Amnesty Ireland make it clear… …they no longer protect vulnerable women New Irish feminist group The Countess Didn’t Fight For This are playing a blinder at the moment. They wrote to Amnesty Ireland after the recent Barbie Kardashian fiasco, in which a troubled and dangerous young man was placed with female prisoners in Limerick Women’s prison.
The cultural capture EVERYWHERE by trans ideology is utterly frightening. What is it - mass institutionalised misogyny or merely a fear of being seen as bigots? People's brains have gone out the windows as a result. I suspect a bit of both, I spent a tedious while conversing with a TRA last night and all RATIONAL argument was met with "you’re a terf you’re just hiding behind concern for women and children because you’re a bigot who hates trans people" 😴 - the woman-hating was strong with that one. With Amnesty it may just be desperation to be seen to be at all times Right Thinking. 🙄
GOOD MAN Kevin Price!!! Hero (despite scary mahoosive beard that I’m sure I could see soup in)
Aoife Martin is a tool. I presume a "transbian"? Makes me actually angry that his mug was broadcast on some building to "celebrate women" - he’s Ireland’s Poundshop Caitlyn Jenner.
Amnesty's answer highlights what's going wrong here well, inadvertently: "Any differential treatment of any person based on their identity is discrimination unless there is a clear objective justification".
In this case, what is the objective justification for treating this male differently from other males based on his "identity"? THEY'RE proposing that, not us. We're proposing NOT treating him differently.
If Barbie were placed in a men's prison, it would not be because of his "identity" at all, we'd be ignoring it and doing it because of his sex, with clear objective justification - the same justification we use for all the other males, who we all put together in a male prison, away from females.
This makes as much sense as saying that gingers need to go in female prisons and to put ginger males in male prisons is discrimination on the basis of being ginger.
There really does need to be some test case brought in a situation like this by a random male demanding to know why he's being discriminated against - why are certain other males (trans/ginger) being permitted into women's spaces, but not all males? It's not clear that this is legal (at least in the UK) - there is a "female-only" discrimination exemption, but not an arbitrary "exclude some males".
"Forcing transgender women into all-male prisons or prison wings instead would not be justifiable, however - this would also make them vulnerable to sexual harrassment, assault and rape".
Forcing ANY person into an all-male prison, including ginger males, has the same effect. But we do it anyway, for all males. To allow the lower-risk female prison to continue to exist, protecting a large chunk of the prison population. Mixing prisons would not make men safer, but it would make women less safe. (Dark thought: actually, it might reduce male-on-male rape, but the total amount certainly wouldn't decrease).
Maybe a GNC male, or a ginger, might be at higher risk than some other males in a male prison, but male prisons are the best place to deal with vulnerable male prisoners, and are well used to doing it.
What they think they can get here is "special privileges" for people like Barbie to be the only male in an otherwise-all-female prison, so Barbie can be the only safe male in the prison system.
This obviously is shit for women, but on top of that doesn't even work once you've got multiple Barbies. (But maybe Amnesty thinks that putting enough TiMs into a space just creates a pillow-fight sleepover party).
Didn't Debbie Hayton quip at some point about the "transgender wing" in some women's prison - "I'd rather take my chances in the men's"...
On a different note, I have something to share which I think is important. It's close to my heart, about the sudden take-over (one of many QT/GI-take overs) of midwifery and birthing organizations in the US just a few years ago. I love how personal this discussion is, but particularly appreciate Courtney's explicit memory of the sudden change/take-over at a major convention of the largest midwifery org in the US & Canada. This is valuable, because though I'm convinced many other orgs were captured as radically and decisively, many of those effected were too confused to see, understand and articulate what was happening until later. Isabella and Courtney here make visceral the horror of what is unrolling around the world.
I urge you and any others here who may be interested, to watch. Do understand, these women, and the professional organizations discussed, come from the point of view of supporting natural birth. This interview is not against women who've had emergency deliveries.
The cultural capture EVERYWHERE by trans ideology is utterly frightening. What is it - mass institutionalised misogyny or merely a fear of being seen as bigots? People's brains have gone out the windows as a result. I suspect a bit of both, I spent a tedious while conversing with a TRA last night and all RATIONAL argument was met with "you’re a terf you’re just hiding behind concern for women and children because you’re a bigot who hates trans people" 😴 - the woman-hating was strong with that one. With Amnesty it may just be desperation to be seen to be at all times Right Thinking. 🙄
GOOD MAN Kevin Price!!! Hero (despite scary mahoosive beard that I’m sure I could see soup in)
Aoife Martin is a tool. I presume a "transbian"? Makes me actually angry that his mug was broadcast on some building to "celebrate women" - he’s Ireland’s Poundshop Caitlyn Jenner.
Thanks for as ever enlightening update 💕
Amnesty's answer highlights what's going wrong here well, inadvertently: "Any differential treatment of any person based on their identity is discrimination unless there is a clear objective justification".
In this case, what is the objective justification for treating this male differently from other males based on his "identity"? THEY'RE proposing that, not us. We're proposing NOT treating him differently.
If Barbie were placed in a men's prison, it would not be because of his "identity" at all, we'd be ignoring it and doing it because of his sex, with clear objective justification - the same justification we use for all the other males, who we all put together in a male prison, away from females.
This makes as much sense as saying that gingers need to go in female prisons and to put ginger males in male prisons is discrimination on the basis of being ginger.
There really does need to be some test case brought in a situation like this by a random male demanding to know why he's being discriminated against - why are certain other males (trans/ginger) being permitted into women's spaces, but not all males? It's not clear that this is legal (at least in the UK) - there is a "female-only" discrimination exemption, but not an arbitrary "exclude some males".
"Forcing transgender women into all-male prisons or prison wings instead would not be justifiable, however - this would also make them vulnerable to sexual harrassment, assault and rape".
Forcing ANY person into an all-male prison, including ginger males, has the same effect. But we do it anyway, for all males. To allow the lower-risk female prison to continue to exist, protecting a large chunk of the prison population. Mixing prisons would not make men safer, but it would make women less safe. (Dark thought: actually, it might reduce male-on-male rape, but the total amount certainly wouldn't decrease).
Maybe a GNC male, or a ginger, might be at higher risk than some other males in a male prison, but male prisons are the best place to deal with vulnerable male prisoners, and are well used to doing it.
What they think they can get here is "special privileges" for people like Barbie to be the only male in an otherwise-all-female prison, so Barbie can be the only safe male in the prison system.
This obviously is shit for women, but on top of that doesn't even work once you've got multiple Barbies. (But maybe Amnesty thinks that putting enough TiMs into a space just creates a pillow-fight sleepover party).
Didn't Debbie Hayton quip at some point about the "transgender wing" in some women's prison - "I'd rather take my chances in the men's"...
Thanks, Graham, as always, for these updates.
On a different note, I have something to share which I think is important. It's close to my heart, about the sudden take-over (one of many QT/GI-take overs) of midwifery and birthing organizations in the US just a few years ago. I love how personal this discussion is, but particularly appreciate Courtney's explicit memory of the sudden change/take-over at a major convention of the largest midwifery org in the US & Canada. This is valuable, because though I'm convinced many other orgs were captured as radically and decisively, many of those effected were too confused to see, understand and articulate what was happening until later. Isabella and Courtney here make visceral the horror of what is unrolling around the world.
I urge you and any others here who may be interested, to watch. Do understand, these women, and the professional organizations discussed, come from the point of view of supporting natural birth. This interview is not against women who've had emergency deliveries.
I hope you have time to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPxvauautQE&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1-Ds3zLq63WbLygBzALjnyPf4XixgeHSTMZevl9pETuU28g_zY74uudmI
Hello Graham,
I will paste below the reply which I received from Channel 4. No surprises here, but I thought you would like to know anyway.
Dear Ms Winfield,
Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding The IT Crowd.
To read Channel 4's statement as regards this episode, please go to our blog post which we have linked below.
https://www.channel4.com/4viewers/blog/ITCrowd
We have made a note of your comments for the team responsible for this programme.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact us. We appreciate all feedback from our viewers; complimentary or otherwise.
Regards,
Francesca Murray
Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries
For information about Channel 4 have a look at our FAQ section at www.channel4.com/4viewers/faqs
Your message :
Submitted on Tue, 20/10/2020 - 20:03
Submitted by: Anonymous
Submitted values are:
Step 1
------
Source: Direct
Title: Ms
First Name: Una-Jane
Last Name: Winfield
Email: unajwinfield@gmail.com
Postcode: W6 9TA
My message is about: All 4 or All 4+- on demand website and apps
Step 2
------
All 4
-----
I watch All 4 via *: All4.com website
Technical
---------
Is this a technical issue?: No
All4 plus non-technical
-----------------------
My All 4+ query is about: Programmes
Step 3
------
My message:
Dear Sirs,
I understand you are removing the IT Crowd episode ?The Speech? from your
replay schedule. This is a ridiculous and cowardly decision which will not
achieve the aims which you want.
The IT Crowd is a unique BAFTA-winning series. It is brilliant and perfectly
crafted and extremely funny - this is humour which has kept its relevance.
The series deserves to be broadcast in its entirety. I do not believe that
you are pulling this episode because of ?house cleaning? while so many
other comedies which are in fact much more ?offensive? remain untouched
and on your platform.
Supporters of Graham Linehan and "The IT Crowd" have noticed that you are
enabling a co-ordinated harassment campaign against the series writer which
has nothing whatsoever to do with his work. This harrassment is narrowly
targetted and relentless, designed to ruin the career of a brilliant comedy
writer. By removing the episode in question, you are caving into bullies and
allowing activists to influence your policy. This sets a dangerous precedent
now and forever: censorship by extremists has always backfired.
The Channel 4 statement that trans people are more susceptible to violence
than anyone else is not supported by the statistics; trans people are one of
the safest demographics in the UK. For examples of criminal attacks whether
as victims or offenders see
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftranscrimeuk.com%2F2017%2F11%2F16%2Ftrans-homicides-in-the-uk-a-closer-look-at-the-numbers%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cc4webform%40concentrix.com%7C4dc8604f75ee48be97c508d8753acad5%7C599e51d62f8c43478e591f795a51a98c%7C0%7C0%7C637388242655516122%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=nJQxhuqztbr419QH50qN5iHic6QxUhVxQXP%2BXZSegKs%3D&reserved=0.
The numbers are minute. Unfortunately many transwomen seem to become "sex
workers" and, like other prostitutes, suffer victimization because of their
work and status, not their "gender identity".
Furthermore, you write that the position of trans people in society is
?vulnerable and some way from being legitimised?. This is simply not
credible. It is more true to say that a handful of insincere complaints by
well-connected and intolerant narcissists spooked you into pulling an episode
from one of the best and most successful comedy series your channel has ever
produced! I cannot think of any other social group with such influence and
power.
On a more general note, I am alarmed to see you?re allowing a particular
ideology - gender identity ideology - to dictate your output. This sort of
mob-led censorship has no place in any sector of the arts, but particularly
not in comedy.
Yours sincerely,
Una-Jane Winfield
I agree to having my details passed to the production company if necessary.:
Yes
Good God! The fellow shown above (trolling a women's only dating app) is surely trans age, too? 23 my arse! What a disgusting creep.