Critically acclaimed Trans gender author says Twin Towers was principled destruction

[Trulywonderful]

I don't know if anyone has posted this already but the same person shared the desire to slit JKs throat a little while ago

It's far more straightforward that trans rights at the expense of women is a logical conclusion of sexism, regardless of right/left wing. I've been astounded at the unthinking sexist shit I've heard even from people that are supposedly feminists - they simply can't unlearn the notion that sex dictates people's personality in some way.

It's an inherently and explicitly sexist ideology. It's only superficially leftwing because 'be kind to the underdogs' is an attractive position when you're about 11 years old.

That is totally brilliant! 😂

Oh lovely. I'd definitely feel safe if he offered me a tampon in the toilets. 😐

Eeekk

@Freddder
Not fascist enough (Orban, Jaysus) for your taste ≠ “left”. Two-tier policing has always happened: there’s just been in a - dramatic, admittedly - shift in the demographic of the beneficiaries. But frankly this is all a bit of a derail & probably belongs in the politics section.

To the main point of the thread: the headline didn’t need “author” after the word “horror” frankly, with their repeated support for Bin Laden. Ugh.

Both can be true.

This is interesting, I could counter and say that the tax burden is higher now than in 2010 and high taxes are left wing? Or I could blame covid. But I don’t think that would properly address what you have said. It would just be tit for tat.

I suppose I’m talking about the social or cultural left wing progressivism that’s been spreading across the west since at least the 1960’s. I could not argue that economically things consistent moved in an economically left wing direction since the 1960’s with the Reagan and Thatcher periods in there.

But even under Mrs Thatcher herself the U.K. moved in a culturally liberal and left progressive direction, the U.K. was less socially liberal in 1979 than it was when thatcher left office in 1990. And why did an organised cabal of elites within her own party oust her? Because of the poll tax? Obviously not. She was ousted because she didn’t want the common market to turn into that most liberal of internationalist institutions, the EU.

I would actually say that some sections of the progressive left are OK with giant corporations running lots of things and billionaires avoiding taxes. Because they’re selfish individualists and left wing progressivism is kind of the same. Anybody can be anything they want, society has to affirm them and bend to ‘their truth’, etc.

OK now if you look at what I actually said, you know instead of using that old left wing tactic of calling everyone a fascist… What I actually said was that I didn’t think the direction of travel could be changed by electing Tories because they would not be prepared to use the power of the state to purge/change leadership within the institutions (which is where I have argued that real power actually sits) and I have used Orban as an example of somebody who would and did.

The point I’m obviously making, at least I thought it was obvious before the ‘fascist’ label was casually thrown around, is that changing the situation would require state intervention of a type that most western mainstream parties including the conservatives are simply not willing to do.

You only have to look at the abuse that Blaire White, Buck Angel and The offensive Tranny (Marcus) get for putting more central views on the subject.
And also look at the gay and lesbian people (Arielle Scarcella, thairivera, MrMenno) that are against this as well, to see what abuse they get for not fully/blindly supporting the "community"

@Freddder

Thanks for your thought out reply. It's not making any sense to my brain at the moment, but that's likely to be my brain operating on reduced power for the last 48 hours with whatever the word is for "like a migraine, but I can broadly pass for functional to a casual observer."

I might return later when more than one brain cell can fire at the same time.

What I can follow and agree with is the thread that it would take more state intervention than any of our political parties are willing to yield to disrupt, well, Stonewall, frankly.

Imo it’ll be mass movement that strains institutions rather than gender, but it may all go together

I don’t know if the gov can actually change it as you say

But we’ll see increasing friction as a result. I’m not sure what will happen when voters demand more and more

"I would actually say that some sections of the progressive left are OK with giant corporations running lots of things and billionaires avoiding taxes"

You don’t think any of the silicone valley’tech bros’ would describe themselves as left wing liberal progressives? How about the bank staff at coutts who gloated about maybe driving Farage out of the country? Would any of them describe themselves as being on the progressive left do you think? Or are all these people for high taxation?

Are you defining Leftists as anyone you disagree with @Freddder ?

No anyone who defines themselves as ‘left wing’, ‘liberal left’ or ‘progressive’ and seems to hold to those basic principles is in my view probably what they says they are.

In my post I asked the question “Would any of them describe themselves as being on the progressive left do you think?”? Obviously I’m concerned about how those people would describe themselves as well as what they believe and what they do.

These men are getting more and more dangerous in their idealogy. It's sickening.

Want to elaborate a little?

OK then… ‘These leftist are getting more and more unhinged, they need to be purged from all important institutions forthwith. They’re demented and sickening. Truly vile people.’ - What is there between this assertion and yours? How is one anymore meaningful or valid than the other? (Other than the fact there is no hint of sexism in my baseless assertion?)

Don't they have.Hate Crime legislation.in the States? Surely a threat to slit JK's.throat qualifies as Hate Crime?

I think there is no such thing as hate speech in the United States, the Supreme Court says it’s all just free speech. There is however hate crime law in the USA, it’s when something that is already a crime in its own right is done out of certain motivations.

Same thing of separating the unhinged, demented political movement from those who are LGBT non compliant, or non compliant women, or the men who form part of the sex class of men without being deranged and thinking mass murder is a jolly good thing, or those who would naturally vote left but are currently looking at this mess going bloody hell, would you look at the state of that.

But can we talk about the issue at hand and have another thread to rant on and on about the left?

I know this is silly to say as I'm sure the pendulum has swayed out of my favour but I do so heartily wish that people could stop fucking masquerading as feminists just because there is now a subsection of feminism specifically involving what they perceive as the exclusion of trans people that they can get on board with.

@Freddder mate you're a right wing bloke who loves Suella and Priti, can't we just be honest you don't care about women, you're not a feminist, you're not on board with a progressive movement like feminism that advocates female equality, what's going on here.

I'm so sick of having to pretend when one thing is clearly not like the other.

I think she's talking about the actual content of the OP, not everything is about you.

I don’t like priti or suella because they are tories but you’re right to say I’m not a feminist. In my opinion the Tories are weak and spineless and conservative nothing, I want to see them gone as a political force. I hope they lose every single seat they have.

What I’m saying here is feminism is a progressive/left/liberal ideology and trans rights is part of progressivism, I’m just saying many of the people here cannot seem to see this. But it seems obvious to me, clear as day in fact, just like it’s clear as day to me that under a progressive system power is primarily held in institutions not government because progressivism doesn’t allow the government to do the certain things that it would take bend the institutions to the government’s will.

It’s like progressive feminists want this liberal progress to stop now that they have what they want from it or they want for it just to continue missing out this step of progress entirely. But it won’t and can’t.

Progressivism won’t stop, won’t miss out this step and the Conservative Party will not do anything for you. And I have already said on this thread what I think it would actually take to stop this so I won’t bother saying it again.