I'm sure it will happen in disability communities too before very long. What with all the people "identifying" as having a vast assortment of disabilities that they have diagnose themselves as having.
I am disabled and I have a number of issues with disability organizations, in particular thinking the entire world should be organized for people with disabilities (sound familiar?). It is reasonable for people to be able to access buildings, but screaming about being unable to access wilderness areas is just another example of gross entitlement.
There are far more disabled people in the world (thus far) than transexual or transgender but at least we don't hear of stairs being banned or renamed 'horizontal/vertical perambulatory platforms' just because wheelchair users can't use 'em. Nor do we hear of EVERY single toilet being converted to wheelchair access.
Understanding abound and in a perfect world more could be done, it's almost as if disabled people get that they're still a minority (8%?), the world does not revolve around them.
Big pharma ain't interested in disabled communities, they're only interested in creating them.
Interesting you mention stairs, there was that case a few months ago when the eduTwitter illuminati were shrieking about how wonderful was a school's new "inclusive" staircase which had been painted in pride colours. When someone tried to point out it wasn't remotely inclusive of pupils/staff with visual impairment or autism, they got shouted down. More important to "include" nebulous, unscientific feelings than people with actual disabilities who are crying out for inclusive buildings.
True. But these orgs aren't usually given a lot of attention. And sure, there are many areas where things could be improved for people with disabilities - save braille keys on drive thru ATMs - and I strongly support that, one thing that does irritate me is the fairly new category of "ableism". Just one of those charges you launch against people you want to silence.
I'm on the childfree sub on Reddit, which skews young (teens and 20s, though there are other people there too, like me). I can't count the number of "-ism" accusations that I've seen there, and it's not even a big activist type sub.
Huh, interesting - you are the first person I've seen who feels that way (that we needn't make EVERY single place in the world accessible, like wilderness areas). I've had similar thoughts, but rarely voice them - wilderness areas are... wilderness. What, are they suppose to pave and grade every backcountry trail? I'm not sure how that would work...
I wish I could find the terrific online post a man wrote about leaving wilderness wild. The overwhelming response, including many from disabled people, was in agreement. But there have been people who insist they have a right to go anywhere they choose -- duh, NO.
It reminds me a bit of the "war" between hikers/backpackers and mountain bikers. Mountain bikers want to be able to go anywhere, hikers/backpackers feel it disturbs the tranquility of the wild to have bikes whizzing past you at 30mph. Here in the San Francisco area, there's been some compormises made, and mountain bikers have specific trails they're allowed to use. But there are still lots of arguments about it from both sides.
Oh, yes, I've signed petitions against mountain biking in the backcountry. At Acadia National Park in Maine, there are carriage roads -- graded and graveled -- throughout the park, originally built for the elite to drive their horses and carriages. I began to hate bicyclists because of their belief they are entitled to whiz around at high speeds on roads filled with walkers, hikers, horseback riders. I think the park may have addressed this issue, but I'm not sure.
I've always wanted to visit Acadia; I lived in Maine in the late 1980s (near Camden, ME). I saw quite a bit of the state, but not Acadia. Did a trip to Baxter and hiked Mt Katahdin, though.
A great piece thank you Simon. Amazed and delighted yesterday that GB News were filming outside Allison Bailey tribunal (instead of the BBC though ? Didn’t see them there - where on earth are they?) GB News reporter looked so professional I was really impressed.
Allison suing Stonewall and her employer is extraordinary. Even more extraordinary though is where on earth are the main TV channels when this *massive* story is playing out? Thousands of people are organising their work lives around twitter tribunal tweets / does the BBC know?
Yes, he is, and he's also a spiteful, dishonest, malevolent and bigoted little prick who despises and bullies women. To see him on his arse, completely disgraced and fully exposed as the talentless nasty piece of work he is, would be so enjoyable and every women in the world deserves that small joy.
"Christine' Burns, heterosexual male who identifies as Deirdre Barlow, has a LOT to answer for, in the form of the outfit Press For Change. Burns is responsible, in part, for the Gender Recognition Act's existence. Long before Stonewall became all TWAW.
"What's most interesting here is that PfC draw the transgender umbrella very wide:
In the broadest use of the term, a transgender person crosses the conventional boundaries of gender; in clothing; in presenting themselves; even as far as having multiple surgical procedures to be fully bodily reassigned in their preferred gender role.
In this report we will normally use the term 'trans people' to describe those people who might be described as falling broadly within this context, as it has become the term of normal use since the coining of it by Press for Change for their 1996 mission statement: "Seeking respect and equality for ALL trans people"[2]. People who identify as transsexual are a small part of this spectrum and may or may not have had medical treatment to alter their physical appearance.
What's also interesting is that PfC's prime example of hatred is an elderly woman who (in the quoted newspaper article) does not want a male-born carer (with or without a GRC."
What these articles have shown is that 'sefl-ID' and minimal effort were 'baked in' to the definition of 'transwoman'. This was not Stonewall's doing: they needed Stonewall's credibility to hitch their cause to.
More from the MN thread above (from PencilsInSpace):
"I did buy Christine 'buy my book' Burns' previous book (Pressing Matters) when it was given away free a couple of months ago. What I have learnt:
The trans rights movement started with the Beaumont Society - a club for heterosexual cross-dressing men and their wives. TranSexuals could join too but they said no to drag queens because homophobia. Stephen Whittle was the first FTM to join Beaumont and was very active in the organisation.
The various demographics have been inseparable throughout PressForChange's history. They championed the use of the word trans as it did not discriminate between Transexuals and Transvestites
So it was never a case of the trans (as in TS) umbrella widening to include TVs and cross-dressers, rather it was the TV and cross-dressers umbrella widening to include TS.
PFC were consulted on changes to the Sex Discrimination Act in 1999. Women were not. Let that sink in. Women were not consulted on changes to the Sex Discrimination Act
PFC were talking about self-ID in 2000
Also in 2000 PFC were talking about an ultimate goal of just not recording sex
PFC were actively consulted (as in, invited to meetings in government departments and sent confidential drafts of reports for feedback) from the earliest stages of the work that resulted in the GRA.
It was PFC themselves who first spotted the potential problem with inheritance and primogeniture and actively suggested an exception. As far as I can tell this is the only exception they thought reasonable - but I'd have to dig out the original archived correspondence to verify that. It's all carefully preserved apparently because they're very proud of what they've done.
Throughout all this cosy consultation period (Christine says they knew they were getting somewhere when the best biscuits came out at a private chat at the Home Office. PFC simply failed to mention that when they said 'trans' this included every cross-dresser and knicker fetishist in the country"
I wonder if Linda regrets not thinking of a Lesbian Awareness Month.
Perhaps the disobedient & difficult 'female partners only' lesbians will wish Linda atb with her creation, and set up their own Awareness Month. Ditto women and IWD.
Well, the most active and successful protest groups against the suffrage movement were comprised of women. Same with those fighting against the ERA, Phyllis Schlaffley and her followers.
That’s why it shouldn’t come as a surprise when so many on TWAW!!! bandwagon are women. It’s always been like that.
I'm not; men want the women they impregnate in "improper" circumstances to be able to get abortions. I got a poll from ACLU wanting to know what poll takers thought of four different pro-abortion ads they created, and I had a good time on every video trashing the ACLU, mentioning that their sponsor George Soros wants to make sure the prostitutes he pimps can be forced to get abortions.
I posted Simons great piece on GETTR, it was thorough and opened eyes to the connivance that is going on. Many untruths, and disguises were revealed, with the usual suspects lurking in the background.
People overlook that information can be found, if you want to look for it, they can’t be shocked when it’s thrown at their feet.
There has been a similar division in the deaf sector where the organisations who support Deaf (people born deaf or who lost their hearing when very young) people who use BSL are part of "the church of Deaf" and have more right to campaign than organisations that support deaf people, those who are Deafened or Hard of Hearing. Then throw Deafblind people into the mix and there can be all out war!! Organisations need to understand they do nobody any favours by causing division and all that happens is the public sector loses the plot as it has with the trans arguments. People who are not BSL users do not get accessible or inclusive services because all the energy and money is going into Deaf BSL services for a minority of people who were ignored for years but there is a need for balance and equality in the same way that there is a need for checks and balances when it comes to trans rights.
My friend's son faced the opposite discrimination. He is profoundly deaf (genetic), no hearing whatsoever do she had to learn BSL to be able to teach him to communicate. The local (highly regarded) deaf school refused to accept him because he was "too deaf"!!! They only use oral teaching in lessons, no sign language. Pupils are expected to be using their residual hearing (augmented with aids). As he has no hearing nerve he has nothing to augment; cochlear implant not possible. So they had to move all the way to Exeter for education and had an atrocious experience (but at least it was all signing)
"Pretending dissent doesn't exist, except when it's useful to have an enemy, is a familiar Stalinist tactic." I understand you are referencing Orwell, but since pretending dissent doesn't exist seems quite popular in the U.S., U.K., and the other three of the Five Eyes, I'm not sure they would appreciate being referred to as Stalinist.
Edgy on form
I'm sure it will happen in disability communities too before very long. What with all the people "identifying" as having a vast assortment of disabilities that they have diagnose themselves as having.
A few months ago, on a very ancient but captured forum, a member mentioned an associate who "identifies as intersex".
I am disabled and I have a number of issues with disability organizations, in particular thinking the entire world should be organized for people with disabilities (sound familiar?). It is reasonable for people to be able to access buildings, but screaming about being unable to access wilderness areas is just another example of gross entitlement.
There are far more disabled people in the world (thus far) than transexual or transgender but at least we don't hear of stairs being banned or renamed 'horizontal/vertical perambulatory platforms' just because wheelchair users can't use 'em. Nor do we hear of EVERY single toilet being converted to wheelchair access.
Understanding abound and in a perfect world more could be done, it's almost as if disabled people get that they're still a minority (8%?), the world does not revolve around them.
Big pharma ain't interested in disabled communities, they're only interested in creating them.
Interesting you mention stairs, there was that case a few months ago when the eduTwitter illuminati were shrieking about how wonderful was a school's new "inclusive" staircase which had been painted in pride colours. When someone tried to point out it wasn't remotely inclusive of pupils/staff with visual impairment or autism, they got shouted down. More important to "include" nebulous, unscientific feelings than people with actual disabilities who are crying out for inclusive buildings.
Reminds me of these crossings:
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/the-blind-cant-see-virtue-signalling?s=r
True. But these orgs aren't usually given a lot of attention. And sure, there are many areas where things could be improved for people with disabilities - save braille keys on drive thru ATMs - and I strongly support that, one thing that does irritate me is the fairly new category of "ableism". Just one of those charges you launch against people you want to silence.
I'm on the childfree sub on Reddit, which skews young (teens and 20s, though there are other people there too, like me). I can't count the number of "-ism" accusations that I've seen there, and it's not even a big activist type sub.
Everyone has to have an identity and a grievance, these days.
Huh, interesting - you are the first person I've seen who feels that way (that we needn't make EVERY single place in the world accessible, like wilderness areas). I've had similar thoughts, but rarely voice them - wilderness areas are... wilderness. What, are they suppose to pave and grade every backcountry trail? I'm not sure how that would work...
I wish I could find the terrific online post a man wrote about leaving wilderness wild. The overwhelming response, including many from disabled people, was in agreement. But there have been people who insist they have a right to go anywhere they choose -- duh, NO.
It reminds me a bit of the "war" between hikers/backpackers and mountain bikers. Mountain bikers want to be able to go anywhere, hikers/backpackers feel it disturbs the tranquility of the wild to have bikes whizzing past you at 30mph. Here in the San Francisco area, there's been some compormises made, and mountain bikers have specific trails they're allowed to use. But there are still lots of arguments about it from both sides.
Oh, yes, I've signed petitions against mountain biking in the backcountry. At Acadia National Park in Maine, there are carriage roads -- graded and graveled -- throughout the park, originally built for the elite to drive their horses and carriages. I began to hate bicyclists because of their belief they are entitled to whiz around at high speeds on roads filled with walkers, hikers, horseback riders. I think the park may have addressed this issue, but I'm not sure.
I've always wanted to visit Acadia; I lived in Maine in the late 1980s (near Camden, ME). I saw quite a bit of the state, but not Acadia. Did a trip to Baxter and hiked Mt Katahdin, though.
A great piece thank you Simon. Amazed and delighted yesterday that GB News were filming outside Allison Bailey tribunal (instead of the BBC though ? Didn’t see them there - where on earth are they?) GB News reporter looked so professional I was really impressed.
Allison suing Stonewall and her employer is extraordinary. Even more extraordinary though is where on earth are the main TV channels when this *massive* story is playing out? Thousands of people are organising their work lives around twitter tribunal tweets / does the BBC know?
Owen Jones is a complete and utter tosser. End of !
Yes, he is, and he's also a spiteful, dishonest, malevolent and bigoted little prick who despises and bullies women. To see him on his arse, completely disgraced and fully exposed as the talentless nasty piece of work he is, would be so enjoyable and every women in the world deserves that small joy.
He is the human equivalent of a sneeze in a spacesuit.
That got a big snort from me!
Is 'sneeze' a euphemism?
Please stop now
Done.
Far too charitable! As a minimum day-glo enamelled fuck piece would be acceptable.
"Christine' Burns, heterosexual male who identifies as Deirdre Barlow, has a LOT to answer for, in the form of the outfit Press For Change. Burns is responsible, in part, for the Gender Recognition Act's existence. Long before Stonewall became all TWAW.
Mumsnet Thread:https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007
Press for Change publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmpublic/cmpbcriminal.htm
"What's most interesting here is that PfC draw the transgender umbrella very wide:
In the broadest use of the term, a transgender person crosses the conventional boundaries of gender; in clothing; in presenting themselves; even as far as having multiple surgical procedures to be fully bodily reassigned in their preferred gender role.
In this report we will normally use the term 'trans people' to describe those people who might be described as falling broadly within this context, as it has become the term of normal use since the coining of it by Press for Change for their 1996 mission statement: "Seeking respect and equality for ALL trans people"[2]. People who identify as transsexual are a small part of this spectrum and may or may not have had medical treatment to alter their physical appearance.
What's also interesting is that PfC's prime example of hatred is an elderly woman who (in the quoted newspaper article) does not want a male-born carer (with or without a GRC."
Se also the article The Trans Umbrella Is Older than You Think:https://womenspeakscotland.com/2021/06/23/the-trans-umbrella-is-older-than-you-think/
What these articles have shown is that 'sefl-ID' and minimal effort were 'baked in' to the definition of 'transwoman'. This was not Stonewall's doing: they needed Stonewall's credibility to hitch their cause to.
More from the MN thread above (from PencilsInSpace):
"I did buy Christine 'buy my book' Burns' previous book (Pressing Matters) when it was given away free a couple of months ago. What I have learnt:
The trans rights movement started with the Beaumont Society - a club for heterosexual cross-dressing men and their wives. TranSexuals could join too but they said no to drag queens because homophobia. Stephen Whittle was the first FTM to join Beaumont and was very active in the organisation.
The various demographics have been inseparable throughout PressForChange's history. They championed the use of the word trans as it did not discriminate between Transexuals and Transvestites
So it was never a case of the trans (as in TS) umbrella widening to include TVs and cross-dressers, rather it was the TV and cross-dressers umbrella widening to include TS.
PFC were consulted on changes to the Sex Discrimination Act in 1999. Women were not. Let that sink in. Women were not consulted on changes to the Sex Discrimination Act
PFC were talking about self-ID in 2000
Also in 2000 PFC were talking about an ultimate goal of just not recording sex
PFC were actively consulted (as in, invited to meetings in government departments and sent confidential drafts of reports for feedback) from the earliest stages of the work that resulted in the GRA.
It was PFC themselves who first spotted the potential problem with inheritance and primogeniture and actively suggested an exception. As far as I can tell this is the only exception they thought reasonable - but I'd have to dig out the original archived correspondence to verify that. It's all carefully preserved apparently because they're very proud of what they've done.
Throughout all this cosy consultation period (Christine says they knew they were getting somewhere when the best biscuits came out at a private chat at the Home Office. PFC simply failed to mention that when they said 'trans' this included every cross-dresser and knicker fetishist in the country"
I wonder if Linda regrets not thinking of a Lesbian Awareness Month.
Perhaps the disobedient & difficult 'female partners only' lesbians will wish Linda atb with her creation, and set up their own Awareness Month. Ditto women and IWD.
Aah...Owen Jones...if only his Daddy's itch in his pants hadn't come to fruition. 🤔
You mean he has one??
Perhaps the proverbial ‘fart with a bonnet’ would apply more ?
Now that would work in a spacesuit.
As a sneeze in a spacesuit, he was hatched in someone's sinuses.
Well, the most active and successful protest groups against the suffrage movement were comprised of women. Same with those fighting against the ERA, Phyllis Schlaffley and her followers.
That’s why it shouldn’t come as a surprise when so many on TWAW!!! bandwagon are women. It’s always been like that.
Also, it’s a mistake to paint the anti-abortion crowd as right wing men. Far more Republican women are staunchly anti-choice than R men.
(I was a little surprised by that poll.)
I'm not; men want the women they impregnate in "improper" circumstances to be able to get abortions. I got a poll from ACLU wanting to know what poll takers thought of four different pro-abortion ads they created, and I had a good time on every video trashing the ACLU, mentioning that their sponsor George Soros wants to make sure the prostitutes he pimps can be forced to get abortions.
Reminds me of this... https://ladiesagainstwomen.com
I posted Simons great piece on GETTR, it was thorough and opened eyes to the connivance that is going on. Many untruths, and disguises were revealed, with the usual suspects lurking in the background.
People overlook that information can be found, if you want to look for it, they can’t be shocked when it’s thrown at their feet.
There has been a similar division in the deaf sector where the organisations who support Deaf (people born deaf or who lost their hearing when very young) people who use BSL are part of "the church of Deaf" and have more right to campaign than organisations that support deaf people, those who are Deafened or Hard of Hearing. Then throw Deafblind people into the mix and there can be all out war!! Organisations need to understand they do nobody any favours by causing division and all that happens is the public sector loses the plot as it has with the trans arguments. People who are not BSL users do not get accessible or inclusive services because all the energy and money is going into Deaf BSL services for a minority of people who were ignored for years but there is a need for balance and equality in the same way that there is a need for checks and balances when it comes to trans rights.
Thank you. Was partially aware of some of this but not the detail.
My friend's son faced the opposite discrimination. He is profoundly deaf (genetic), no hearing whatsoever do she had to learn BSL to be able to teach him to communicate. The local (highly regarded) deaf school refused to accept him because he was "too deaf"!!! They only use oral teaching in lessons, no sign language. Pupils are expected to be using their residual hearing (augmented with aids). As he has no hearing nerve he has nothing to augment; cochlear implant not possible. So they had to move all the way to Exeter for education and had an atrocious experience (but at least it was all signing)
Ignorant perhaps, but can’t be the only one - who is the woman in specs?
"Christine" Burns - Transexual male. See my comment above.
Thanks
"Pretending dissent doesn't exist, except when it's useful to have an enemy, is a familiar Stalinist tactic." I understand you are referencing Orwell, but since pretending dissent doesn't exist seems quite popular in the U.S., U.K., and the other three of the Five Eyes, I'm not sure they would appreciate being referred to as Stalinist.