Aimee Challenor Quits!

[JustfiedandAncient]

About time too!

Sian Berry (co-leader of the Green Party) was interviewed on the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning. Not a sausage about any Challenor-related difficulties the party are currently having. Unsurprising though, the BBC really does not like to step outside the boundaries of a stunning and brave narrative.

This is making the Monster Raving Loonies seem like a viable contender for my vote.

The bbc are the biggest white-washers of the lot - even more than the Guardian.

I'm most disappointed in them on this, as I've always staunchly defended them in the past.

The letter I got from the bbc says that their coverage was small because the greens only have 1.6% of the vote in the U.K. it would seem they either have no clue or have no wish to do any kind of investigative journalism.

There is a summary of the AC story. together with sources and illustrations.

It covers the family background, political career, involvement in trans activism, evidence of sexual proclivities, links to Stonewall and aftermath of the public "outing". In other words, the details and full picture.

infogalactic.com/info/Aimee_Challenor#Family_Background

I note that there has been a collective sharp intake of breath from members of the Green Party, once they have seen it and shared it on Twitter.

And there are still some who are screeching and telling people not to read it because it was written by a transphobe.

The letter I got from the bbc says that their coverage was small because the greens only have 1.6% of the vote in the U.K. it would seem they either have no clue or have no wish to do any kind of investigative journalism.

Really? How do they explain their endless interviews with Nigel Farage at a point when UKIP was barely a political force in the UK?

The bbc are the biggest white-washers of the lot - even more than the Guardian.

The left wingers like to say that the BBC is biased to the right wing. And the right wingers like to say that the BBC is biased to the left wing.

I don't think it's that: I think the BBC, as a state broadcaster, has an "establishment" bias. And that it so wholeheartedly supports the transactivist agenda says to me, as the writer in the Spectator also said the other day, is evidence that this is an establishment project and not a liberation movement for transsexuals. Indeed, transsexuals seem to have been entirely forgotten.

Is that going to be the benchmark from now on? An issue that affects less than 2% of the population is not to be reported?

I recall the scorn the Today programme attracted when it devoted one of its programmes to the London Fashion Week. I can't imagine that being an event that involves more than 2% of the population.

It's a stupid example to highlight a stupid excuse.

Hear hear hackmum. Sadly expecting the blighter back very soon

I loved "He now claims on his LinkedIn page to have a degree in politics from the Open University, obtained in 2018-2024 i.e. the future."

In December 2015, he persuaded the Green Party to adopt a policy that male prisoners who "identify" as women should be housed in women's prisons, even when the men are convicted rapists and murderers.

Was this after AC's dad was arrested?

Aimee/Ashton has been active for many years since the age of fourteen or younger on sexual fetishist websites such as Fur Affinity where he uses the name @MuckyMeerkat. He linked this to his Twitter ID @challenora which has since been suspended and replaced with another one. [16] In his profile he describes himself as "diapered at all ages” and uploads photographs of himself wearing nappies i.e. baby's diapers.

So it wasn't just his dad who was wearing nappies? FFS!

I've just read the whole thing and am horrified that the Green Party had anything to do with that family.

That InfoGalactic link is quite something. It would be good to send it to the BBC reporter who wrote the story about Aimee Challenor, though disappointingly there isn't a byline on the story.

I note that there has been a collective sharp intake of breath from members of the Green Party, once they have seen it and shared it on Twitter.

If Stonewall genuinely financed the injunction against Healey, I'm speechless at this interference in the constitutional activities of a national/international political party. What on earth are they doing with the other parties? How is this legitimate for a charity?

So, I'm looking forward to hearing the Green Party explain its selection policy and letting us know what background checks they carry out on prospective candidates to ensure the public is voting for people of probity to represent us in parliament.

If I were able to edit that InfoGalactic piece I'd do two things:

Replace 'backward' in SEBD context with another word.

Replace 'child pornography' with 'images of child abuse'.

Nevertheless it's a powerful article.

And now it appears that the Green Party (some of them) did know, but didn't pass the information on. And they didn't know DC was a member (did Aimee forget this wee detail?)
leftfootforward.org/2018/09/exclusive-green-party-figures-knew-equality-spokespersons-father-had-been-charged-with-sexual-offences/

Even half the stuff in that infogalactic piece would consign most politicians to the outer darkness.

C'mon BBC and Guardian! Would you be adopting this moral disdain for grubby facts if it were a member of Leave campaign with a role in shaping brexit policy?

I sill love you both, but you're making this hard...

Even half the stuff in that infogalactic piece would consign most politicians to the outer darkness.

The Greens appear to think that the more batshit the candidate, the more virtue they can signal by supporting them.

If the Greens were anything other than a knitting group for people with time on their hands, then the photographs of Challoner in nappies would be handy electoral campaigning material in Coventry: "the truth about the Greens". But the Greens are politically irrelevant, so no serious political party needs to get in the cesspit with their members.

Post #Metoo the Greens think its ok to say, that a candidate has no responsibility or moral duty to consider whether their election agent facing serious sexual offence charges might be a bit of an issue which is incompatible with party values of social justice.

They are excused any responsibility due to their identity being trans, and pointing out that trans people have just as much responsibility to engage their brains and moral compass as any other candidate is transphobic.

Are they therefore saying that trans people are so handicapped and/or oppressed that they no longer have a fully functioning ability to use their brains or they are so handicapped and/or oppressed that they lost their moral compass, and we should just be making accomodation for this?

Just so we are clear here about how far the Greens are pushing Trans Rights to make sure they don't fall foul of Aimee's accusation that they are 'falling behind' others.

They are excused any responsibility due to their identity being trans

In related territory, this is referred to as "the racism of low expectations".

They are excused any responsibility due to their identity being trans

Unimpeachable identities are incompatible with safeguarding.

This is the whole point of safeguarding.

redtoothbrush I must disagree; many members are complaining that AC was highly reckless and that had they not jumped, they should rightly have been shoved out of the party, never to return. However the TRA lobby has been labelling these members "TERFs" and "transphobes" merely for suggesting what should happen.

Members are still convinced this may yet finish us as a party.

many members are complaining that AC was highly reckless and that had they not jumped, they should rightly have been shoved out of the party, never to return.

When did this complaining start?