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

Has anyone divorced their spouse for not understanding gender critical views?

152 replies

PinkTreeFrog · 25/12/2025 15:25

It is a major point of difference, along with others that I will omit in this thread for clarity. Generally, values aligned at marriage but became distinct over the past decade.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
JamieCannister · 03/01/2026 13:41

RedTagAlan · 26/12/2025 05:12

For sure LGBTQ rights have become real, but the people have always been here. We just don't ostracize folk now, or we are not supposed to. Same with civil rights overall.

Remember its well within living memory since Loving V Virgina (1967), desegregation, even voting rights. Same sex marriage is only 10 years old.

What has changed if that these rights people have fought for have been weaponized by the right. They want women back at the kitchen sink, for Black folk not to be able to vote, and for gay folk to be shoved back in the closet.

The repubs invented the culture war. Really, because they have nothing else to offer.

I am in the UK... I am a life-long "leftist", my biggest issue with labour has (in the past) always been that I regard their version of capitalism as right wing, and I want a centre left version of capitalism and much more re-distribution of wealth.

I am still a leftist, and just about the only think that might get me to vote labour at the next election is them to come out 100% against transgender ideology and repeal the GRA and remove GR as a PC under the EA 2010, and kick out any MP who thinks Palestine is more important than their constituents.

The culture war is 100% on the left, and the left are showing themselves to be stupid and bigoted.

TempestTost · 03/01/2026 15:32

RedToothBrush · 03/01/2026 11:28

They simply have no concept of the world outside their bubble in my experience.

They want everyone to just get along, but don't really have solutions for conflict points. They simply deny the existence of a conflict point or just don't see it or don't want to see it.

Its a black and white thinking for Nice People. People who are not Nice People are somehow just Bad People. And you choose either to live in Nice Land or Bad Land. Bad things don't happen to Nice People because you've chosen the Right Way.

Its really difficult to explain. I find it all very deliberately isolationist precisely so you don't have to engage with The Difficult Stuff.

Either way, I find it privileged and unaware of how its simply not possible for the majority of people to live like this because of their background and the lack of ability to escape other people easily.

I think this is a good description of a lot of the people who embrace that sort of politics, Quaker or not.

I do think however that from a Quaker perspective, it's also shallow and reductive. Historically I think this kind of Quakerism was actually very inclusive, not in the sense of a simplification of good and evil, but in the sense of understanding that all people - even the ones doing bad things, are a reflection of the divine life and need to be loved, and also that there was massive sacrifice and commitment attached to their kind of peace activism.

It also used to be a lot more intellectually rigorous. I find in some ways it compared to the Anglican Communion, over the last 50 years or so they seemed to have dropped most of their intellectual rigour for a kind of socially acceptable progressivism and their political commitment has similarly degraded to a kind of bland left orthodoxy.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread