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

Trans group attack Wes Streeting"s constituency office

178 replies

DrudgeJedd · 01/08/2025 20:18

Happened this morning but doesn't seem to be reported anywhere. Trans protest group Bash Back smashed a large window & painted "child killer" (although it looks more like 'chip king' 😁).
Manifesto seems to be the usual MtF centred hyperbole about 'our trans sisters' and repeats the mass suicide myth that Jolyon Maugham & his daughters' group Trans Kids Deserve Better have been trying to blame on Streeting since last summer. I wonder if TKDB have decided that leaving paper coffins outside of this office every day isn't getting the attention they want?
x.com/LeftieStats/status/1951281603776278791?t=z-aJP8CBec9iUri9dZH_PA&s=19

Trans group attack Wes Streeting"s constituency office
OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
ArabellaScott · 04/08/2025 22:26

SidewaysOtter · 04/08/2025 21:56

It's rather proving the point many of us are making - you either vocally and vociferously condemn the likes of Reform (while conveniently ignoring why anyone would consider voting for them) in order to prove your 'right-on' credentials, or you're One Of The Bad People Who Need To Be Re-Educated.

I was listening to an episode of the History Extra podcast about the Iron Mountain hoax (an anti-war satire which got taken to be a real report about plans for social control) and the interviewee broadened the discussion into how conspiracy theories take hold. He said societies need to step back and ask why people are wont to believe them, and what is causing their fear that a conspiracy theory provides an answer to. I'd say that applies in absolute spades here, but so many people like HPFA would rather condemn and scold than look to see why people feel the way they do and whether they have a legitimate cause to feel aggrieved.

This habitual, simplistic error is a large part of why moderates and centrists are struggling. On here, it is quite often a result of people attempting to smear the forum or its users, (I'm not at all accusing pp of this, just noting the dynamic), but it seems to happen in good faith, too. People genuinely think that if one discusses a contentious issue that reveals some kind of support. As if ideas are contagious.

Actually the tacit suggestion that one has to hide or suppress ideas that aren't suited to the current orthodoxy only worsens the paranoid attempts to guess what people really mean - see all the accusations of 'dog whistles' and 'unconscious bias' - because when everyone is carefully curating their language, and everyone else is carefully scrutinising each other for wrongthink, nobody trusts each other because nobody can ever be honest.

It's not healthy. It makes discourse brittle, leaves blind spots, clears fertile ground for opportunists, and creates an atmosphere of superstitious 'ooh, she said a bad word!' febrility.

I suppose this is purity spirals, isn't it.

Binglebong · 04/08/2025 22:30

This has turned into a fascinating discussion. Thank you.

I've spoiled for the last few votes - my conscience wouldnt let me vote for any candidate. At least I was showing that I'm ot just being lazy - instead they need to up their game!

SionnachRuadh · 05/08/2025 00:55

ArabellaScott · 04/08/2025 22:26

This habitual, simplistic error is a large part of why moderates and centrists are struggling. On here, it is quite often a result of people attempting to smear the forum or its users, (I'm not at all accusing pp of this, just noting the dynamic), but it seems to happen in good faith, too. People genuinely think that if one discusses a contentious issue that reveals some kind of support. As if ideas are contagious.

Actually the tacit suggestion that one has to hide or suppress ideas that aren't suited to the current orthodoxy only worsens the paranoid attempts to guess what people really mean - see all the accusations of 'dog whistles' and 'unconscious bias' - because when everyone is carefully curating their language, and everyone else is carefully scrutinising each other for wrongthink, nobody trusts each other because nobody can ever be honest.

It's not healthy. It makes discourse brittle, leaves blind spots, clears fertile ground for opportunists, and creates an atmosphere of superstitious 'ooh, she said a bad word!' febrility.

I suppose this is purity spirals, isn't it.

Actually the tacit suggestion that one has to hide or suppress ideas that aren't suited to the current orthodoxy only worsens the paranoid attempts to guess what people really mean - see all the accusations of 'dog whistles' and 'unconscious bias' - because when everyone is carefully curating their language, and everyone else is carefully scrutinising each other for wrongthink, nobody trusts each other because nobody can ever be honest.

A lot of what passes for the centre-left has adopted this whole method of discourse that used to be confined to sects like Jehovah's Witnesses or the SWP. It becomes very aggravating after a while.

"PAY NO ATTENTION TO THAT MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN"

Me: hang on, there's a man behind that curtain

Them: Why are you attacking the Wizard? The Wizard is on the right side of history

New posts on this thread. Refresh page