Julie Bindel & Sharron Davies can't believe women centre their politics around the trans issue

I think that the switch to seeing what was really happening was very slow. Tough really, it pretty much mirrored the change in thinking in the country at large. It took a good while for most people to get what was going on, and many of us had that moment where it clicked and suddenly, the whole thing looked completely different. Political leaders seemed to have pretty much the same experience with a good number totally on board and quite a few others who just thought it was all small potatoes.

Once they started to cotton on though at the higher levels, I think things have moved as quickly as could be expected in politics. Which is rarely as quickly as people would like.

It really is like turning a tanker and getting it back up to speed.

@antifascist · Today 00:20
Some people (like @EmbarrassingHadrosaurus consider approvingly retweeeting a holocaust denial is a trivial matter

I am asking for the third time: please would you send me a link to the re-tweet by Sharron Davies, which you now say is a holocaust denial?

Previously, you said it was a re-tweet of something said by a person you say is a holocaust denier, but not that the original tweet was a holocaust denial as you do now.

I do- and I don't have over 100000 followers.

If I had "accidentally" retweeted a white nationalist holocaust denier twitter.com/sharrond62/status/1545664864907051008?s=20&t=r8AMeGTMs6c9kAjJCN3hxw

and it had been pointed out to me
twitter.com/Simon_Whitten/status/1545728940517761025?s=20&t=r8AMeGTMs6c9kAjJCN3hxw

I would delete and apologise

I guess it's a matter of priorities. Some people appear to think that it's an easy mistake to make and/or it's not that important.

i'm sure that's particuarly trues if you share the sympathy with the extreme right that some gender critical people do-

Do you check out the background of everyone you retweet?
I certainly don't, I see something I like and click retweet, are we supposed to do a thorough background check first?

Some people (like @EmbarrassingHadrosaurus consider approvingly retweeeting a holocaust denial is a trivial matter which could happen to anyone- and the person who points that out is the one who should be held to account for their "Calumny"

I guess it could happen to anyone who is in sympathy with holocaust deniers

I expressed some reservations a few months ago when I saw JB assert, in an interview, that feminism should remain on the left.

It irritates me a little when people talk about feminism "leaving" the left or "remaining" on the left.

I get where they are coming from but feminism IS the left. It cannot detach itself from the left. It is about a group of oppressed people trying to liberate themselves through collective action. That is left politics, whether we like it or not.

Still thank you for confirming the links between the gender critical and the extreme right

I assumed she had followed the holocaust denier in question and then posted her denial

the fact @EmbarrassingHadrosaurus thst you consider approvingly retweeting a whiute. nationalist holocaust denier is less serious than the above says a great deal about your priorities. I'm glad I don't share them

I'm saying check out who Sharron Davies has been retweeting

You might be better advised to consider the beam in your own eye. You failed to carry out due diligence and made a serious assertion alongside assigning a motivational driver: you've chosen not to retract your calumny. It speaks volumes about your actions and more.

I don't particularly like this 'check out' instruction thing. If a poster has a point to make, please summarise the point and add the (hopefully credible) source.

I'm saying check out who Sharron Davies has been retweeting

Tell me if I have misunderstood:

A woman cannot inherit a peerage in spite of the example of our great queens. If she becomes a trans man - even bearing in mind that TMAM - she/he cannot inherit the peerage.

A peer who becomes a trans woman however - even bearing in mind that TWAW - can keep his/her peerage.

Upside: you've understood perfectly.

Downside: you've understood perfectly.

It’s certainly a weird hobby

EmbarrassingHadrosaurus · Today 22:18
And where they hypocritically conveniently made an exception in the law whereby a change of gender would not be recognised when it comes to descent of peerage

Unless it's expedient to set that aside for special purposes, of course…

The House of Lords could shortly welcome its first trans peer and only female hereditary member.

Matilda Simon was this week given permission to contest the next by-election for one of the upper chamber’s remaining 92 hereditary seats.

If she wins, she will doubtless become the envy of peers’ daughters across the country, because the vast majority of titles may only be passed to a male heir.

However, because of a legal loophole, the candidate, born Matthew Simon in 1955, has inherited and retains the Barony of Wythenshawe, despite being in all other legal respects a woman.

^www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553555-first-trans-peer-a-step-closer-as-hereditary-candidate-claims-seat^

This is an outrage. The hypocrisy is unbearable.

Tell me if I have misunderstood:

A woman cannot inherit a peerage in spite of the example of our great queens. If she becomes a trans man - even bearing in mind that TMAM - she/he cannot inherit the peerage.

A peer who becomes a trans woman however - even bearing in mind that TWAW - can keep his/her peerage.

I so wish there could be a legal challenge.

Oh god yes even more hypocrisy; Matthew becomes Mathilda and is legally a woman but then she's not a woman after all as she is a he and legally inherits the title as a male heir.

Meanwhile poor Jane becomes John and is now legally a man but then he's not a man after all as he is a she and entitled to fuck all. Make way for male born little brother to inherit it all.

What's not to understand?

And where they hypocritically conveniently made an exception in the law whereby a change of gender would not be recognised when it comes to descent of peerage.

Unless it's expedient to set that aside for special purposes, of course…

The House of Lords could shortly welcome its first trans peer and only female hereditary member.

Matilda Simon was this week given permission to contest the next by-election for one of the upper chamber’s remaining 92 hereditary seats.

If she wins, she will doubtless become the envy of peers’ daughters across the country, because the vast majority of titles may only be passed to a male heir.

However, because of a legal loophole, the candidate, born Matthew Simon in 1955, has inherited and retains the Barony of Wythenshawe, despite being in all other legal respects a woman..

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553555-first-trans-peer-a-step-closer-as-hereditary-candidate-claims-seat

Why have we now got a random poster in this thread urging us to check out what a holocaust denier has been saying? No-one's interested. You might be happy to spend your time reading shit like that but it doesn't represent my interests at all.

The other thread title is
“New PM”
The Telegraph is also writing about Rishi Sunak’s views.

I am not entirely convinced so far that he understands the undercurrent of authoritarian ideology people have been trying to describe on this thread. and how far it has permeated so many official directives already; or the threat to the health of young women in particular posed by the current culture that has been created.

Which of course makes him a jellyfish and not someone I'd want responsible for standing up against Putin etc. I want a PM with some guts.

Someone has posted this on another thread. Rishi Sunak’s pitch is based on supporting women’s sex based rights, and protecting children in schools, while also looking for ways to protect trans people’s interests.

He is stressing that he has two daughters and comes from a family of strong women.

www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/news/politics/200162/exclusive-womens-rights-top-priority-for-sunak

Anothernamechangeplease · Today 20:17
I respect what you are saying, and you have had some effect on my inner ear so to speak, but I recognise more Conservative defences of women’s rights over the last year or so than than you seem to - and this is in inverse proportion to the other parties’ refusal to listen to women’s concerns rather than disdainfully dismissing them.

Not apropos of what you have said, and not really the topic of discussion, but just as a point of interest:
I think it’s not true of the Taliban who wanted to ban the practice, but some Afghans try to cheat their ban on homosexuality by dressing little boys up as dancing girls before basically raping them.

I also read of poor Afghans sometimes dressing their girls up as boys so they can try to get some work outside their home in order to help their families.

In Iran they prefer to trans men rather than have them be seen as being homosexual.

Yes, I understand that. My point is that the Taliban do not buy into the notion that gender exists separately from sex. They do not think that male-bodied people can "identify" as women, or that female-bodied people can "identify" as men.

Perhaps calling them gender-critical is a misnomer, but my point still stands. The Taliban know exactly what a man is, and what a woman is, and I'm pretty sure that they wouldn't entertain any notion of people changing sex. However, that does not in any way ensure that they are willing to protect the rights of women.

The Tories are not the Taliban, of course. I am just surprised that people have so much faith in their commitment to protecting the rights of women simply because they know what a woman is. From what I have observed, I haven't seen much evidence of them really caring about women in the slightest.

And where they hypocritically conveniently made an exception in the law whereby a change of gender would not be recognised when it comes to descent of peerage.

@Anothernamechangeplease

But their discrimination is what constructs gender. Gender isn’t something ‘in’ us, it’s in the collective minds of the people who enforce it.

Is that gender critical? I believe that they force women into certain roles because of their sex, rather than because of any notion of gender. I don't suppose that an Afghan girl would be allowed to identify as male in order to be allowed to go to school?

They understand biology perfectly well, and their discrimination is based on sex, not gender.

@Anothernamechangeplease

Of course you’re right (look at the US!) but actually the Tories have done a lot to protect women’s rights. They have had two female PMs to boot, and I see very few Tories (except Nokes, Mordaunt, Blunt) saying the batshit-crazy things I hear from Labour and LibDem MPs about what women shouldn’t be allowed to say.