?"

"Do you support gay couples having equal access to IVF and adoption in order to have families?"

"Do you support sex ed in schools and if so should it include be LGBT inclusive?"

"Do you think Section 28 was a mistake?"

If she answers 'No' to any of those questions she's a homophobe :)

Have just caught up on this thread - and it appears there is a concerted effort to get this thread deleted….. Almost the full repertoire of insults and denigration has been spewed - I do hope it is preserved for posterity and sunlight.

I'm sure if I met the Baroness I would think her a perfectly pleasant individual but that still doesn't mean she can't be a homophobe.

Where has she said she now supports it?

She says in the tweet that she her opposition to it on the grounds it "degrades women" has since been "justified" by events.

I'm not the one defending her!

Do you agree with her that gay marriage "degrades" women?

I can hardly see how someone can be "fighting for women" if she wishes to prevent those women who chose to from marrying and having children with other women.

In fact, I see that as a significant curtailment of the rights of women. Would you not agree?

That’s because they just have to do a quick rebrand - they don’t actually have to DO anything. Especially they don’t have to visibly do anything at all in countries who may ban them from operating.

Exactly, Amazon go on about how they care about their LGBT+ employees and how LGBT+ rights are human rights, yet they've blocked people searching for gay themed stuff in Saudi Arabia.

These companies care about gay rights in countries where gay rights already exist, they don't care about gay rights in countries where it is illegal.

Hearach - I don't think you understand that tweet (or perhaps you do but are being disingenuous). It's not saying what you think it's saying at all. She isn't saying being a lesbian is 'degrading' she is saying that she thought allowing same sex marriage would 'degrade' (by which she means blur/ confuse/ change for the worse) the status of what a woman was and their treatment in society.

And you cannot argue that she has not been proven right. Even the UN now refuses to define a woman.

I don't agree that it is same sex marriage itself that has caused it (But then I don't know that she thought precisely that either), but the fact is Stonewall have pivoted to their anti-sex based rights, pro-gender, TRA stance since marriage equality was achieved, their initial aims seeming complete, and so they found a new cause to champion in order to keep the money coming in. Gay marriage has - inadvertantly - been the catalyst for Stonewall campaigning to remove women's rights and redefine homosexuality against the will of actual homosexuals.

This is not gay marriage's fault, nor does it make gay marriage a bad thing or even the voting for it a bad thing. It is entirely Stonewall's fault for choosing to champion a further, nebulous cause - not in line with their initial aims - just to stay on the gravy train. It is an act of corporate greed.

However, it is no bad thing for our lawmakers to stop and think of the full ramifications of any piece of legislation - no matter how honourable and just its intentions - before it is passed into law. Nor is it a bad thing for them to vote against that legislation if they think it is badly worded and that the ramifications will be negative and far reaching.

The baroness has said she thought the status of wome would be degraded following marriage equality being granted - as it was worded in the law she was voting on - and it has been.

Stop pretending that you think that means she has said that lesbians getting married is degrading.

The rainbow flag used to be an indicator that the establishment was gay themed (like a gay bar, gay book shop etc), now it is used by all businesses (who were rather quiet about the issue in the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s).

It's worth looking at their corporate presence in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. What a positive message it would be for some of those subsidiaries to share pride messaging in countries where being gay is persecuted? I wonder why they don't?

I see people around London posing with their little flags. It’s like carnival. I see people on twitter posting images of their ‘costumes’ (again like carnival - or a soho sex shop). It’s just one big party - nothing to do with gay rights.

Here's some of her anti-LGB 'stuff'

Brought up as part of a hounding campaign by a man who in the past had laughed at the idea of a trans person trying to commit suicide.

I'm moving on from campaigners deliberately trying to derail a debate, because they want to debate the person, not the argument (and yet refuse to debate the qualities of the people they reference).

The same people outraged at the Union Jack flying for the Jubilee, are those celebrating the flying of the Progress++ Pride Flag. Intersex people are canon-fodder in this debate. There's likely to be something else added next year (and anyone who mocks the constant additions to the flag is called a bigot).

I'm seeing a growing number of actual gay people getting fed up with it. The rainbow flag used to be an indicator that the establishment was gay themed (like a gay bar, gay book shop etc), now it is used by all businesses (who were rather quiet about the issue in the 70s, 80s, 90s and 00s).

The only reason the flags are up is because they think it is profitable and think more people will come into London to spend money because of the flags. Rainbow capitalism at its finest.

Exactly. If you are saying lesbians are not female homosexuals, you’re a homophobe. If you’re demanding they sleep with males, that’s conversion therapy. If you’re then threatening and bullying them when they say no, that’s homophobic abuse and illegal. But stonewall condone this. The pride flags don’t represent LGB any more.

I walked Regent Street yesterday. I find the flags oppressive. There is no ignoring them. It is aggressively symbolic that the culture has changed and you'd better just accept it. The edict "no debate" in imagery in the streets of the Capital. Baronness is right in what she says in her letter. Anything else right now is whataboutery.

Moreover there should nuance in the abortion debate and in the debates around having children. This is because the rights of children are involved. Creating a family is not a right, it is a responsibility and a priviledge. Anyone who argues against this is extremely selfish in my opinion and hasn't thought through all implications for a child. I am neither against abortion rights or gay parenting btw.

Bring not being.

apologies

I tell you what. I will write her an email. She has replied to my other emails, so I have no concerns that she won’t answer and answer honestly.

Why don’t I ask her for you if you cannot being yourself to ask her yourself rather than monster and demonise her.

As I have said, She has been involved in the development of laws protecting women and children at local, national UK and at EU level. I would expect she saw a way this would cause negative effects to women that you and I cannot see.

Unless you are a experienced legislator or campaigner for women’s needs heararche. Are you?

I'm astounded at the accusations of homophobia coming from people who believe that lesbians can have penises.

I hate the flags, I see them as an anti woman symbol. Because that is what they are.

I don't understand the idea that if someone doesn't have exactly the same views with you about everything you believe in then you should never support then in voicing opinions that you both agree on.
I live in NI, I work with a lot of people who are anti abortion, I'm not. But we all get along and work well together because we are adults whose entire personality isn't shaped by certain opinions.
I think I'm right, they think they are and we are both entitled to think this 🤷

Oh I’d forgotten that one. So was JF admitting JF was male and therefore suffered more, or was JF saying as a transwoman JF did not pull their weight during COVID?

And something about males having more issues with Covid because:

But hey! Maybe one answer is that cis women are not
pulling their weight in the crisis?

And wasn’t it Jane Fae who said women only died from DV because of ‘eggshell skulls’.

Still no response to Stonewall's homophobia I see.

Homophobia's fine so long as it's TQ+ political homophobia, is that it?

Yes. In 2020, she wrote a tweet to explain her previous lack of support for a particular wording of a particular bill.

So what?

This is not her, in 2020, stating she doesn’t support same sex marriage in concept and in current legislation.

But do crack on.

And what about Fae’s support of lowering the age of consent for porn actors?

So, has the homophobic claim about same sex marriage been pivoted away from now?

Because I have seen you mention it on at least one other thread if not more.