KJK’s insane rant

[Dontblameitonsunshine]

Kjk’s decision to attack everyone who is not her lapdog is increasingly destructive. It looks like Can-sg put on a great conference. Those doctors who have spoken up have risked their careers. Kjk has become famous and has started a business from LWS. She has benefited way more than any of these doctors.

Her work could be powerful if she just stopped attacking everyone else. But these days she is a demagogue and causes more harm than good by capitalising on vulnerable and timid women and telling them that they need her to speak for them.

Could you tell us more about how kjk keeps closing her ltd companies and opening new ones @theothercatpurred? Does this mean we can’t track how much money she is bringing in? I didn’t know that but it makes sense to me because, as others say, she reminds me of a cross between Jack Munro and Jessica Taylor

It's a discussion board I was responding to OP and then other posters.

I have made no comment about "guilt by association". I said "Some people choose not to associate with her because of her links to the far right"

😆😆

you can't help contradicting yourself, in the same sentence!

I'm not going to kick off. I have no particular interest in JCJ, she wrote some interesting stuff on the debate a while back and that's all I know about it.

Not everyone in real life is on a "side", much as it suits the black and white purists on here to think they are.

It's a statement of fact datun if you scroll back to what I was referring to you'll see the context. Jean Hatchet chose not to associate with her because of her far right links.

That statement says nothing about how I refuse to support people because of "guilt by association"

I've already outlined why I don't support her and her "guilt by association" isn't the reason.

Unfortunately it's difficult to say where the threshold between extremism and "standard" trans rights activism is because promoting trans rights always involves the removal of women's rights and the promotion of an enforced belief.
By contrast, most other beliefs promote themselves with the acceptance that not everyone will hold that belief. Because of this, it's far easier to tell the difference between the extremists and those who just hold a general belief in God, Allah etc.

oh....we are back to this again. It is a cycle.

"some people" as in, 'not me, I am just posting this shite that others believe and it doesn't mean that 'I' think it'.

Meanwhile, I am pointing out the errors and the fails in evidence of links that you are posting. It is not 'irrelevant', because you are introducing what amounts to misinformation to the thread. Misinformation needs to be addressed regardless of who posted it or why.

I don't care whether you made a comment. You posted the link. No one else. Just you.

why can’t you just look her up on the companies house website?

Do Jack Monro and Jessica Taylor trawl the country, and indeed the world, where they do nothing but platform women everywhere?

Including shaking women, vulnerable women, crying women - giving them a voice that they have absolutely nowhere else?

It's utterly shameful that because some people don't like her personality, that they try and put an into this.

Shameful, truly.

"Does this mean we can’t track how much money she is bringing in?"

just listen to yourselves.

I’d say that anyone who wants to erase ‘sex’ as a protected characteristic and replace it with ‘gender identity’ is an extremist.

Whereas trans non-extremists are happy with a protected characteristic of their own (as is currently the case with ‘Gender Reassignment’).

Regarding Tommy Robinson, it’s worth thinking about KJKs timeline.

She first started speaking out at WNTT events and on Twitter, she had the police visit her from Leeds at the behest of Suzie Green, she was going speak for Women’s Place, but they dropped her in the shit, she was also banned from twitter, mumsnet and so on.

She was not who she is today back then, the YouTube channel, the T-shirt business.

When she was talking about not believing everything you hear about so-called “far right” “hate” figures, it was obvious it was because she had been wrongly smeared with that sticky mud herself and started to wonder if it’s ALL bollocks, not just about her. It’s pretty reasonable imo. I also give people more of a chance these days. I am suspicious if someone is labelled ‘toxic’, ‘problematic’, ‘hateful’, or even ‘racist’ now, because I have seen how these terms are used to silence and isolate outspoken people and I DO NOT want to live in a world where people are afraid to speak the truth from their perspective. If I hear my kids discussing someone who is supposedly ‘toxic’, ‘problematic’, etc, I tell them to think again because those words could just as easily be used against them.

Some people choose not to associate with her because of her links to the far right"

IS a comment about guilt by association.

They 100% are. And pretty sure you are not far behind.

One thing I don’t understand @AdamRyan, and you fail to explain every time, is why Jean Hatchet is an arbiter of truth when it comes to KJK’s supposed links to the far right?

It is not misinformation to say she has links to the far right. I personally don't really care, apart from I find it quite interesting that stating that fact causes absolute uproar on here.

You don't like that she has those links. And you are arguing the toss by asking endless questions, but by doing so you are setting yourself up as the ultimate arbiter.

It's pretty obvious and pretty tedious now. I don't have to assuage your cognitive dissonance for you.

😂
If you think I'm a TRA extremist that shows how far down the rabbit hole you must be!

I don't like KJK. I'm entitled to that opinion.

I agree with OP that attacking a medical conference was ridiculous. That's why I'm on the thread.

I love how long these sad attempts at KJK smearing threads always get.

It is remarkable isn't it? How that site has been posted here as a beacon of well investigated and balanced journalism?

You don't like that she has those links.

I suspect most posters don't believe that she has those links. A big difference.

I'm not. I'm saying she's entitled to whatever boundaries she wants to put in place about who she chooses to associate with and I respect that.

Very odd to me that women who are all about safeguarding are then so quick to criticise others personal boundaries. Boundaries and the right to define one's own boundaries are key to safeguarding.

I have accidentally watched an episode of the Lotus Eaters on YouTube autoplay so I’m probably far right adjacent anyway.

And you all post on the same forum as me so you are all crypto-fashy-as-fuck.

It's almost as remarkable as when posters claim policy exchange is a good source of information and that people who question sources are somehow bigoted and anti free speech. Curious.

😂

What on earth is crypto-fashy??

This thread is the kind of thing that makes me ill-tempered: it's the very embodiment of ad hominem arguments stopping us from talking about more interesting things.

I don't care about KJK's mortgage.

I don't care if JCJ is pretentious.

I don't care (shoutback to a previous, frankly terrifying, thread) that a campaigner was photographed standing next to a TW and didn't repudiate him in the strongest terms punch him in the face.

I just want to hear their arguments and learn about their objectives. JKJ hates the 'gender identity' concept, so objects to medics using that language and remaining open to the possibility of treatment rather than simply declaring 'not a thing'.

I partly disagree with her and also with the PP who suggested we can't change people's minds about this. I think there's scope to shift public perception from 'everyone has a gender identity and anyone who is sex/gender incongruent must change themselves' to 'apparent sex/gender incongruence is an interesting psychological phenomenon in individuals which deserves a thoughtful well-researched response rather than blind acceptance'. Medics are on it.

(That hopenothate webpage was shite though.)