The Council of Men has spoken! Chloe Cole is taking on the gender Mengeles Trans rights activists hate her for her bravery We see you, Pink News Look at the sleight of hand here. (Remember, editor Ben Cohen is married to an ex-Memaids trustee). Kavanagh’s complaint about John Nicolson’s online conduct is a beautiful thing
They have a Gender Identity scale with Barbie at one end, and GI Joe at the other - we need a Gender Critical scale with JN at one end and DK at the other. 😁
I think the TRAs and their cheerleaders being unhinged is very on brand. They do our work for us. JN is so unpleasant I can’t see a neutral thinking, he must be right; so, carry on, John, you are hastening the demise of this rotten ideology, you ridiculous man.
Well, someone is paying attention. I particularly like that she's British (only because I think if people have heard insane things, they think it's mostly America).
Chloe Cole and Camille Kiefer are 2 young women in the US now initiating lawsuits against those who ignored their real mental health issues and pushed the "lucrative solution" on them, with rushed hormone/surgery treatments, no extensive psychotherapy. The situation with KC Miller, of eponymous YT channel, also involved terrible childhood trauma, recent interview on Boyce. Camille Kiefer has a YT channel called The Get Better Researcher, exploring many dysphoria influences. Link to her testimony in Florida, before the Medical Board, below.
Good luck getting yer twitter accounts back. Just received this response after my 'post Elon Musk takeover' plea for clemency. It took a while for them to make up their minds. Looks like GC accounts will remain in limbo:
"Your account has been suspended and will not be restored because it was found to be violating Twitter's Terms of Service, specifically the Twitter Rules against hateful conduct.
It is against our rules to promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease.
Additionally, if we determine that the primary purpose of an account is to incite harm towards others on the basis of these categories, that account may be suspended without prior warning".
Bit confused about the 'big glamourpuss portrait'? Is it a blurred photo of a woman in a coat near a road? Is this a comment to say you think she's attractive? Unsure how that makes her a 'glamourpuss'? Or what that's got to do with much and commenting on how attractive you find her.
No it's just an odd photo to choose for such a story. If there was a real threat you'd think they would do what they can to keep her identity at least a little quiet, not post what looks like an election shot.
Ok, but you know that this is all a machine and she may have had little control over any image used by the BBC? And again, how should she have appeared? What has being a 'glamourpuss' got to do with being harassed? Too attractive?
Have you ever seen anyone give evidence about the abuse they experienced?
I would hope we are incredibly careful about making any judgment about the validity of someone's experience because of their appearance. I am surprised Graham made that statement and as if that would affect the credibility of what she might be saying.
Then point out the absurdity of the harassment claims and don't go down the route of criticising a woman (in politics) for being a 'glamourpuss'. A very strange choice of words.
No, but the BBC did choose to use that image. Really, the overall point being made is that people are crying wolf. She is fine, and no doubt delighted with herself like in the photo. If she was a victim, why show her face to all the horrible bigots? Seriously there's no sexism or misogyny here.
She's a councillor, people need to know who she is. And the comment is directed at her, not the BBC.
We need to be very careful about drawing connections between how people look and the credibility of what they are saying. None of us know who is targeting her. Women in politics are often too sexy or not sexy enough.
I don't care what she looks like, I don't believe she is being harassed in the manner in which the BBC is reporting. If it was a man, I'd doubt him also. Genuinely this is not a case where she is being judged on her appearance.
Yes, but that has nothing to do with Graham. This is seriously going off topic now. I believe the majority of readers interpreted this as Graham intended. Let's not forget, he had his life ruined for defending women and girls.
Yes, I know the image. She is an attractive woman. Women in politics get shredded however they appear. How is a victim of harassment supposed to look? Holding a tissue in shot? Like they haven't brushed their hair? Cheeks still moist with freshly wrung tears?
That's a fair point, ThoughSheBeButLittle. I do get you. I'm just tired of people defending this movement, claiming they are suffering when they are the priestly class. It's so hypocritical and so misleading (overall, I mean). People on the GC have lost their jobs, are fighting tribunals etc. Has she simply received complaints? I just wonder if it's a case of hyperbole again, as we know the BBC loves.
I am definitely not defending 'this movement'. I am highly uncomfortable with that word used to describe her. She's not splayed over a car, but is she 'allowed' to smile? Allowed to be found attractive in politics? What does 'woman being harassed' look like? This is a bog standard photo FFS.
Women in public life get truly astonishing levels of abuse - not for their actions or words but how they look. I am sure the police have been informed but how do we know? Why even bother guessing. Let's hold her to account for the silly intellectual position she is attempting, not the way she looks.
Thank you. This is incredibly raw for me today (as is probably obvious). The reports from the Ambulance services and the Royal Navy that have come out in recent days show there's a bit of an enormous mountain to climb. One former officer said she had to leave as she couldn't say what she's saying in uniform. Now that's brave and stunning!
Dennis K is fabulous. 💪
Brava Chloe Cole. Bring on the de-transitioners' lawsuits. It's the way out.
Nice one Chloe! Indeed, bleed them dry... bastards!
I actually side eyed that Green Party nonsense - read it and then automatically reacted with that. 😄
Word salad with dressing, and mayonnaise!
And plenty of trans fats in the mayo!
With anchauvinists!
Once again, Dennis proving what an amazing man he is!
JN once again, proving that he is, the exact opposite!
They have a Gender Identity scale with Barbie at one end, and GI Joe at the other - we need a Gender Critical scale with JN at one end and DK at the other. 😁
I think the TRAs and their cheerleaders being unhinged is very on brand. They do our work for us. JN is so unpleasant I can’t see a neutral thinking, he must be right; so, carry on, John, you are hastening the demise of this rotten ideology, you ridiculous man.
We love Dennis K! He needs to get a buy me a coffee page. Does he have one?
I think he's probably ok given his profession.
I saw him on YouTube, saying he’s thinking of going back to work, but advising right now.
Ah, ok. That's good then!
Sweet of you to think of him - he has some great writing on his website that is not on his substack.
I'll need to check it out.
My personal highlight is his article, "Proud of bloody what?"
And this one: https://dennisnoelkavanagh.substack.com/p/cometh-the-backlash
My heart!! 💔
I haven’t seen it, if he has.
I'll put a note on his blog. He deserves some coffees for being brilliant!
Definitely 💯
And each of those men is still capable of sword fighting right? 😉
Can there be a more confused and confusing person than a 'bisexual transwoman'?
yet again, they shoot themselves in the foot, with logically impossible claims
yes -- their big, hairy, stilettoed, 'non-passing' foot!
"Rhian" is giving a perfect exmple of the smile known as "Duper's Delight," the hallmark narcissist facial expression.
Well, someone is paying attention. I particularly like that she's British (only because I think if people have heard insane things, they think it's mostly America).
Parody of Dylan M: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD9NEtHkvdo
From Mein Fuhrer to Men Fuhrer.
Chloe Cole and Camille Kiefer are 2 young women in the US now initiating lawsuits against those who ignored their real mental health issues and pushed the "lucrative solution" on them, with rushed hormone/surgery treatments, no extensive psychotherapy. The situation with KC Miller, of eponymous YT channel, also involved terrible childhood trauma, recent interview on Boyce. Camille Kiefer has a YT channel called The Get Better Researcher, exploring many dysphoria influences. Link to her testimony in Florida, before the Medical Board, below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWVxsZf7ntw
Good luck getting yer twitter accounts back. Just received this response after my 'post Elon Musk takeover' plea for clemency. It took a while for them to make up their minds. Looks like GC accounts will remain in limbo:
"Your account has been suspended and will not be restored because it was found to be violating Twitter's Terms of Service, specifically the Twitter Rules against hateful conduct.
It is against our rules to promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease.
Additionally, if we determine that the primary purpose of an account is to incite harm towards others on the basis of these categories, that account may be suspended without prior warning".
What has Rory Stewart said?
The responses to Chloe Cole are disgusting. And they accuse us of nastiness!
Lol that Green Party boy! Willy T'WATkins. Prick.
Bit confused about the 'big glamourpuss portrait'? Is it a blurred photo of a woman in a coat near a road? Is this a comment to say you think she's attractive? Unsure how that makes her a 'glamourpuss'? Or what that's got to do with much and commenting on how attractive you find her.
No it's just an odd photo to choose for such a story. If there was a real threat you'd think they would do what they can to keep her identity at least a little quiet, not post what looks like an election shot.
Ok, but you know that this is all a machine and she may have had little control over any image used by the BBC? And again, how should she have appeared? What has being a 'glamourpuss' got to do with being harassed? Too attractive?
Her glamorous and carefree presentation is at odds with the apparent harassment.
Have you ever seen anyone give evidence about the abuse they experienced?
I would hope we are incredibly careful about making any judgment about the validity of someone's experience because of their appearance. I am surprised Graham made that statement and as if that would affect the credibility of what she might be saying.
I believe he would have pointed out the absurdity of the harassment claims in exactly the same way - the photo of her is just a cherry on top.
Then point out the absurdity of the harassment claims and don't go down the route of criticising a woman (in politics) for being a 'glamourpuss'. A very strange choice of words.
Victims of harassment are rarely photographed tearing their hair out and crying in distress.
No, but the BBC did choose to use that image. Really, the overall point being made is that people are crying wolf. She is fine, and no doubt delighted with herself like in the photo. If she was a victim, why show her face to all the horrible bigots? Seriously there's no sexism or misogyny here.
She's a councillor, people need to know who she is. And the comment is directed at her, not the BBC.
We need to be very careful about drawing connections between how people look and the credibility of what they are saying. None of us know who is targeting her. Women in politics are often too sexy or not sexy enough.
I don't care what she looks like, I don't believe she is being harassed in the manner in which the BBC is reporting. If it was a man, I'd doubt him also. Genuinely this is not a case where she is being judged on her appearance.
Ok. Would Graham have called a man - a male councillor - a 'glamourpuss'?
Let's hope she wasn't wearing a short skirt too.
I doubt she had a short skirt on, it was just a headshot after all so what would be the point!
The point is there is an impossible line to walk being a councillor if you are a woman - 'not shaggable' to 'asking for it'.
This is why women avoid and leave public life.
Yes, but that has nothing to do with Graham. This is seriously going off topic now. I believe the majority of readers interpreted this as Graham intended. Let's not forget, he had his life ruined for defending women and girls.
You speak for the majority of readers?!
Graham used that choice of words! No one forced him to. It very much has to do with him, unless someone else wrote it?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-63556776
I reckon Glinner might just mean that she's hardly the image of a bullied / harassed person!? She's positively glowing...
Yes, I know the image. She is an attractive woman. Women in politics get shredded however they appear. How is a victim of harassment supposed to look? Holding a tissue in shot? Like they haven't brushed their hair? Cheeks still moist with freshly wrung tears?
Yes exactly, with tears rolling down her pronoun badge.
That's a fair point, ThoughSheBeButLittle. I do get you. I'm just tired of people defending this movement, claiming they are suffering when they are the priestly class. It's so hypocritical and so misleading (overall, I mean). People on the GC have lost their jobs, are fighting tribunals etc. Has she simply received complaints? I just wonder if it's a case of hyperbole again, as we know the BBC loves.
Is it harassment along the lines of that which the Mermaids volunteers received?
Well, there is that. I must admit that my patience is frayed! The welfare of kids overwhelms me 🫣
As in what exactly is the definition of harassment to these people.
I am definitely not defending 'this movement'. I am highly uncomfortable with that word used to describe her. She's not splayed over a car, but is she 'allowed' to smile? Allowed to be found attractive in politics? What does 'woman being harassed' look like? This is a bog standard photo FFS.
Women in public life get truly astonishing levels of abuse - not for their actions or words but how they look. I am sure the police have been informed but how do we know? Why even bother guessing. Let's hold her to account for the silly intellectual position she is attempting, not the way she looks.
"Let's hold her to account for the silly intellectual position she is attempting"
Let's absolutely do this!
P.s. in no way suggesting you are defending this movement. I didn't mean you, I meant all the sheep who believe the headlines without thinking!
Thank you. This is incredibly raw for me today (as is probably obvious). The reports from the Ambulance services and the Royal Navy that have come out in recent days show there's a bit of an enormous mountain to climb. One former officer said she had to leave as she couldn't say what she's saying in uniform. Now that's brave and stunning!
I am a bit tired, but I read "We see you pink news" as "We see you prick news". Maybe the change of name is appropriate.