Glinner Bullseye comment on X

[Thatcatsaflippingnightmare]

Always trying to explain Glinner to DH, today he showed me on X JD Vance defending murder of the woman by ICE. Glinner had replied something like 'bullseye', as in agreement. I tried to comprehend with "satire?" but he said no he's on Liz truss show these days. I said well he's always been about protecting women and children, he's not suddenly supporting femicide, but the post convinced DH otherwise. Any insights? I'm not on social media

What is that comment referring to?

Absolutely this.

The left can fix this.

Why don't they?

Because “ they “ are spineless, cowardly, captured, venal and thick

How is that any better than saying "the right" are all raging, gammony, thick bigots?

Grow up

The extraordinary thing is not that the Right know what a woman is.

The extraordinary thing is that the Left (pretend they) don't.

If that results in people abandoning left leaning parties then these left leaning parties have only themselves to blame. What a spectacular own goal they have opened themselves up to.

It is hard to express sympathy with left wing parties when left wing parties are advocating to sterilize children, castrate young gay men, end women's rights spaces and language, telling straight men and lesbians that they are bigoted scum if they are not willing to suck c**k and who literally claim a mentally ill person's feelings are more important than reality. And are doing all of the above whilst suppressing truth and free speech.

I have never voted Tory. I despise Farage. The only times I have not voted labour are, IIRC, one vote for the greens and one vote for the Lib Dems [which was when the Lib Dems were advocating for higher taxes than labour and I was in an incredibly safe labour seat where there was no risk of the tories getting in.]

Yet I find myself defending Tommy Robinson (or rather asking for evidence from people who are accusing him of bad things) and finding that Rupert Lowe talks a lot of sense... people who see me online might well assume I am a lifelong Tory who is moving to the right because of the way I criticize the things labour are doing wrong.

And you're also a man who similarly to Glinner thinks calling women silly or using misogynistic language when it's about a woman who doesn't hold the same view as you ...I think you've also said you're not a feminist and don't see the relevance of regularly declaring yourself as male even if threads where women are disclosing their experiences or assault assuming this place is frequented mostly by women. I note you've chosen to ignore reference to posters such as yourself in my post that make me as a left wing GC feminist feel this place is no longer tolerant to discussing GC beliefs from a feminist and left wing view point.

Yep, I am a left wing libertarian, more left wing than I am libertarian.

I am also a capitalist who believes in a strong state!

Exactly so. The amazing thing to me is that the left don't learn. It seems to be widely acknowledged that one of the reasons Trump was able to edge it over the Democrats in the swing states, thus winning the election, was the "Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you" advert. Ordinary Americans were not enthused about men competing in women's sports or allowing cross-dressers into women's changing rooms.

You'd think that, following that, the left would pause and reflect.

And yet in California the Democrats are still allowing violent men into women's prisons, with the consequence that a man was able to rape his female cellmate and in the forthcoming trial the victim is required to refer to him as "she".

And in the UK, the Labour govt is going to court to defend the view that men can be women, and a major trade union actually organised a demonstration in support of allowing men into women's changing rooms.

It's not just that they're terminally stupid, they're incapable of learning even a tiny bit from their own stupidity. No wonder people don't want to vote for them.

Again, Reform are not gender critical.

I don't believe men can be feminists. I believe that a feminist is a woman who fights for women and I hope I am able to play my (small) part in supporting feminists.

Were I to call myself a feminist I believe I would be saying that I have an equal right to women to determine what feminism is and what is good for women. I don't believe I have that right.

If you wish to highlight precisely what parts of a previous post of yours I have chosen not to respond to or simply not read, then I will try to respond.

I certainly have no problem with people discussing feminism from a left wing viewpoint here or anywhere else.

Maybe I am wrong, but my view is that if anyone wishes to discuss previous trauma then they need make a decision whether to do so publicly or privately, and if they do so publicly then they cannot blame the public for reading it. (I wonder how many people read each thread compared to how many post on it? For all I know 30% of the people who read this board are men, and 10 times more people read than post).

She was on the Unite the Kingdom march, which my step-grandson also attended. His report was clear; there was no violence and those attending included ethnic minorities in the UK and people from across the class spectrum. There is nothing wrong in wanting to put our country back together again, punish rape gangs, remove criminals who have also entered the country illegally, and to celebrate our culture of tolerance, liberty, anti-slaving (Lancashire cotton workers starved and sent money to show their support for the North and anti-slavery during the US's civil war, for example, and Britain spent treasure and lives ending the Triangular Trade and stopping slavery wherever they found it and had influence), Parliamentary democracy, great literature etc. I also follow Birdy Rose and KJK, too. I don't agree with everything they say or do but one cannot agree with someone on everything. We agree on some things that I believe to be important.

spineless, cowardly, captured, venal and thick

followed by

grow up

make it make sense 😂😂😂

If non GC women are going to be labelled thick I see no need to continue that discussion.

Let us bring focus back to Glinner who is now retweeting people who think women shouldn't vote, and now thinks thr word ret*rd is acceptable language from a 60 year old lol

He's been leeching off women for years time to cut him loose.

Irrelevant comment, really.

"spineless, cowardly, captured, venal and thick" was outrageous.

However it is very clear to me that anyone who claims (almost certainly dishonestly) to believe that men can be women is some combination of spineless and/or cowardly and/or captured and/or venal and/or thick.

Unless I am missing something? Can you explain how someone can claim to believe that men can be women (and that women's rights can get in the sea) is not at least one of those things? Are there any people who claim men can be women because they are really clever and brave free-thinkers who have worked out that some men do have wrong-sex gendered souls, and that it is the souls that determine sex not the chromosomes?

It's true? And none of it has the insult impact of 'gammon'.

My comment was about political parties, especially Labour not women on here

How is it irrelevant when I've said upthread I feel reluctant to post anymore as a left wing GC feminist because I feel a space that was once a place to talk amongst like minded women now has a lot of men posting in a way I find off-putting and sometimes in a way that's misogynistic? Unless only certain options count I'm not sure how your comment is doing anything than proving my point that people raising concerns from a left wing or feminist perspective are shut down,.it's certainly not furthering discussion.

As someone who is left wing (literally confirmed today on that website where you answer questions and it tell you where you are on a left right / authoritarian libertarian spectrum) and who supports women who are fighting for women, it is somewhat ironic that I am one of the "people raising concerns from a left wing or feminist perspective" nd you are trying to shut me down.

To be clear - I believe that one can post from a feminist perspective whilst not claiming to be a feminist because one is not female and one believes that being female is a pre-requisite to being a feminist.

Men cannot be feminists !

If you reread my post clearly, I'm not interested in discussion feminism or women's rights with men who a, don't feel it's relevant to disclose their sex to people and b, who makes misogynistic jabs about women who disagree with them. As women we can disagree amongst ourselves and I don't agree with policing each others language about those who support TRAs for example, but I don't think it's acceptable for men to do it and I'm not happy to see it becomes more normalised on this board. Likewise with men hounding women to debate with them, like Glinner, so I hope you'll understand clearly as you fall into the two categories I'm not interested in discussing with you personally, so please leave me alone now.

If that was to me I agree and sorry if I typed confusingly.

I do not believe that men can be feminists. They can try to support those women who they see fighting for women, and can express things from a feminist perspective. But they cannot be feminists.

Anyone who doesn't think it's possible for men to be feminists hasn't really read or invested much time into learning what feminism is

In theory I agree… but men who claim to be feminists do risk sounding like arse holes.

Maybe ‘agree with feminism’ is a better way to phrase it.