Critically acclaimed Trans gender author says Twin Towers was principled destruction

At this point, we could change the GRA and make it strictly about only post operation transsexuals. That may only limit the problem from a GC perspective.

But we can't be sure that there wouldn't be another successful challenge to the European Court of Human Rights, and they would change the rules of what countries have to do.

I don't know if we could just ignore certain rulings without actually pulling out, but that would be kind of an institutional change if we had that policy anyway.

We can't really repeal the GRA at the moment, although in theory Parliament has the power to do it, it creates issues with obligations.

Oh, it's him.

Absolute creep. I am unsurprised, tbh.

Just ignore him, he’s only doing it for attention.

I mean have things gotten worse or better over the last decade? Why can’t they have another decade like the last? Why can’t they simply do this again and again and again?

Why will it have to if those in charge don’t want it to go? The Soviet Union was an absolute mess from the start and still lasted about 70 years. Why can’t they, for the rest of our life times, continue to make mess after mess and have thing getting worse and worse and worse? History tells me they absolutely can do this and that leftists if given the chance will.

It may take a while.

But the mess is piling up and it's fundamentally unworkable. Eventually it will have to go.

Yeah that’s not happening… At least not under a conservative or labour government. A Labour government will strength it. A conservative will do nothing but preserve and conserve whatever the last labour government did. Wish in one hand and shit in the other, see which one fills up first.

The GRA is going to have to go.

It's fundamentally incompatible with equality and with reality, it was a hideous mistake, and the mess it's created will eventually have to be undone.

“On a much bigger level people should ask how we’d overturn the GRA, and if we can’t what can be done for women? We do not have the legal basis to say no currently”

I don’t remember feminists having a problem with the GRA at the time so that tells me they didn’t, as I heard the great Helen Dale say, think their thoughts through to the end. But It’s done. The Tories will never repeal that. The only way out of this is a complete rethinking of the progressive world view that elites have been onboard with since the 1960’s. I don’t know if that can happen though. Maybe, but rethinking the status quo will take many other things with it.

“What’s the outcome if voters and institutions don’t align to a massive degree? Idk”. The outcome is the liberal progressive ideology we live under continuing to dissolve everything that is against its ideals I guess? It has no logical end point so like the French Revolution it will continue until someone or something outside of itself stops it? As for the voters I’m just finishing the populist delusion that was recommended to me to read. I’m convinced elite theory is right and that the voters don’t change or decide anything. If they did this would not even be happening in the first place. I think the left know this but I’m not sure the right do.

One really good thinker I could recommend is Mary Harrington, I think she’s a genius and I find her thought fascinating. Maybe try reading her? She might have some ideas about what to do?

Yes I think we face major institutional capture and it is a huge problem for women, as a feminist it matters to me too.

A small example is the lengths KB had to go to to secure Baroness Falkner’s role against adversity. We don’t have the ability to protect every GC woman up against it

On a much bigger level people should ask how we’d overturn the GRA, and if we can’t what can be done for women? We do not have the legal basis to say no currently

In the end it may be climate pressure and mass displacement that will stretch post war set up, maybe taking gender stuff with it.

But looking at actual laws and institutions in place and how it operates and is intertwined I’m doubting that even atm

What’s the outcome if voters and institutions don’t align to a massive degree? Idk

I guess you see it the same way I do regarding the power of institutions and institutional capture vs the power of government?

When Kemi makes a statement does the woman who’s in trouble with her HR department for something she said suddenly find she’s not in trouble anymore because suddenly their policies and procedures have changed over night? Does her trade union start backing her all of a sudden because Rishi Sunak said xyz? Does the chief Constable of the local police force suddenly change how their force operates? Do the judges suddenly do a 180 and make different rulings? Would Kathleen Stock have found the management at her university suddenly putting an end to what she was going through if only the Home Secretary had made a statement? It’s for the birds isn’t it?

I already said what I think it would take to change it and was called a fascist on this thread for my troubles so I won’t say it again, unfortunately some of the posters here don’t have arguments and just use abuse to try and discredit the poster hoping that this will be enough to counter their argument.

What I would say though is stopping this can’t be done in isolation because it is just a part of the progressive system we live under. It’s the liberal progressive orthodoxy that’s been growing in the West since the 1960’s. If we were to live under a different ideology there would be all sorts of different problems and things that would upset us that would come along with that too.

I might be missing some background here as it’s the first time I’ve come across usernames but it seems to me we do have an institutional issue. A major challenge in fact.

As an example could we repeal the GRA, and if people don’t want that or see that we can’t do it, how do women overturn male TRA prominence in law and practice?

Attention seeking edgelord.

I don’t like priti or suella because they are tories but you’re right to say I’m not a feminist. In my opinion the Tories are weak and spineless and conservative nothing, I want to see them gone as a political force. I hope they lose every single seat they have.

What I’m saying here is feminism is a progressive/left/liberal ideology and trans rights is part of progressivism, I’m just saying many of the people here cannot seem to see this. But it seems obvious to me, clear as day in fact, just like it’s clear as day to me that under a progressive system power is primarily held in institutions not government because progressivism doesn’t allow the government to do the certain things that it would take bend the institutions to the government’s will.

It’s like progressive feminists want this liberal progress to stop now that they have what they want from it or they want for it just to continue missing out this step of progress entirely. But it won’t and can’t.

Progressivism won’t stop, won’t miss out this step and the Conservative Party will not do anything for you. And I have already said on this thread what I think it would actually take to stop this so I won’t bother saying it again.

I think she's talking about the actual content of the OP, not everything is about you.

I know this is silly to say as I'm sure the pendulum has swayed out of my favour but I do so heartily wish that people could stop fucking masquerading as feminists just because there is now a subsection of feminism specifically involving what they perceive as the exclusion of trans people that they can get on board with.

@Freddder mate you're a right wing bloke who loves Suella and Priti, can't we just be honest you don't care about women, you're not a feminist, you're not on board with a progressive movement like feminism that advocates female equality, what's going on here.

I'm so sick of having to pretend when one thing is clearly not like the other.

Same thing of separating the unhinged, demented political movement from those who are LGBT non compliant, or non compliant women, or the men who form part of the sex class of men without being deranged and thinking mass murder is a jolly good thing, or those who would naturally vote left but are currently looking at this mess going bloody hell, would you look at the state of that.

But can we talk about the issue at hand and have another thread to rant on and on about the left?

I think there is no such thing as hate speech in the United States, the Supreme Court says it’s all just free speech. There is however hate crime law in the USA, it’s when something that is already a crime in its own right is done out of certain motivations.

Don't they have.Hate Crime legislation.in the States? Surely a threat to slit JK's.throat qualifies as Hate Crime?

OK then… ‘These leftist are getting more and more unhinged, they need to be purged from all important institutions forthwith. They’re demented and sickening. Truly vile people.’ - What is there between this assertion and yours? How is one anymore meaningful or valid than the other? (Other than the fact there is no hint of sexism in my baseless assertion?)

Want to elaborate a little?

These men are getting more and more dangerous in their idealogy. It's sickening.

No anyone who defines themselves as ‘left wing’, ‘liberal left’ or ‘progressive’ and seems to hold to those basic principles is in my view probably what they says they are.

In my post I asked the question “Would any of them describe themselves as being on the progressive left do you think?”? Obviously I’m concerned about how those people would describe themselves as well as what they believe and what they do.

Are you defining Leftists as anyone you disagree with @Freddder ?

You don’t think any of the silicone valley’tech bros’ would describe themselves as left wing liberal progressives? How about the bank staff at coutts who gloated about maybe driving Farage out of the country? Would any of them describe themselves as being on the progressive left do you think? Or are all these people for high taxation?