Kellie-Jay's New Political Party

[TheBadLuckOfTeelaBrown]

I can't see a thread on this, but she is starting a new party and will run in elections.

twitter.com/StandingforXX/status/1600235830475653123?s=20&t=hhlXpo7uErB4FlkFj1nSRA

www.theotherparty.co.uk

@Happylittlechicken I'm reporting for the 16.00-midnight twatsignalling shift. You've done a great job on the twatsignaller. Very shiny.

You seem very invested in promoting gender ideology as safe and not a threat to women. Why?

Because whatever happens to them, they can always get abortions? I believe that's the logic about why it's okay to put Dana Rivers into a woman's prison in California.

Billy Braggs FB post on Roe v Wade being overturned (long, 3 screenshots)
He got a response from Posie Parker (KJK) that he then screen grabbed and posted.

I'm just thinking...

So a male can identify as a transwoman and get sent to a female prison. In there he could rape and impregnate an actual woman who would then need abortion services.

Both the man in the women's prison and the ability to have an abortion are both currently available options in this country

I dunno but I think if you were to ask the women in prison to decide between:

banning abortion

Or

Banning men in the female prison estate

They'd choose to ban men in their prisons.

BUT if the only way to keep the men out of their prisons was to ALSO ban abortions I think they'd say yes ban both. We'll deal with the banning abortion issue later. They wouldn't say no keep both we are quite happy to risk getting raped and impregnated and get an abortion later if needed.

But in this country we are not at the banning both together stage. If we ever get there, hopefully not re abortions, we'll deal with that then.

But for now KJK, whatever her views on abortion may be, is currently standing for woman to get its rightful meaning of adult human female back. She's not campaigning to end legal abortions.

Loaded question. I have suggested no such thing regarding gender ideology much less promoted it. You seem very invested in writing random loaded questions that say the opposite of what I have actually said, why is that?

@Onnabugeisha Happy asked that question because that's what your posts read like: as an apologist for the male of the species.

Because it’s not a legal context it’s SM. KJK is not in court she’s just using the English language in a free way where set aside is the trifle meaning below.

I sense you are actually worried about this rather than having an agenda (although could be wrong), but you’ve taken a line and run with it unnecessarily.

He got a response from Posie Parker (KJK) that he then screen grabbed and posted.

Yes, I've found that. But that's not the context of where she wrote though that, is it? It's just the oldest found source of the screenshot.

Are you claiming it was a comment on that thread that he reposted on the same thread for some reason? He's not saying that.

He doesn't say "he got a response".

She's not campaigning to end legal abortions.
True, but she is willing to sacrifice our right to an abortion to get what she wants. As an MP (if elected) she will have access to the political power to make that a reality. I’m sorry, but a real womens rights campaigner would be all in for all our rights. They would not be even hinting that we can give up rights we fought long and hard over successive generations to obtain…to get another right. And I don’t for a second believe abortion can be easily won back…not when it isn’t even considered as important a right as freedom of speech!

Her way is just choosing different terms of inequality and oppression, it’s not fighting for our rights.

But you did. You said no woman has ever died from trans ideology, so therefore women should just shut up about it, as we should prioritise abortion rights. When it was pointed out that a male with a trans identity had killed three people, you were very quick to assert trans ideology had nothing to do with it, you have minimised attacks on women by male gender ideologists as ‘not that bad’. You have asserted that women should not complain about males with trans identities raping them in female spaces as ‘men are gonna rape and assault anyway so let’s just make all spaces mixed sex’. That’s the really good thing about writing stuff like that, people can see it. You suggested I went and ‘fact checked’ @Helleofabore s posts showing quotes of stuff said by you, so I did. I can now see exactly what kind of person you are. And it is not a feminist in any way shape or form.

It requires some amazingly contortional thinking to go from "women's sex-based rights are of primary importance " to "if elected KJK would actively seek to abolish the right to abortion."

True, but she is willing to sacrifice our right to an abortion to get what she wants.

And you're willing to sacrifice all women's other rights to get purported support for abortion. And then think you'll somehow keep the abortion right.

You may think you're "all in for all our rights", but you're clearly not.

Look at the header…it is under “Replies” in his screenshot. It was right after he posted that long post about Roe v Wade being overturned.

Just coming back to this.

The definition given doesn't actually help me, though, unless I know what is meant by 'transgender'.

A bit like 'a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman'

Hasten to add Onnabugeisha did not actually say KJK would do that but did say True, but she is willing to sacrifice our right to an abortion to get what she wants. As an MP (if elected) she will have access to the political power to make that a reality. which certainly implies it.

No, I’m not willing to sacrifice any rights at all. You’re willfully lying about what I’ve posted at this point. I corrected this several times now.

You’re willfully lying about what I’ve posted at this point.

I'm simply inferring from your actions and what you've written. Those inferences are as well-founded as your inferences about how KJK would vote in Parliament.

Yes, this

it’s bizarre

Agree with this.
I'm not willing to give up my rights in pursuit of just one, that doesn't begin to make sense
Wanting these people in power is not a good thing for women.

Meant to add not seen those screenshotted posts of Billy Bragg before, agree with everything he said and think it's perfectly put.

Which people? Women? Campaigners for womens rights?

This

Plus she’s only one voice. Other women can highlight other issues

All together is better rather than taking each other out. It’s madness

Hasten to add Onnabugeisha did not actually say KJK would do that

Yes he did:

She would agree to and vote on an abortion ban or restriction in return for other MPs votes on her cause.

You said no woman has ever died from trans ideology, so therefore women should just shut up about it, as we should prioritise abortion rights.

FALSE. I never once wrote that.

When it was pointed out that a male with a trans identity had killed three people, you were very quick to assert trans ideology had nothing to do with it

I was quick to post what the PROSECUTORS said at the actual murder trial instead of that made up shit you posted about being “upset lesbians wouldn’t date him”

you have minimised attacks on women by male gender ideologists as ‘not that bad’

I have called out thrown eggs and cream pies as not being a new norm of heightened violence for USA protests given that at least a dozen peaceful protesters, vast majority of which are minorities, are actually killed during protests and so to start a thread saying that cream pies and eggs are somehow more violent than usual is tone deaf white feminism. I make no apology for putting that in its proper context. That’s not minimising, that’s correcting blatant exaggeration.

You have asserted that women should not complain about males with trans identities raping them in female spaces as ‘men are gonna rape and assault anyway so let’s just make all spaces mixed sex’.

FALSE. I have never once written that.

She's not campaigning to end legal abortions.

True, but she is willing to sacrifice our right to an abortion to get what she wants.

Seriously @Onnabugeisha if it came down to it right now and it was the general election tomorrow and I had a choice between vote labour, with their a man can be woman if he says he is stance and women have penises from Stella creasy, or vote for KJK who might, MIGHT, at some undetermined point in the future decide she wants to put a motion forward to ban abortions then I WOULD still, as a Labour party member, side with her over Labour.

Make of that what you will, but just because a woman has a different point of view in some things it doesn't mean as much as you seem to think it does.

Why do you seem to believe it does? Why are we expected to have purity of thought?