Doritos - why do the very worst keep rising to the top?

It's not defamatory.

It was very clear. The tweets were about sex acts with children.

Have you had an email @ArabellaScott? I imagine MNHQ are quite busy dealing with Willoughby's fans, so maybe erring on the side of caution a bit too much in deleting everything vaguely defamatory.

"I'm gender critical. I want women to have access same sex spaces where it's appropriate and proportional e.g. changing rooms, toilets, hopitals, where intimate care is needed, sports to name but a few. But where there is no conflict of rights, I want people who self identify as trans to be treated with respect, be equal under the law, live their best lives, be happy."

I agree with this, but I think I'd state it the other way round. That the default is for trans people to be treated as equal under the law to others, but where there is a conflict of rights, I will always assert women's rights to same-sex spaces that are not accessible to anyone male.

Would you prefer me to say that Samantha wrote tweets describing sex acts with children?

Is that more palatable?

Are we not to mention paedophilia now, Mumsnet?!

WTF?!

Deleted?

I doubt they would have dropped Samantha if it was just violence and sexism. That's par for the course with TRAs, isn't it?

Lazy article with the usual cliches trotted out but at least it quotes some of the offensive things that this individual said about causing serious sexual harm to children.

This person also wants to destroy the nuclear family. Now I know a lot of child sexual abuse goes on within families but can you imagine how vulnerable all children would be to predators with no families to protect them? Whenever someone with paedophilic tendencies argues for the destruction of the family unit you know what their motivation is. Pretty much the same reason these guys want to get into prisons and locker rooms.

If the BBC is dictating what “left wing” and “right wing “ mean, then yes, apparently.

I sometimes think that some people deliberately put themselves 'out there' and blatantly knowing how it will go down to begin with.

Firstly, they love the attention (infamy) - and any attention is coveted, whether good or bad.

Secondly, I wonder if they see themselves as the brave pioneers in breaking down barriers and spearheading radical change, just as soon as society 'catches up with them' and sees that they were on 'the right side of history' all along.

You don't ever get radical change and turn the masses' instinctive, common-sense understanding on its head by quietly putting up your hand and asking nicely for it. The MAPs will have to go brazen, loudly demanding and get right up there in the spotlight if they ever have a hope (please no) of capturing people's sympathy to their vile agenda.

At first glance I thought that was Shon Faye.

Whoever the person is s/he has just admitted child sexual abuse via whatever Twitter is called these days.

pickledandpuzzled · Today 08:29

So right wing activists is the new name for ‘people who understand basic safeguarding’, then?

Yes, I'm just sitting here in my SS uniform...

(That's a joke, if clarification is needed).

There are just so many examples of these people being appointed to high profile positions with no experience or credentials other than their identity issues. What about the US government advisor who stole women's suitcases and wore their clothes? Big corporates failing to carry out a basic sweep of social media is one thing but the US Government not doing background checks seems crazy.

biden-official-sam-brintons-2nd-alleged-theft-included-1700-in-jewelry

It's the usual liberal feminist argument of 'people who notice something bad are worse than people who do something bad.'

A journalist also needs to ask him why he plans to make money out of being a proud Marxist, um, brand ambassador.

Interesting.
So right wing activists is the new name for ‘people who understand basic safeguarding’, then?

The bbc have reported on it, claiming the criticism was lead by right wing activists…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68495705

I could accept he had changed- I know some 15yr olds that think this kind of thing is great. The more you tell them it isn’t, the more they dig in and believe their own rebellion is somehow a triumph. I could believe that 15yr old chose the vilest things he could think of to shock.

I would still think a public role is out of the question due to the stupidity of the 15 yr old’s behaviour. Just like if a 15 yr old eats and drinks crap, an athletic career won’t be possible in adulthood. Consequences.

of course accepting the possibility that he was a stupid 15yr old doesn’t mean he isn’t in fact a misogynistic abusive paeodophile.
(Sorry can’t spell it or spell check it for some reason).

From the article

Hudson said she was sorry for the tweets, which she described as “pure provocation and in very bad taste”.

“Some tweets that I posted in 2015 are resurfacing and honestly I don’t know what to say, I don’t remember having written such barbarities,” she said.

“At that time I dedicated myself to saying nonsense, the heavier the better, because I thought that ‘dark humour’ was funny,” she added.

So that makes these 👇 OK then! Nothing to see here👇

"Why is it so difficult to find non lunatics to represent?", because the whole lot of them are lunatics? No one exhibiting TRA behaviour is of sound mind.

But hey, like many here, despite being an amiable ambling lefty most of my life, I am now well and truly a member of the hard right.

Oh well, if one is to do the time, might as well do the crime. And vote accordingly.

One can be critical of Biden's stance on transgender activism and still disagree with people supporting Trump after his attempts to threaten the cores of electoral democracy and having no legacy but policy failures and unnecessary provocation as President (I won't even get into his ongoing lawsuits); since unfortunately Trump is Trump, not some mildly conservative politician whose opinions may differ from yours but still generally tolerable, voting for Biden would not be viewed as equally moronic.

One thing to note when looking at US elections is that a lot of US voters don't seem to fully grasp the current impingement on women's rights by transgender activism, or even if they do, it remains to be seen how many will actually vote based on the issue.

I too felt sick reading the OP