I was at a party last night

[BrokenToy]

With lots of people I either don’t know or have only met once (old friends of Dh, and they live hundreds of miles away from us, we travelled up to the party).

No topic was taboo, except one. We had fabulous tipsy conversations about politics covering the strikes, Brexit, Johnson. Allsorts of topics. Many differing views and a very intelligent cohort. (We did talk about other stuff as well, it was a fun party)

However, several times across different conversations with different people, the trans thing came up and EVERY SINGLE TIME the person I was talking with said oh I’m not not getting into that/I’ll be in trouble if I say what I think/don’t get me started I’ll never stop and it’ll offend somebody.

Every single person had the same views as I do (that the whole thing is nonsense) but hardly anyone would get into any sort of meaningful conversation. I didn’t keep bringing it up or anything, it sort of naturally flowed into conversations but it was striking that as soon as it was mentioned the topic was blocked.

’No debate’ really has had the intended effect, even among a bunch of educated professionals in their late 40s/50s. It was quite chilling really.

I can’t talk about it at home as I have two very woke young adult kids. DH and I discuss it obviously. But it was interesting to me that people who will happily and animatedly tell you why they disagree with you on the strikes, or rant about Boris, or any other hot topic, will not discuss trans issues or women’s rights. It’s completely taboo.

Funny. This is the exact technique I use on my exh when he goes off on a 'poor me' diatribe. Very effective.

Good to know @ChagSameachDoreen; thank you. I'll pass that on.

Just been with 30 years friend plus other friends of hers. We all know we have different views on all this but I was told when I brought in a flippant comment to basically shut up. I was upset by this but held myself back and the chat rolled on. At the end of the evening friend said thank you for not saying anything. I expressed my view that what really upset me was the silencing ,which is why we are in the position we are in now. And of course that the other friends views/ friendship were apparently worth more. Was told we wouldn’t be invited if we couldn’t keep quiet. Partner and I very upset particularly as we would have judged all those present perfectly able to talk about the issues involved. It was particularly bad as we had been involved in some small actions over the weekend which no one wanted to hear about, and were feeling quite depressed about what we see. Wish there were more who could support us nearby. This is the only issue which is dealt with in this way, apart from maybe Brexit.

Yes! (Not that I was there, despite my views apparently dating from the Jurassic Age).

But ”Hey Harry, gotta say I’m with Clem on this one” would have had far greater consequences then than merely losing one’s social circle and job.

Beheading, anyone?

It will only be a matter of time 😱

@Ramblingnamechanger that's really chilling. thought control in action

Re Private Eye - I went to a meeting in Central London a few years ago, before lockdown, and spotted Francis Wheen in the audience. He is very senior at Private Eye and I surmise that he is the one writing the stories they feature regularly now on this debate. There's a very sceptical tone which is markedly different from most of what you see in the Guardian or the Indie.

I was pleased when Richard Dawkins finally said something GCish a few months ago as I have been baffled by the silence on this issue of so many prominent humanists and atheists. Of course, in some cases, they're not silent, they're full on in their support of gender ideology. Alice Roberts, for example.

I kind of understand why Ben Goldacre has kept stum, although I find it disappointing. Robert Winston has only spoken up quite recently, and is probably too eminent to be cancelled, and nearing the end of his professional life, which must make a difference. Mid-career academics have to think about grant funding, promotions etc, and nowadays adverse feedback from students can do an academic a lot of damage.

I remain convinced that it was a masterstroke of the gender ideologues to convince Stonewall etc to move from LGB to LGBT. Stonewall had built up a lot of goodwill by the clever and engaging way they campaigned for gay rights in the 1990s and 2000s. My impression is that many people are keen to show that they are not prejudiced in the matter of gay rights, and without ever thinking about it they have just assumed that that means they have to agree with gender ideology too. It's not remembered that Stonewall only went from LGB to LGBT in 2015.The fact that they are two different things and that there is a clash of rights there has gone right over most people's heads.

The clash of rights with women's rights is not seen as anything important because of deeply ingrained misogyny, of course. More important for us to be kind than safe.