Sunak telling Robin White that biological sex is important live on GB news

At this point 'right wing' seems to mean very little more than 'says things that present boundaries to the absolute sexual freedoms of men'.

It's as meaningless a term as 'transphobia', 'kind' or women'.

As an insult..... yeah, poopoo head would probably be about it's level. With tongue stuck out.

Aaagh! I’ve also fallen into the not proof reading trap.

What I should have said is that:

Policy Exchange, whether you think it is partisan or not, is not an “educational charity” in respect of being specific to education, but its charitable purpose is educating the public.

And besides which, outside of the policy exchange document, how many personal experiences will it take to change someone who has stated, ‘never seen it’ to, so maybe there is an issue and maybe I should look further into it. Maybe it is just not being reported.

There is no way the sets of parent I know even went further than a complaint to the HoY that allowed it. I doubt the school’s Head teacher even knew of the complaints. But does that mean it didn’t fucking happen?

There is fear around think tank papers. There shouldn’t be. There seems a trend in those considered ‘right wing’. They seem to encourage ‘left wing’ Activists to come and talk on a panel or discuss a paper at their conferences and seminars. Who the fuck should be rejecting voicing evidence and proven points just because the panel is considered by some to be ‘right wing’ (or even called right wing by the founders).

I will read and analyse any paper someone links to. Because in doing so I then think and evaluate my position with that information. That is why I laugh everytime someone feels the need to denigrate daily mail links. Because that is all to do with them personally and not necessarily even closely related to the person writing the article.

They claim to be an educational charity.

Policy Exchange is the UK’s leading think tank. As an educational charity our mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas which deliver better public services, a stronger society and a more dynamic economy.

https://policyexchange.org.uk/about/

Well that poster also made an untrue statement:

They say they’re an “educational charity” they are not.

Policy Exchange, whether you think it is partisan or not, is not an “educational charity”.

Why should think tanks be non-partisan? I don’t think there’s any rule or law that says they have to be politically neutral.
The onus is on the individual to consider their conclusions and the rationale that led to those conclusions, taking into account any bias, and decide whether those conclusions are reasonable. In some cases I will agree with what they say, in others disagree.

And when contentious sources are used, it is more useful to address the points raised. Dismissing a source due to what you feel are political alignments is not a debate. It is outright dismissal and rejection because of a source.

Address the issue. Read the article and point out flaws in data and in logic. And misrepresentation .

Dont expect people to consider you have engaged when you have not in evidence engaged.

I ask for clarification when I struggle to understand linguistic nuances and I don't really know how to word it in a way that a poster won't read as aggressive or insincere. I try to take posts at face value rather than assuming anything else behind them.

That's all I was doing too. I genuinely thought the poster had the two mixed up. I even googled to make sure I hadn't mixed them up first.

Apparently my deletion was for making a personal attack so I will attempt to remake the point as a general observation and not aimed at any single individual. Here goes…

It is often difficult to know when a man considers himself to be a woman unless he signals it in some way either through clothing or a name change or making an announcement. Also it often takes a lot of cognitive effort to use the wrong pronouns for many men who consider themselves as women because the wrong pronouns are counterintuitive.

Just lost a post. Tldr, I ask for clarification when I struggle to understand linguistic nuances and I don't really know how to word it in a way that a poster won't read as aggressive or insincere. I try to take posts at face value rather than assuming anything else behind them.

I'm also baffled by "waiting in the wings" - I'm reading on and off throughout the day on a phone, like most people.

Personally if I miss out a "not" or something that changes the meaning of what I typed, I clarify without assuming anything unwritten is obvious.

I give up trying to have a remotely intelligent or meaningful conversation on here. There appear to be posters constantly waiting in the wings to be passive aggressive/rude/condescending. Deliberately jumping on anything to get a tiny rise.

There are a lot of neurodivergent people who struggle when people don't type what they mean. It's not deliberate or aggressive.

It was obvious to me she stopped reading at "non-partisan" because that is untrue so not worth her time continuing to read an untrue statement.

There do appear to be a lot of these lobby groups masquerading as "non partisan charities" out there. Always worth a quick Google, if Tufton Street is in the address treat with caution.

The rest of my post and previous posts were all saying this particular think tank is Partisan (right wing) not impartial, not objective. I would say that would make my initial sentence an obvious mix up.

I give up trying to have a remotely intelligent or meaningful conversation on here. There appear to be posters constantly waiting in the wings to be passive aggressive/rude/condescending. Deliberately jumping on anything to get a tiny rise.

Reading a short paragraph though. So tiring. I understand.

Generally speaking, if someone means the opposite of what they say, what is it that makes it obvious? I really struggle with this kind of communicating. Am I supposed to know something about the poster's views other than what they write in a post?

Can't tell if it's just me that doesn't find it "obvious" and needs to ask to clarify.

That wasn't obvious to me as you said you stopped reading at non-partisan.

I obviously meant non-Partisan

Are you getting partisan and non-partisan mixed up?

No, think tanks should be partisan but very few actually are. They push political agendas and notoriously lack transparency regarding sponsorship and donors. Anyway that is besides the point of this thread- I was merely challenging people using contentious sources as evidence.

I will have to take your word for that. I just don’t see what a school or staff in a school would have to gain by pushing any sort of gender ideology.

I've only had one warning, saying I looked like a "troll hunter," when KJK was Down Under. I also got banned for a week last autumn, after someone took a daft suggestion on a parking thread seriously.

For that, I emailed and got one back saying they would let me back, as long as I abided by the site rules, which I've been doing my best to do.

I've had a few deleted on FWR, no contact about them.

Oh, just had a gander at the newspaper reporting. One headline is that the accused has admitted to those ‘other horrible (my own opinion) activities’ in court.

‘The court heard on Monday (February 12), that X (sic, my substitution) has pleaded guilty to Y (sic, my substitution) as it was read out in the agreed facts.’

I suspect that is being raised as evidence if the defendent has admitted to them in court.

I stopped reading at “non-Partisan”.

The logical conclusion is that you'd prefer a partisan think tank.

It's great that your school/trust is so fabulous. Near me, a 5yo female child was transed, and I know two teenage girls being transed. Both those girls have teachers at the school influential roles (pastoral care, PSHE). It's causing major issues in the school with teachers scared to talk and parents questioning why there are now "gender neutral toilets" which no one asked for. There's also a high school with a cluster of social contagion.

These are schools just in a 5mile radius.

Parents care a lot about this. And they talk.

I’m would be little surprised if it is contempt as it in the newspapers. I do not mention any detail at all. It may be the case that it is being raised as evidence. Shall I do a Private Eye and say that the alleged ‘activities’.

I stopped reading at “non-Partisan”.