Mermaids being investigated by the charity commission

[MajorieEks]

“hoisted by their own petard” never seemed more apt, if true

There does seem to be a general narrative that parents are likely to disapprove, doesn't there? We see that many times - and 'glitter family' offering to step in as replacement family.

Munroe Bergdorf: www.bbc.com/news/uk-48643467.amp

Rachel McKinnon/Veronica Ivy offers to be a 'glitter family':

Jules Gleeson: 'To abolish the family […] means allowing the relations which already blossom between us to become unchecked. Already, we offer each other prolonged bouts of joy, rarefied skills, and kinds of support that we’re uniquely placed to share. We don’t do this in order to create sturdy forms that will outlast generations, but exactly to enjoy moments of community with our fellow exiles.

www.womenarehuman.com/the-family-unit-is-transphobic-and-must-be-abolished-transgender-activist-says/

Jeffrey Marsh offered to be a 'nonbinary mom'.

Based on what evidence do they think that families are going to disapprove or not support?
And what evidence are these organisations/people are in a better position to support children than the children's families?

Best to leave bundle jibes out in the future to reduce the chance for RMW to appear having decided they've been invited to derail the thread.

This. Please don't give the opportunity.

And we have just in Scotland seen the govt's 'experts' suggest that any family who resists a change in 'gender identity' or 'gender presentation' should risk having that right taken away.

tl;dr, they'll have your kids off you if you don't 'affirm'.

Judging by the thread about the Scottish government's Conversion Therapy Bill, respect for the family doesn't apply when your child thinks they may be trans.

And why are people in responsible positions of work with children not aware of the most basic safeguarding concepts, that the motives of an adult who wishes to separate a child's trust from their parents and refocus it on themselves should always, always be a source of concern and questioning.

Priorities, priorities. If you’re neither use nor ornament to the substantive issues of safeguarding and Mermaids lack thereof, then off you trot and leave it to those who actually care about them.

As usual, you can apparently see things in my mind that aren’t there. Amazing really. How to you do it?

The magical power of sunlight…

Much like IW take on JKR, I don't see how the media finally accurately reporting what's going on at Mermaids can be interpreted as bullying. I suppose when the free ride ends it can be a bit jarring.

I think we should ask Mumsnet to put a post at the top of FWR that notes we all agree that @RobinMoiraWhite had nothing to do with the bundles in the Bailey case.

Maybe then RMW will stop posting about it because reading RMW's smug, badly written, disingenuous posts is really fucking annoying

And @RobinMoiraWhite we know you didn't make the bundles but given the rubbish you spout on here you can't blame us for assuming you did

Judging by the thread about the Scottish government's Conversion Therapy Bill, respect for the family doesn't apply when your child thinks they may be trans.

I was going to say much the same thing. "Parental alienation" is the phrase I was looking for.

We use an electron microscope…

Different views aren’t ‘rubbish’. Don’t we all have a right to a view?

And I mostly seem to be criticised for sticking to simple, factual things like pointing out the bundle nonsense, rather than following down rabbit holes.

For some reason I’m starting to associate the word ‘bundle’ with a song by a chap named Orville Richard Burrell, a Jamaican reggae singer better known by his stage name…

Oh i love that song, cloglady. It's a guilty pleasure. Like blurred lines...

Aren't there rules about that kind of thing? Surely that's beyond inappropriate?

All I can think about now is being at school and hearing a shout of "bundle" so everyone could jump on someone.

Here's a literal fact for you.

Some "views" are NOT rubbish. For example "sex is set early in foetal development, is in pretty much every cell of the body and can never be changed".

Other views are quite literally rubbish. For example "trans women are women" is literal rubbish, as a woman is an adult human female and you literally have to be an adult human male to be a trans woman.

The only way that it is possible to hold similar views to the repellent, bigoted, child-safeguarding nightmare idiots at stonewall and mermaids is to literally pretend that every view is valid and there is no objective truth.

I am tempted to say that the NHS should be available to all... apart from those who do not believe in objective truth. They should be perfectly happy with a homeopathic remedy and it would save government lots of money.

She is coming out all guns blazing on this one.
And that dig at celebrities Emma Watson contacting their PR teams was glorious.

Personally, I prefer the famous (for those of us old enough) ‘Not the Nine O’Clock News’ piece taking off ‘That’s Life’ including Prince Philip exploding and, in particular, the response when the team contacted the Electricity Board for comment.

I’m sure it will be on You Tube somewhere…

Oh, Robin are you lonely? Seriously, you must have better things to do than hang around here. I know I do. There's stuff I should be getting on with. Anyway, I'm probably overthinking. I don't wish to insult you, I hope you're okay.

I find your comment on the thread, or any aspect of the case. Only the bundle misinformation. And, to be fair, the person posting apologised.

I’m fine. I’m sitting in a restaurant waiting for my guest, who is a little delayed, and I have finished my book. But thanks for asking.

No worries.

Different views aren’t ‘rubbish’. Don’t we all have a right to a view?

Presumably it’s Chrysanthemum5’s view that some views are rubbish. Does she have a right to that view?