Why was this ignored to begin with?

Because taking legal action against an almost bankrupt organisation, over an issue with mentally-ill patients, is always money well spent.
Lawyers must think every day is Christmas. 😀

Meanwhile , back in real life, heart and cancer patients are added to the waiting list, and people who want their cock cut off jump right to the front.
 
What is shameful is the sight of politicians pandering to this nonsense so they don't upset the right on blue hair brigade, corporations capitulating so they don't get targeted by activists and lose profit, and the police acting like the Gestapo to enforce this year's liberal loony fashion.

Shame on you all.

Everyone who has suffered because of this should be compensated.
 
The entire farce has been a fine example of collective hysteria. The Trans stuff was the Fentanyl for the virtue signaling addiction that took hold of a significant, and powerful, minority of the Anglo world (this madness never really had the impact in places like Germany and France.

This kind of thing is not uncommon in late stage civilisations. What matters now is if they try to challenge this in the future.

What I want to see are the court cases against people who actively assisted in the maiming and permanent damaging of mentally ill adolescent children. This goes way beyond the local loon deciding to wear a frock and proclaim himself as a 'lady'. Girls were literally rendered sterile before they were old enough to vote. There HAS to be people losing their liberty now. For a long, long time.
 
Didn't stop the BBC running a storyline in "Doctors" where anything anti alphabet people is vilified and hated on, and one of the lead doctors in it turns up to work in a nurses uniform, to make a point, except he's serious.
 
Matov said:
The entire farce has been a fine example of collective hysteria. The Trans stuff was the Fentanyl for the virtue signaling addiction that took hold of a significant, and powerful, minority of the Anglo world (this madness never really had the impact in places like Germany and France.

This kind of thing is not uncommon in late stage civilisations. What matters now is if they try to challenge this in the future.

What I want to see are the court cases against people who actively assisted in the maiming and permanent damaging of mentally ill adolescent children. This goes way beyond the local loon deciding to wear a frock and proclaim himself as a 'lady'. Girls were literally rendered sterile before they were old enough to vote. There HAS to be people losing their liberty now. For a long, long time.
Click to expand...
I think you will be disappointed. I suspect you might agree, although our reasoning won’t be the same.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
To ensure everyone’s rights are protected is going to take a long time and a great deal of money. What will happen in the meantime is the bigger question.
Click to expand...
Sounds like there are far more pressing things to spend time and money on than trying to deny that there are biological genders.
I will actually state that I believe there are some genuine trans people - however, nowhere near the numbers mooted. What huge rights are to be protected? Trans people's rights over women's rights - is that genuinely going to be worth it?
I think people are fed up with minority rights being championed ad nauseam whilst the majority aren't even allowed to openly oppose what they disagree with. I think you might find this to be the crux of the issue that is creating the populist politics you so despise.
However, I genuinely doubt you'll want to see that.
 
ASCPFC said:
Sounds like there are far more pressing things to spend time and money on than trying to deny that there are biological genders.
I will actually state that I believe there are some genuine trans people - however, nowhere near the numbers mooted. What huge rights are to be protected? Trans people's rights over women's rights - is that genuinely going to be worth it?
I think people are fed up with minority rights being championed ad nauseam whilst the majority aren't even allowed to openly oppose what they disagree with. I think you might find this to be the crux of the issue that is creating the populist politics you so despise.
However, I genuinely doubt you'll want to see that.
Click to expand...
Did anyone ever truly deny there are “biological” genders? I don’t think they did, or do. It was always trying to find the right way to balance competing needs. Something the Supreme Court judgement hasn’t done, because it wasn’t asked to.

“Biological” women now have the security of knowing that the toilets, changing rooms, etc they use will not be used by “biological” men. Which solves one problem but creates another.

“Biological” men who identify, dress and behave as women must now use male facilities or search for shared ones. Which aren’t yet widely available. I think should they use male facilities they would be at much greater risk than a “biological” women would be if they used female facilities.

The consequence of which will undoubtedly be a move to shared facilities. Something that has already started but will add cost and take time. Whilst in Germany recently I saw the ideal solution to the toilet issue. Shared facilities, with a single entrance, charged for by card entry. A area of male only urinals, screened from view by others, and another of closets and wash hand basins open to all. No one seemed discomforted in any way using them.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Did anyone ever truly deny there are “biological” genders? I don’t think they did, or do. It was always trying to find the right way to balance competing needs. Something the Supreme Court judgement hasn’t done, because it wasn’t asked to.

“Biological” women now have the security of knowing that the toilets, changing rooms, etc they use will not be used by “biological” men. Which solves one problem but creates another.

“Biological” men who identify, dress and behave as women must now use male facilities or search for shared ones. Which aren’t yet widely available. I think should they use male facilities they would be at much greater risk than a “biological” women would be if they used female facilities.

The consequence of which will undoubtedly be a move to shared facilities. Something that has already started but will add cost and take time. Whilst in Germany recently I saw the ideal solution to the toilet issue. Shared facilities, with a single entrance, charged for by card entry. A area of male only urinals, screened from view by others, and another of closets and wash hand basins open to all. No one seemed discomforted in any way using them.
Click to expand...
Why on earth should we go to trouble and expense in pandering to sexual deviants?
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Did anyone ever truly deny there are “biological” genders? I don’t think they did, or do. It was always trying to find the right way to balance competing needs. Something the Supreme Court judgement hasn’t done, because it wasn’t asked to.

“Biological” women now have the security of knowing that the toilets, changing rooms, etc they use will not be used by “biological” men. Which solves one problem but creates another.

“Biological” men who identify, dress and behave as women must now use male facilities or search for shared ones. Which aren’t yet widely available. I think should they use male facilities they would be at much greater risk than a “biological” women would be if they used female facilities.

The consequence of which will undoubtedly be a move to shared facilities. Something that has already started but will add cost and take time. Whilst in Germany recently I saw the ideal solution to the toilet issue. Shared facilities, with a single entrance, charged for by card entry. A area of male only urinals, screened from view by others, and another of closets and wash hand basins open to all. No one seemed discomforted in any way using them.
Click to expand...
In my previous university, the disabled toilets were made gender neutral and disabled toilets. There was no outcry - it was pretty practical really. Will that be acceptable? I'll guess at not.
 
ASCPFC said:
Sounds like there are far more pressing things to spend time and money on than trying to deny that there are biological genders.
I will actually state that I believe there are some genuine trans people - however, nowhere near the numbers mooted. What huge rights are to be protected? Trans people's rights over women's rights - is that genuinely going to be worth it?
I think people are fed up with minority rights being championed ad nauseam whilst the majority aren't even allowed to openly oppose what they disagree with. I think you might find this to be the crux of the issue that is creating the populist politics you so despise.
However, I genuinely doubt you'll want to see that.
Click to expand...

In my view the whole problem started (and it was highly funded) when the culture started promoting the word 'women' and 'men' next to trans......That indoctrinated a lot of the left and 'go alongs' into believing that just believing you are another sex was a good enough metric to access their previously off limits spaces....obviously especially women's, as apparently if you're a bloke you are hardly allowed any for some messed up reason.

The term for most of my life was 'Trans-sexual' and until we go back to that then common sense will never prevail.

Trans-sexuals like Blair White, who is on the right, has been saying this for sometime.

We had Quentin Crisp when I was a lad and Boy George and others and they all had successful careers. No one was going around saying that we were extinguishing 'trans' people or their lives, because that is utter bullsh1te that modern day mentally ill activists are just allowed to constantly promote in the media because essentially our institutions are full of the kind of people who want to push this crap.
 
Stirlingsays said:
In my view the whole problem started (and it was highly funded) when the culture started promoting the word 'women' and 'men' next to trans......That indoctrinated a lot of the left and 'go alongs' into believing that just believing you are another sex was a good enough metric to access their previously off limits spaces....obviously especially women's, as apparently if you're a bloke you are hardly allowed any for some messed up reason.

The term for most of my life was 'Trans-sexual' and until we go back to that then common sense will never prevail.

Trans-sexuals like Blair White, who is on the right, has been saying this for sometime.

We had Quentin Crisp when I was a lad and Boy George and others and they all had successful careers. No one was going around saying that we were extinguishing 'trans' people or their lives, because that is utter bullsh1te that modern day mentally ill activists are just allowed to constantly promote in the media because essentially our institutions are full of the kind of people who want to push this crap.
Click to expand...
Activists are to blame for all of this nonsense.

How many of them are the same people from Just Stop Oil, Free Palestine or any number of other student/loony organisations?
 
Hrolf The Ganger said:
Activists are to blame for all of this nonsense.

How many of them are the same people from Just Stop Oil, Free Palestine or any number of other student/loony organisations?
Click to expand...

The activists were always there, it's the huge amounts of money and access that was behind it.

Our institutions promote it even now after the judgement and that's no accident......They will look for workarounds.
 
Stirlingsays said:
The activists were always there, it's the huge amounts of money and access that was behind it.

Our institutions promote it even now after the judgement and that's no accident......They will look for workarounds.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
 
Sooner or later reality always kicks in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top