Kemi Badenoch appointed new Minister for Women and Equalities

McWhorter is one of several black scholars who have broken down the racism inherent in crt.

What makes you think he lacks knowledge of the subject? He has been researching and writing on it for years.

Meanwhile the NYT is fully captured by woke ideology and we have good reason not to trust them. Especially since all their good journalists left or were pushed out.

Crt says that MLK is outdated. That we should bring back racial segregation. That the most important thing about any human being is the colour of their skin. That white people are inherently racist. It's a load of bollocks.

This.

Yep exactly this. She’s a populist right-wing nutter.

any shared views with decent, principled GC is coincidental. She’s coming from an entirely different place.

According to @electricdreaming, it's the label of 'terf' that anti-women activists use for us which has convinced some people that bring critical of genderism is right wing.

I do think the general public see GC views as associated with the right. Perhaps this is because of the label of “terf” - by labelling people as exclusionary, you suggest that they’re not progressive and are more “traditional”, and therefore right wing.

So if we label genderists as exclusionary of women (which they are), will they then be seen as right wing? Is that how it works?

@verastan
,
The New York Times article is a basic explainer of the roots of CRT as an academic theory and the controversy around it.

I have actually read the McWhorter book and think it's garbage. He's a professor of linguistics who basically argues that black Americans are both not grateful enough for the protections they gained under law, and simultaneously held back by them. He's either not hugely knowledgeable or he's disingenuous. He is certainly no more an impartial subject than the NYT and his history is weak. In fact, one could argue he's weighed up what he has to gain by offering a contrarian perspective.

So, laughing at your suggestion as hard as you're laughing at mine.

Well, yes you are, if you want to be taken seriously. Otherwise it's just smearing someone. "Her views are monstrous!" Which views? What makes them monstrous? "Her views! Because I said so!"

You're an ideologue. You're using hyperbole and vitriol in place of an actual argument. Disinterested bystanders will assume that's because you don't have an actual argument.

Pp have generously given you many opportunities to bring an actual argument. Your last resort is to claim that there's no rule against being vague and pointless! Effectively admitting that you have nothing worthwhile to contribute here.

And do not mention women’s rights. Go on about ‘trans’ as much as possible.

Call everyone extremists and generally lose it under hyperbole.

TRA tactics 101.

1. Accuse anyone questioning the mantra ‘TWAW’ of being far right. DO NOT MENTION ROSIE DUFFIELD.

2. If possible, use a Conservative politician to channel this. DO NOT MENTION CRISPIN BLUNT.

3. Pretend that these ‘far right feminists’ are all obsessed with toilets. DO NOT MENTION PRISONS.

Yes when people get called right wing for refusing to believe TWAW , then I can’t take any accusations of anyone being right wing without complete proof seriously any more. Yet another way in which gender ideology has reduced what should be a serious accusation to ‘they won’t agree with me

Absolutely agree 100% with this.

Also laughing at the poster who recommended an article by the NYT to explain CRT as if the NYT is impartial on this subject. Perhaps that poster should read "woke Racism" by John McWhorter.

We have Kemi to thank for commissioning the Cass review which has precipitated some major developments in women's and children's rights recently which were under threat from trans ideology. Seems like a perfect fit for equalities minister.

Yes when people get called right wing for refusing to believe TWAW , then I can’t take any accusations of anyone being right wing without complete proof seriously any more. Yet another way in which gender ideology has reduced what should be a serious accusation to ‘they won’t agree with me’

Yeah these awful right views like believing women are really women

What, from the Department for International Trade?

Do you mean, she made an ‘out there’ suggestion about school budgets some time ago when weighing up her own leadership bid?

Are you on glue?

One thing that is related to this for me is that I find that in recent years, I put a lot more weight on whether a politician is intelligent, as opposed to political stripe.

I think KB is really smart, and that counts for a lot.

Well meaning but dim people can cause a lot of damage.

They usually mean anyone who is to the right of Lenin.

Was that an abstention? I thought she was just absent from the commons that day, rather than choosing to abstain?

Agree with a PP:

'I will never vote Tory so I'm not delighted by anything that's happening now, but given we're stuck with this government pro tem it's good we don't have a TWAW person in the Women and Equalities post. That's about as far as I can go?'

I just don't see these lists as useful at all.

What was the legislation, and more importantly, why did she choose to vote as she did?

That's always the most important point.

My point really is that trying to make policy and allocate resources is always an exercise in choosing some things over others, or some outcomes over others, or some sacrifices over others. All within what is possible in terms of budget, resources, the voters, the political landscape, the international situation.

It's never, do everything you'd like to do under ideal circumstances.

And then bad choices can also be made because people assess the situation or likely outcomes incorrectly. Maybe due to incompetence, or maybe there is just not enough information, whatever.

There are jobs where people risk their lives, I was in one, my husband was too.

There have been rare occasions where I think a policy reflects thinking that truly doesn't give a shit. But usually it's just not that personal.

Equalities minister who voted against laws to promote equality and human rights. You couldn’t make this shit up.

Its clear that you don't have specific evidence to back up your 'monstrous views' claim.

I don't know much about KB tbh but if people are going go claim that a member of our governing cabinet is a 'right wing extremist' then I'd quite like to see the evidence if that.

Don't you know as long as she knows what a woman is she can do what she likes.

I was not aware that I was required to not be vague and pointless! I CBA to list out everything that everyone already knows. If you want specifics (re)watch the leaders' debates for starters. The right of the Tory party is not going to help women.

Maybe you could provide specifics, evidence, links, fresh information or insight to counter my vague and pointless views?

Cutting rescue services isn’t necessarily monstrous. RNLI is funded by donations. If the government don’t want to contribute beyond gift aid and allowing the charity status, then fine. But, in my view, deliberately allowing immigration enforcement officers to risk lives at sea is monstrous. There is (in my mind) a big difference between failing to act to save a life and deliberately endangering a life. A government which does the latter, with no imminent risk to the health or safety of (other) citizens, is making a monstrous decision.

I do, of course, acknowledge that my personal history is probably impacting my view on this one issue, which is why I was upfront about it.

I agree with you on universal childcare though.

Predictable glee on the MN ‘feminist’ board. I don’t know how KB will be. Shit, most likely.