Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

KJK is standing against Lloyd Russell-Mole in the General Election

1000 replies

BoreOfWhabylon · 23/05/2024 14:20

Grin https://www.youtube.com/live/vHudcvW0bSQ?si=kj-pX6z_ioL6l3nj

Before you continue to YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/live/vHudcvW0bSQ?si=kj-pX6z_ioL6l3nj

OP posts:
Thread gallery
42
IwantToRetire · 25/05/2024 02:01

Some women have concerns that Sarah's case is not the best strategy and will entrench mixed sex provision.

I think it is totally disgusting that posters think they have the right to comment on a legal case bought by a survivor of rape as though what is more important is their views on it as a "campaign".

It is disgusting that anyone should think Sarah shouldn't have her day in court because of some fantasy someone has dreampt up that the outcome of this case would entrench mixed sex provision.

Talk about parasitic leaching on someone's distress.

If her legal team has had to decide on a particular line of arguement based on what the law says, than that is all they can do.

Instead of presuming to tell Sarah she shouldn't be doing what she is doing, for heavens sake have some empathy and let her do what is best for her and what her legal team has said is possible.

If you are actually worried about mixed sex provision getting "entrenched" start your own campaign, and do something, instead of sitting on the side line sniping.

Publicly criticising her at a time (unless they delay it again), when she is soon going to court is monstrous.

Just shocking.

(And for those who have been misled, Sarah's case has nothing to do with KJK or the clique of socialist feminist who are part of the WPUK -FiLia axis. This is about an individual woman looking for justice. It is more relevant what the local council is doing with its funding that any long term antipathy between 2 factions of feminism.)

parttimeweddingplanner · 25/05/2024 02:11

IwantToRetire · 25/05/2024 02:01

Some women have concerns that Sarah's case is not the best strategy and will entrench mixed sex provision.

I think it is totally disgusting that posters think they have the right to comment on a legal case bought by a survivor of rape as though what is more important is their views on it as a "campaign".

It is disgusting that anyone should think Sarah shouldn't have her day in court because of some fantasy someone has dreampt up that the outcome of this case would entrench mixed sex provision.

Talk about parasitic leaching on someone's distress.

If her legal team has had to decide on a particular line of arguement based on what the law says, than that is all they can do.

Instead of presuming to tell Sarah she shouldn't be doing what she is doing, for heavens sake have some empathy and let her do what is best for her and what her legal team has said is possible.

If you are actually worried about mixed sex provision getting "entrenched" start your own campaign, and do something, instead of sitting on the side line sniping.

Publicly criticising her at a time (unless they delay it again), when she is soon going to court is monstrous.

Just shocking.

(And for those who have been misled, Sarah's case has nothing to do with KJK or the clique of socialist feminist who are part of the WPUK -FiLia axis. This is about an individual woman looking for justice. It is more relevant what the local council is doing with its funding that any long term antipathy between 2 factions of feminism.)

Edited

Yes, this. All of it.

NefertitiV · 25/05/2024 02:36

Seriestwo · 24/05/2024 20:48

she May as well have wrapped the gift she handed the Labour candidate.

who is advising her? Has she got a team who are experienced in politics or are they all activists?

Not sure about political advice, but some funding at least does come from conservative US sources - CPAC.

CliantheLang · 25/05/2024 06:55

NefertitiV · 25/05/2024 02:36

Not sure about political advice, but some funding at least does come from conservative US sources - CPAC.

I'm gonna need a source for that assertion because KJK says no, she didn't: https://nitter.poast.org/search?q=CPAC%20(from%3Atheposieparker)&src=typed_query.

CliantheLang · 25/05/2024 06:59

Winnading · 24/05/2024 10:55

I'm not on twatter so can only see

Her case has raised £95k. I have grave concerns at what good it will do

is there something in that that say i will not support this case? Or is she just saying exactly as above?

For anyone not on twitter, the Sarah Summers thread can be read here: https://nitter.poast.org/theposieparker/status/1759196040387846492?s=46

missmousemouth · 25/05/2024 07:15

@IwantToRetire

👏👏👏

Sloejelly · 25/05/2024 07:43

I think it is totally disgusting that posters think they have the right to comment on a legal case bought by a survivor of rape as though what is more important is their views on it as a "campaign".

Stop with your attempt at censorship by emotional blackmail. Women are free to comment on anything they think it important to them. We’ve had enough of #nodebate.

anyolddinosaur · 25/05/2024 07:56

Donated to POW as a contribution to the deposits. I'll probably donate again after the end of the month. Used to donate to the LP at election time, that money goes to support womens rights now.

Whether Adam likes KJK or not (and obviously the Labour Party dont want the flaws in their policies pointed out) she gives women a chance to speak when people like Adam want to silence them.

I doubt LRM's minders will be able to keep him in check and his constituency can see exactly what they will get.

Seriestwo · 25/05/2024 08:13

Antagonising an opponent in an attempt to get them to lose their temper and therefore votes is a reasonable political/debate technique that I’d probably try on LRM because i know I wouldn’t rise to it if he tried it on me.

im not sure KJK would be able to resist the baiting. The Harrop interview was brilliant because she had the upper hand, but Harrop is not a politician or lawyer.

im worried that this sort of rage farming will be used to make her look batty and/or bad. Therefore I’m wary of being associated with her or her brand so ill not be buying my 70 quid hoody this weekend.

BackToLurk · 25/05/2024 08:17

70 quid for a hoody!!! (Yes, yes I know that wasn’t the main point)

NoWordForFluffy · 25/05/2024 08:18

BackToLurk · 25/05/2024 08:17

70 quid for a hoody!!! (Yes, yes I know that wasn’t the main point)

She discounts regularly. I meant to buy the 'dog' t shirt the other weekend, but it slipped my mind!

NoWordForFluffy · 25/05/2024 08:21

Seriestwo · 25/05/2024 08:13

Antagonising an opponent in an attempt to get them to lose their temper and therefore votes is a reasonable political/debate technique that I’d probably try on LRM because i know I wouldn’t rise to it if he tried it on me.

im not sure KJK would be able to resist the baiting. The Harrop interview was brilliant because she had the upper hand, but Harrop is not a politician or lawyer.

im worried that this sort of rage farming will be used to make her look batty and/or bad. Therefore I’m wary of being associated with her or her brand so ill not be buying my 70 quid hoody this weekend.

I think you're crediting LRM with far too much ability in relation to reasonable discussion! I doubt she'll drop to his level at all. She'll be forceful with her points (which some people don't like women to do), but she won't be raging.

Seriestwo · 25/05/2024 08:48

KJK’s no diplomat - which is fine for activism but not for an election.

She publicly criticised 4 scottish female politicians for something they said in a room she wasn’t in that she thought she disagreed with. That was stupid, it demonstrated that she had no idea who the 4 women were and what their argument was. If that was said in a hustings against those women KJK would not leave with any votes at all.

LRM is a misogynist but he has the support of a large party. He will get help in figuring out how to handle KJK. I’m told KJK refuses help, I hope that’s wrong because I think her election campaign could be really helpful for women’s rights, but “vote for me, let’s make trans people homeless” is not a winning manifesto.

she needs some political advice.

EasternStandard · 25/05/2024 08:57

NoWordForFluffy · 25/05/2024 08:21

I think you're crediting LRM with far too much ability in relation to reasonable discussion! I doubt she'll drop to his level at all. She'll be forceful with her points (which some people don't like women to do), but she won't be raging.

Wonder if he’ll go all wagging finger and barely contained aggression

AdamRyan · 25/05/2024 09:12

CliantheLang · 25/05/2024 06:55

I'm gonna need a source for that assertion because KJK says no, she didn't: https://nitter.poast.org/search?q=CPAC%20(from%3Atheposieparker)&src=typed_query.

They said they paid for her flights (and security iirc)

One of the two is lying, I'm can't see a motivation for CPAC claiming to support someone they didn't but I can see a motivation for KJK to deny that association as CPAC are an organisation that aren't particularly friendly to womens rights.

CPAC spokesman confirms they paid for Kellie-Jay Keen's Australian flights

Posie Parkerhttps://www.abc.net.au/melbourne/programs/mornings/why-anti-transgender-activist-posie-parker-was-in-australia/102140892

https://youtu.be/VFuBEzjHa9g?si=osEU1fuT7ElsJZQa

NefertitiV · 25/05/2024 09:15

@CliantheLang

I'm gonna need a source for that assertion because KJK says no, she didn't: nitter.poast.org/search?q=CPAC%20(from%3Atheposieparker)&src=typed_query.

Sure - the above has Andrew Cooper of CPAC Australia discussing it. He was somewhat perturbed by KJK's denial.

NefertitiV · 25/05/2024 09:17

Thanks Adam!

BezMills · 25/05/2024 09:17

I'm rather looking forward to her campaign. She's here to chew gum, and trigger misogynists. She's all out of gum.

Stone. Cold. Legend.

Acceptableinthe8Ts · 25/05/2024 09:42

AdamRyan · 25/05/2024 09:12

They said they paid for her flights (and security iirc)

One of the two is lying, I'm can't see a motivation for CPAC claiming to support someone they didn't but I can see a motivation for KJK to deny that association as CPAC are an organisation that aren't particularly friendly to womens rights.

KJK herself said that CPAC sponsored the tour and also covered the insurance.

Kellie-Jay Keen "CPAC will sposnsor and insure our whole trip"

posie parkerAustralia standing for womenlet women speak

https://youtu.be/3Zc7whzXrNs?si=pZrjTVJGKmCZhuT_

kolopolo · 25/05/2024 09:43

Oh god. As a kemptown ward voter I am very confused. I would like nothing more than to see the tories kicked out but can't stand Lloyd Russell Moyle. I feel KJK is a bit extreme for me. But may go to the hustings. If anyone knows when the hustings are please let me know!

Datun · 25/05/2024 09:53

When gender reassignment was made a protected characteristic, those who approved it were either monumentally naive or thoroughly captured.

Anyone can have it, including fetishists, serial attention seekers, bullies and men's rights activists intent on undermining women.

It's a disgraceful piece of legislation that relies on sexism to even make the slightest sense.

And, it looks like Foran has identified a possible motivation for changing the law.

I'd love to see that out in the open and being discussed.

FloorMop · 25/05/2024 09:58

Helleofabore · 24/05/2024 14:51

I think that any person donating to the Party for Women know upfront that they are not likely to get a member elected. If people are donating because they believe that these women will get a member into parliament at this election, they really shouldn't be donating money to political parties that started within the last two months.

And if people are donating money to something when they cannot afford to, then again, they need support to stop doing that. However, that is not the responsibility of a party that started two months ago to warn and support people who would seem to be not making wise life decisions.

Exactly.
KJK has always made her intentions and strategy very clear and I think she has set achievable goals. I am looking forward to seeing her take on LRM.

AdamRyan · 25/05/2024 10:09
Money Burn GIF by nog

I just watched her latest video on advice on the other thread that there was "context" for her transphobia. (I didn't see any personally)

She said she was planning to spend a lot more time in the US as "that's where her heart is". So worth bearing in mind if you want to donate to her UK based political movement.

EasternStandard · 25/05/2024 10:12

Datun · 25/05/2024 09:53

When gender reassignment was made a protected characteristic, those who approved it were either monumentally naive or thoroughly captured.

Anyone can have it, including fetishists, serial attention seekers, bullies and men's rights activists intent on undermining women.

It's a disgraceful piece of legislation that relies on sexism to even make the slightest sense.

And, it looks like Foran has identified a possible motivation for changing the law.

I'd love to see that out in the open and being discussed.

The legislation including the GRA is the driver of all the issues

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread