The attack on women's boundaries smacks of mentitlement. Misogynists have always found women's boundaries offensive because boundaries restrict mentitlement. The so-called trans rights movement is as misogynistic and patriarchal a movement as I've ever seen. They're just using the language of progressivism and social justice to achieve the same ends.
Completely agree with your assessment of the genderborg's part in the current backlash. The narrative I keep seeing being peddled is that the DfE's review on its guidance for schools on how to deal with gender issues will be the new Section 28. So not only are they appropriating actual historic discrimination against gay people, they are being completely disingenuous about a very real need for clarification given the part they've played in making this review necessary. But it strikes me that the ultimate outright duplicity in all this is that Stonewall & Co. have essentially already enacted their own Section-28-by-stealth by redefining same-sex attraction out of existence!
Can you talk about the fight-back in Ottawa - Christians and Muslims joining forces re. indoctrination in schools? And, Rye College?
Thank you.
Thanks for the info about Wickes. Will never shop there again.
So, now that the issue has been debated, what is the result? Does it require Parliament to take any action?
The attack on women's boundaries smacks of mentitlement. Misogynists have always found women's boundaries offensive because boundaries restrict mentitlement. The so-called trans rights movement is as misogynistic and patriarchal a movement as I've ever seen. They're just using the language of progressivism and social justice to achieve the same ends.
My weekly dose of sanity, thank you chaps!
Completely agree with your assessment of the genderborg's part in the current backlash. The narrative I keep seeing being peddled is that the DfE's review on its guidance for schools on how to deal with gender issues will be the new Section 28. So not only are they appropriating actual historic discrimination against gay people, they are being completely disingenuous about a very real need for clarification given the part they've played in making this review necessary. But it strikes me that the ultimate outright duplicity in all this is that Stonewall & Co. have essentially already enacted their own Section-28-by-stealth by redefining same-sex attraction out of existence!