Laurence Fox answers Women’s Place UK questions

[ChristinaXYZ]

As a candidate for London mayor Laurence Fox has answered five questions on women's rights and it is a breath of fresh air. Highlights being:

First of all, the police cannot protect what it does not define. We acknowledge that women are adult human females. They are vulnerable as a result of biological sex.

Acknowledge that The Equality Act 2010 provides legislative protection for women by virtue of their sex. We will enforce it without fear or favour and protect the rights of women to single sex spaces.

Ring fence funding for single-sex refuges and support services

Read his full answers here:

laurencefoxforlondon.co.uk/news/answering-womens-place-uks-5-questions/

Lets hope this puts pressure on the other candidates

This is the stuff I've been taking about with GC being used as a mask by alt-right morons.

LF isn't agreeing with you because he's gender critical or because he gives a shit about any form of feminism, he's agreeing with you because he's a transphobe.

If me and him both agreed gravity is real and the earth is round would that make me an awful bigot?

It's simpler than that, Hibari.

He's agreeing because he wants votes. Why? Because he wants to be the next Mayor of London, because that's something his ex-wife Billie hasn't (yet) done.

He's not 'agreeing with us'.

I doubt he reads these boards

He's a. Reacting as all parties to the recent murder and b. He likes pissing people off and causing a row

This idea that if xyz says something that is said by women on these boards is neither here nor there. Most people in the world know that sex is a thing, that women are at risk from men, that you can't change sex, and that the results of mixed sports/ prisons are predictable and the women won't come off best.

Lawrence Fox a breath of fresh air?!
I think that's enough internet for me today lol

Btw, can someone please, please, please come up with a proper definition of "alt-right". I'll even donate a tenner towards the working groups coffee tab, if you do.

@NiceGerbil

He's not 'agreeing with us'.

I doubt he reads these boards

He's a. Reacting as all parties to the recent murder and b. He likes pissing people off and causing a row

This idea that if xyz says something that is said by women on these boards is neither here nor there. Most people in the world know that sex is a thing, that women are at risk from men, that you can't change sex, and that the results of mixed sports/ prisons are predictable and the women won't come off best.

Agree as in "holds the same position," like you and I seem to agree on a bunch of race issues and LF despite never discussing either.

He is a total wanker.

Actually, scratch that.

Just speak about what you find objectionable in someone's views, as if the sodding word had never been invented.
Whatever the word means, you think he qualifies as an example of it because of something he did, or something he said.

So post about that.

@BeagleEagle

Absolute slap in the face to our black sisters to even consider him as viable for anything other than a bin

Also this, well said Feminism for all women, and he certainly doesn't stand for that.

But if arsehole men are using what is said for their own purposes ( and they are) it doesn't mean we should stop.

Many gains and arguments feminists have made have been used against women by arsehole men. That's the nature of trying to fight for women and girls when men are still in charge everywhere.

We can't give up though.

I don't want to be associated with that dickhead, thanks. My views don't align with his. He has no interest in feminism. Just because he doesn't believe TWAW or whatever doesn't mean we should be cheering him on.

I find it interesting that on an anon board, where anyone can start a thread.

One like this (LF is a breath of fresh air ??!!??) is taken as representative of the view of the whole board and all the different women on it.

The poster could be anyone. Could be LF himself! I mean who knows.

It is fair to say though that the board has many more posters now, some of whom are not feminists etc.

I've seen some really, um, interesting views on here on topics like abortion recently.

The topic around single sex stuff is cross party, cross lots of things. That's the way it is.

The fact that it's not just a certain type of feminist who is posting shows it's a wider issue in society.

FWIW when the topic has come up in real life all but one person has said people can't change sex, single sex spaces are important etc. People are genuinely scared to say this at work etc though. That's not great is it.

Who are 'we'.

If people want to cheer him on that's up to them. Most posters have said he's a wanker though from what I can see.

NiceGerbil, it's fascinating.

I don't even think Laurence Fox could read this thread and come away thinking he'd got our votes (and I've seen him do Olympic level misinterpretion on twitter). But it's being managed here.

That's quite something.

Na not interested in anything he has to say. Even if 1% of it vaguely resembles some of what I think.

A couple of articles illustrating why he's a twunt.

www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/apr/27/laurence-fox-question-time-fiasco-half-educated

Even Piers Morgan slates him www.radiox.co.uk/news/tv-film/piers-morgan-laurence-fox-shut-up-tweet-covid/

I can't quite picture him doing the job of mayor. But maybe people could vote for him - seems unlikely but I think a lot of people are up for protest votes.

That's significant to me - protest votes are an important thing, they let the political class know when they are failing in a big way. This is good, if it it gets their attention, because if they keep failing in a big way it leads to bad places.

As for his responses to the questions, I think they were better than expected, which is great because it will affect how other responses are seen. Other candidates' answers will be compared to his.

Is he honest in his views? I kind of think so, I think he probably really had very little patience for critical theory approaches (though I don't know that he would recognise them as such) and then when he was challenged on air on that show, it put a bee up his ass. He's not always very discerning now in that he tends to take the contrarian view almost reflexively, but I don't think it's just to be an ass. He no longer thinks anything good can come from the "other side". That's not so good in a leader, though.

Protest votes are not always a fab idea.

And making a dick like him look more popular than he is, is not good. How will anyone know how many are protest and how many are real?

With the current political climate he might do quite well genuinely, who knows.

Why are we all taking about this tosser again?

@NiceGerbil

Who are 'we'.

If people want to cheer him on that's up to them. Most posters have said he's a wanker though from what I can see.

Seeing a lot of posters here rush to sign onto the idea that he's all right. same with Ngo and Peterson when their threads popped up.

At least in this case, I'm seeing more pushback. Probably because people are more knowledgeable about an English wanker and American ones.

@NiceGerbil

Protest votes are not always a fab idea.

And making a dick like him look more popular than he is, is not good. How will anyone know how many are protest and how many are real?

With the current political climate he might do quite well genuinely, who knows.

Why are we all taking about this tosser again?

...and yeah. Populists will always do this to try and bank on protest votes while presenting themself as anti-establishment.

They've been taking the piss recently with Farage and Reese-Mogg trying their hands at it.

@NiceGerbil

Protest votes are not always a fab idea.

And making a dick like him look more popular than he is, is not good. How will anyone know how many are protest and how many are real?

With the current political climate he might do quite well genuinely, who knows.

Why are we all taking about this tosser again?

Keeping on voting for the same shit is also not a great idea, because nothing changes. Tweedledum or tweedledee, it's shit however you look at it.

There are only a few ways for people to show what they think when that's the situation: just change who they vote for among traditional candidates - well if they are are all shit that's no good as they all assume votes mean real support.

Vote for a third party or alternative type of candidate: it can be difficult to tell why people like them - is it a protest or desperation or what, although later it may be clearer when you see if they maintain support - and some candidates of this type are just not up to much if they actually win.

Vote for some sort of joke candidate: this at least in numbers shows people are dissatisfied but often isn't an option. Plus they tend not to add much to the election discourse.

Don't vote: hard to interpret, seems like apathy.

This is London mayor I think?

How many on the thread have a vote in it?

^Seeing a lot of posters here rush to sign onto the idea that he's all right.
same with Ngo and Peterson when their threads popped up.^

&At least in this case, I'm seeing more pushback. Probably because people are more knowledgeable about an English wanker and American ones.^

Finally! The intellectual break-through comes!

We did keep telling you that this is a British site, that we had no idea who these people were and we weren't going to be able to condemn them without evidence.

If you know of them and you have an opinion on them, it is your job to convince us that they are wankers.

If you would like a model on how to do this, you could do worse than look at my own posts in this thread about Fox. As you can (presumably) deduce, I don't like him that much and I have explained why. I even linked to his star turn on the Delingpod.

P.S.

With this post of mine, this thread will reach 125 posts. Less than ten of those were in favour of LF for Mayor of London.

So I need to know what thread Hibari is reading, where "a lot of posters" are saying they support LF.

Yours,
Confused of Chelmsford

Peterson is a poor scholar and an ignorant fool who revelled in his few years in the public eye after some standard middle aged man reactionary behaviour gave him notoriety
His work is dull and convoluted with no great insight where he does hit the target, and is laughably wrong where it doesn't
It's also shines through that the diazepam didn't help him form coherent thoughts
Also Andy Ngo is an irrelevant provocateur who is fighting equally irrelevant provocateurs
Satisfied @Hibari ?

I'm Scottish but listen to The Majority Report most days, a radioshow/podcast, which for Americans is hard socialist left but for us is pretty standard fair
Peterson's a particular bete-noir of theirs, so I checked out some of his stuff

And this knob LF can fuck right off and all btw