Kemi Badenoch nails it

[teawamutu]

From Glinner's update - this is brilliant:
grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/no-means-no?r=ahiyi&s=r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

Nokes is just awful on this topic. She really doesn't want to be pinned down on anything and refuses to ever really define anything. (Also - off topic - it really pisses me off that with all the serious and worrying stuff that is going on at the moment, her Twitter feed is 90% Wordle scores - Caroline, we don't care!)

Nokes is a massive fool. I hadn’t realised quite how venal and glib she also is until her Select Committee performances; and putting Wordle scores on Twitter screams ‘smug’.

Nokes is embarrassingly stupid and awful.

See the crappy MN web chat performance as well. She doesn't actually understand the issues.

Badenoch skewered her. "Define 'trans'" was the key moment in that exchange where it went wrong for Nokes.

So Nokes believes that trans girls are biologically male? At least she's on board with that, although I suspect she would give a non-answer if asked directly "are trans girls male?"

I love the fact that some people live in a world where nobody, but nobody, does anything for mischief or devilment. I live in the world where some people (mostly men) would do just that.

Why would Nokes bring that up? Drawing to the attention of parents that your underage unattended teen is now sleeping in a mixed sex space and if you say anything you will be smeared - not a great look Caza

Spot on Kemi. Nice, clear, unambiguous answer. And there's something seriously wrong with anyone who wouldn't be uncomfortable with this.

It's because Nokes thought she'd be drawing Kemi Badenoch into a fog of obfuscation and this would make her look like a bigot. It didn't occur to Nokes that Badenoch might ask that Nokes clarify her question. Nokes has become used to a debate in which clarity is characterised as bigotry and forgot she was not in such a "safe space".

How are you defining trans?

This is a keeper.

Cheering for Kemi, that was outstanding! Do we know where this was or what was said before and after?

It still surprises me although it shouldn't that however polite, well spoken, articulate etc a person is that when faced with the simple request to define the terms so that everybody can be on the same page to allow the discussion that's apparently so needed , that they just can't do it.

@Whatwouldscullydo

It still surprises me although it shouldn't that however polite, well spoken, articulate etc a person is that when faced with the simple request to define the terms so that everybody can be on the same page to allow the discussion that's apparently so needed , that they just can't do it.

It fits their agenda for them to allow people to assume that they are talking about children of the same sex who identify as transgender, so that they can frame any objections as bigotry, and the same as homophobia.

Once it's made clear that what is being discussed is putting boys in girls' dorms, it is no longer about any sort of phobia, it's simply safeguarding.

The mangling of the language around this has made it easier to obfuscate. Making it clear that a 'transgirl' is actually a boy elicits a different response from people not familiar with the language used.

@Rodedooda

How are you defining trans?

This is a keeper.

And Nokes said she didn't know how she was defining it!

It fits their agenda for them to allow people to assume that they are talking about children of the same sex who identify as transgender, so that they can frame any objections as bigotry, and the same as homophobia

I do wonder how many times they think that they can do this before we notice

As if it isn't entirely obvious every time, that people all.if a sudden go from knowing what they are talking about to complete non answers with the desperate seeking of audience participation where said non answers can be drowned out by cheers and claps.

Its the discussion equivalent of ending your story " and it was all a dream". Completely cliche obvious and lazy.

If nothing else the lack of interest and effort should immediately be cause to lose faith in the person and be angry that they have nothing better for their public they are meant to be serving

It fits their agenda for them to allow people to assume that they are talking about children of the same sex who identify as transgender, so that they can frame any objections as bigotry, and the same as homophobia

Sadly for Nokes she isn't clever enough to pull it off. Kemi Badenoch had her number.

It's gaslighting isn't it.

"Would you be concerned about a trans child sharing a dorm with your child?"

Well, if a female child who was trans eg identified as a boy or non binary, and shared a dorm with my daughter that would be FINE!!! It's not about "being trans" it's about being either one sex or the other.

It's almost as if, deep down, people like Noakes know it's all a lie. But they're so committed to the cause that the lie is serving, they don't know how to disentangle themselves. It's much more comfortable to keep lying and be cheered on for lying by all the self identified good people. No wonder they're so uncomfortable around people who are interested in facts.

It really reminds of a friend of mine who used to speak in tongues as a kid at her evangelical church. She knew she was faking it, but it was so much easier to fake it than to sit there wondering what she had to do for god to make it happen to her. And then once she was faking it, there was so much support from her community, she didn't know how to stop.

Always call it out. Always get them to spell it out where possible. It's a very common tactic.

Nokes is so condescending, she's really talking down to KB and obviously thinks she's got a "gotcha" moment. Then gets whiny when asked to define the terms of her own question. She's so out of touch to believe most people wouldn't be uncomfortable with their daughter sharing accommodation with a biological male. Why is she seeking to undermine her own party for this?

Jo Bartosch on Nokes from 2021:

[Nokes' WESC report on GRA reform] bitterly bemoans the lack of enthusiasm for such policies among the relevant ministers, noting: ‘we contacted the minister for women and equalities [Liz Truss MP] with an invitation to give oral evidence… she declined our invitation, offering no reason, and forwarded it on to the minister for equalities, Kemi Badenoch MP. Minister Badenoch also repeatedly declined our invitation.’ It all has the desperate ring of ‘the bigger girls won’t play with us’.

www.spiked-online.com/2021/12/22/caroline-nokes-and-the-make-believe-of-gender-self-id/

@Linguini

It's gaslighting isn't it.

"Would you be concerned about a trans child sharing a dorm with your child?"

Well, if a female child who was trans eg identified as a boy or non binary, and shared a dorm with my daughter that would be FINE!!! It's not about "being trans" it's about being either one sex or the other.

100%

Perfect performance by Kemi, and to be honest, Nokes too, exposing exactly and precisely all of the issues in a short exchange.

Define your terms.
Acknowledge sex.
Say 'no'.

@FunnyTalks

It's almost as if, deep down, people like Noakes know it's all a lie. But they're so committed to the cause that the lie is serving, they don't know how to disentangle themselves. It's much more comfortable to keep lying and be cheered on for lying by all the self identified good people. No wonder they're so uncomfortable around people who are interested in facts.

It really reminds of a friend of mine who used to speak in tongues as a kid at her evangelical church. She knew she was faking it, but it was so much easier to fake it than to sit there wondering what she had to do for god to make it happen to her. And then once she was faking it, there was so much support from her community, she didn't know how to stop.

Of course.

She knows she's talking absolute bollocks, but she's seen what's happened to Rosie Duffield and JKR; so she's keeping the (rabid TRA) wolves from her door by blithely going along with it.

She doesn't truly believe a word of it, none of them do.

@FunnyTalks

It's almost as if, deep down, people like Noakes know it's all a lie. But they're so committed to the cause that the lie is serving, they don't know how to disentangle themselves. It's much more comfortable to keep lying and be cheered on for lying by all the self identified good people. No wonder they're so uncomfortable around people who are interested in facts.

It really reminds of a friend of mine who used to speak in tongues as a kid at her evangelical church. She knew she was faking it, but it was so much easier to fake it than to sit there wondering what she had to do for god to make it happen to her. And then once she was faking it, there was so much support from her community, she didn't know how to stop.

Well that's the thing, isn't it? They all know that they're lying, that's why they get so angry when asked to define their terms or justify something. They know that there's no possible answer so they have to waffle, make something up or insult.

Every single person that goes along with TWAW is a bare-faced liar and it makes me wonder what else they'd be happy to lie about.
So for me, any politician or political party that goes along with it will never get my vote.

My favourite bit is when Caroline Noakes is asked to define the terms she used and she starts spluttering. If you have conviction in what you're taking about then you don't do that.

Well done Kemi Badenoch.