Oh fuck OFF, Emily Thornberry

Thornberry definitely reminds me of this clip from a Rogan interview, she falls for the sob stories over the facts:

https://x.com/WokeNoLonger/status/2029678700367909236?s=20

For those not on TwiX:
https://nitter.net/WokeNoLonger/status/2029678700367909236#m

Another woman happy to bang a drum for all things trans instead of women. She's ignoring the stats re male violence to women and girls.
Why do women do this? It makes no sense to me
So what if she's got a 'trans cousin' - what the heck difference does that make?
Bonkers

I wonder how much experience she has of groups that 'get beaten up', is she really that confident she knows enough about the subject to declare who's the 'most likely'.

"...and not actually following our hearts," that just what a modern country, who economy is in the toilet, and whose productivity is a negative number needs, a government who follows their heart. Give me strength. 🤬

She's a lawyer. She believes she can overturn reality through the power of argument.

I find this woman so tiresome, I can't bear to watch her being interviewed because she's smug and it gets on my nerves.

I worry that women like her, and Caroline Noakes (another smug person I can't bear), who don't have to worry about encountering the negative effects from policies that prioritise the wants of disordered men over the safety of women/girls are determined to push the 'be kind' nonsense in parliament. She also comes across as the type of person who's resistant to evidence, she seems to prefer feelings/vibes in her approach to policy.

Yes. Or young black lads in gang fights? Really Emily? I'm going to need to see your statistics please.

They’re most likely to get beaten up

More than the murdered and abused women, who can't walk safely home at night?

Ignorant woman who just wants to appear in the headlines.

She's always struck me as thick as two short planks but tries to pretend she's not by using a posher voice than she actually has

Why does it follow that being a victim means that the definition of woman has to expand to include men? It doesnt happen in any other context.

She's also say what she wants to happen, without saying how it can happen. If women have to include men in their class and spaces, how is women being defined?

What use are women only spaces and opportunities if men can take advantage of them, too.

Disappointing from someone with her undeniable intellect.

Who knows whether this is what she really thinks or whether she believes it’s a vote winner. Either way, it’s a depressing thing to say.

Shame on her. These Labour women who would sell out women’s rights with this #bekind shit are so very, very disappointing.

“They’re most likely to get beaten up. They’re the ones who are most likely to have prejudice against them. We should not be indulging in anything that marginalises them even more.”

This is just wrong, as in factually incorrect, as in easily fact-checked, as in an ex-fact, as in pining for the fjords....etc...

Really, how does anybody who says things like this get away with it? In particular, how does anybody who is in a position of responsibility get away with it? [rhetorical question, don't waste any energy answering🙄]