Critically acclaimed Trans gender author says Twin Towers was principled destruction

"I would actually say that some sections of the progressive left are OK with giant corporations running lots of things and billionaires avoiding taxes"

Imo it’ll be mass movement that strains institutions rather than gender, but it may all go together

I don’t know if the gov can actually change it as you say

But we’ll see increasing friction as a result. I’m not sure what will happen when voters demand more and more

What I can follow and agree with is the thread that it would take more state intervention than any of our political parties are willing to yield to disrupt, well, Stonewall, frankly.

@Freddder

Thanks for your thought out reply. It's not making any sense to my brain at the moment, but that's likely to be my brain operating on reduced power for the last 48 hours with whatever the word is for "like a migraine, but I can broadly pass for functional to a casual observer."

I might return later when more than one brain cell can fire at the same time.

You only have to look at the abuse that Blaire White, Buck Angel and The offensive Tranny (Marcus) get for putting more central views on the subject.
And also look at the gay and lesbian people (Arielle Scarcella, thairivera, MrMenno) that are against this as well, to see what abuse they get for not fully/blindly supporting the "community"

OK now if you look at what I actually said, you know instead of using that old left wing tactic of calling everyone a fascist… What I actually said was that I didn’t think the direction of travel could be changed by electing Tories because they would not be prepared to use the power of the state to purge/change leadership within the institutions (which is where I have argued that real power actually sits) and I have used Orban as an example of somebody who would and did.

The point I’m obviously making, at least I thought it was obvious before the ‘fascist’ label was casually thrown around, is that changing the situation would require state intervention of a type that most western mainstream parties including the conservatives are simply not willing to do.

This is interesting, I could counter and say that the tax burden is higher now than in 2010 and high taxes are left wing? Or I could blame covid. But I don’t think that would properly address what you have said. It would just be tit for tat.

I suppose I’m talking about the social or cultural left wing progressivism that’s been spreading across the west since at least the 1960’s. I could not argue that economically things consistent moved in an economically left wing direction since the 1960’s with the Reagan and Thatcher periods in there.

But even under Mrs Thatcher herself the U.K. moved in a culturally liberal and left progressive direction, the U.K. was less socially liberal in 1979 than it was when thatcher left office in 1990. And why did an organised cabal of elites within her own party oust her? Because of the poll tax? Obviously not. She was ousted because she didn’t want the common market to turn into that most liberal of internationalist institutions, the EU.

I would actually say that some sections of the progressive left are OK with giant corporations running lots of things and billionaires avoiding taxes. Because they’re selfish individualists and left wing progressivism is kind of the same. Anybody can be anything they want, society has to affirm them and bend to ‘their truth’, etc.

Both can be true.

@Freddder
Not fascist enough (Orban, Jaysus) for your taste ≠ “left”. Two-tier policing has always happened: there’s just been in a - dramatic, admittedly - shift in the demographic of the beneficiaries. But frankly this is all a bit of a derail & probably belongs in the politics section.

To the main point of the thread: the headline didn’t need “author” after the word “horror” frankly, with their repeated support for Bin Laden. Ugh.

Oh lovely. I'd definitely feel safe if he offered me a tampon in the toilets. 😐

That is totally brilliant! 😂

It's far more straightforward that trans rights at the expense of women is a logical conclusion of sexism, regardless of right/left wing. I've been astounded at the unthinking sexist shit I've heard even from people that are supposedly feminists - they simply can't unlearn the notion that sex dictates people's personality in some way.

It's an inherently and explicitly sexist ideology. It's only superficially leftwing because 'be kind to the underdogs' is an attractive position when you're about 11 years old.

Freddder · Yesterday 19:26

Because they’re on the left and the establishment are on the left. It should be obvious to all that the U.K. has two tier policing.

Really? Because the Police arrested 90 of Timmy Robertson's hooligan mates, after they attacked the Police line, and didn't arrest as many of the pro Palestine marchers?

Is the U.K. more or less left progressive than it was when the Tories were elected in 2010? I’d say more

I'm genuinely interested in this discussion, although finding it hard to stomach in places.

2023 vs 2010:

We have a privatised postal system that is on it's knees. Back in 2010 letters were delivered daily.

Our NHS is in an objectively even worse state than it was in 2010. Headline from the commons website:
"Performance declined between 2013 and 2018. Since the pandemic it has fallen further. In September 2023, 59.3% of patients waited under 62 days for treatment after an urgent GP referral, compared with an target of 85%.

There are less police officers. You can't go into a police station without an appointment and significant cause any more. They don't attend for "minor" crimes any more.

Care provision for the elderly and for the disabled has dropped off a cliff.

Those aren't consistent with a left progressive society to me.

And of course, women's rights are majorly rolled back and constantly under attack. I can see why it is said that T rights superceding women's rights is a leftist phenomenon, but I would also like to argue the points that women's rights being rolled back is very much anti-left-wing politics.

But is it untrue? And if it’s true doesn’t it matter?

We have had a conservative government for the last 13 years. Now when I think back 13 years to 2010 what was the country like as compared to now? In 2010 did you worry about schools indoctrinating your kids? Did university students behave as insanely and in such great numbers in 2010 as they do now? Did was have such obvious two tier policing in 2010? Did officers from a politicised police force knock on people’s doors to check their thinking in 2010? Did banks and other essential service providers regularly cancel their customers accounts because of their customers politics in 2010? I could go on and on but you get the picture.

I guess the next question I would then ask is are these changes unique to the U.K. due to a unique type of government or has this been a trend and a general direction of travel across the west? I would say this has been a trend across the whole western world.

So next thing I have to ask is what has driven these changes? Are they natural and organic or has an organised elite driven those changes? I would say the answer here is less obvious but that it’s elite driven, if it weren’t you wouldn’t have the general population electing all those right wing governments that never seem to achieve anything.

Who are these elites then? Well that’s difficult because it’s not an organised conspiracy or anything like that but I guess they are people with a certain way of thinking and a relatively common set of values that dominate all the important institutions in the west right down from a local police force right up to a large NGO or EU or UN body. I think these people are left wing, progressive internationalist and liberals. And it’s not an accident they all agree on pretty much it’s just the logical conclusions to their core values. It’s no accident that all the large centre left parties in the U.K. have almost identical policies on trans rights, it simply their progressive belief system running to its logical conclusion.

I would argue that progressive liberal thinking really got started in the 1960’s and has become slowly dominant since then. We are now living in the world that many of the ex-guardian readers on here have long championed and cheered for.

I don’t think the right can easily reverse this either. The Tories certainly can’t because they are unwilling to use hard state power to directly purge the leadership across a wide range of institutions. A government like Viktor Orban’s who were actually willing to use state power this way could but it would have to happen across the west and be sustained. The one success the right has had that stands out to me is the successful appointments of judges in America, but again this is evidence to me that power is in the institutions and those running those institutions are more important than MPs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motives_for_the_September_11_attacks

Raymond Ibrahim, as a researcher at the Library of Congress, found a significant difference between Al Qaeda's messages in English directed to a Western audience and al Qaeda's Arab messages and documents directed to an Islamic audience. The Western-directed messages listed grievances as grounds for retaliation employing the "language of 'reciprocity.'" Literature for Islamic audiences contained theological motivations bereft of references to the acts of Western nations.

Well, we have seen some of the left, (or far left, whatever) supporting the Hamas attack on Israel, so why not bin Laden also?

If you go far left enough or far right enough you end up in the same place. The extremes on both sides each circle back into fascism.

The thing is, the posts I’m describing prevent any useful discussion of these structural issues.

Instead it turns into bordering on conspiracy theorist nonsense about ‘leftists’ or whatever that prevents any useful discussion and seek to put everyone into unfit for purpose boxes.

I see those posts more about who holds power and why it underpins male rights, which then shows up in extremes such as this person, who is enabled to continue

It could just be a thread on how awful etc but I found pp look at structures that put women where we are interesting

We have very little room for challenge within laws and institutions

It’s better imo to talk about that

It’s really tedious when any discussion gets turned into a generalised tirade agains ‘leftists’ or ‘the right’.

There are terrible people and good people and loads of people in between across the political spectrum.

Mm.

More venn diagrams developing, there's the incel circle and the sociopath circle and the antisocial personality disorder circle, and a lot of intersection going on really.

It is becoming more and more necessary to recognise that when the line of letters 'LGBT+(infinity)' is used, it now means a political lobby. Of whom this individual is sadly pretty representative of views, behaviours and attitudes towards other humans.

That acrononym now only means and identifies that political lobby. Any LGBT people not compliant and enabling of that TQ lobby have long since been excluded, thrown out, screamed at, threatened and derided, however it continues to serve the lobby to use the acronym for their own purposes and power, and claim to be representing everyone who is LGBT. It's (another) Trojan Horse.

Therefore yes. This individual is representative of many in the political lobby which is now exclusively T political agenda focused, and aggressively prejudiced against any other voices or views, including wishing to make homosexuality unacceptable and stamped out. Neither the lobby nor this person is representative of all LGBT people. It is the political lobby, those whom it is attracting and encouraging, and what it is enabling, and why/how they benefit from the enabling that is the unacceptable problem, and growing steadily more of a problem. Not the people.

Politicians and newspapers really need to start laying out this distinction in words of one syllable.