Sunak. Men are men and women are women.

How on earth have we got to the stage where our politicians are going along with this?
Because it was framed as ‘be kind’, and presented as a tolerance issue. The whole script of the trans lobby is designed to portray dissenters as uncaring, reactionary and out of touch.

We see it on here - constant references to the 70s, comparisons with homophobia and even racism, how ‘young people’ are more accepting (as though they are a homogeneous mass with one mind between them), dubious figures about suicide risk that don’t correlate or screen out mental health issues that might have led to people trying to change their lives in the first place, paranoia about right-wing conspiracies along with the suggestion that anyone who questions the idea that sex can be changed is a ‘rabid righty’ - it’s all a deliberate attempt to narrow the Overton Window to the point where discussion is impossible.

It worked until recently, but some of the more egregious examples of trans extremism have made people realise that it is not about ‘inclusion’ at all, but about the imposition of a dangerous ideology, and politicians have realised that.

Doodledog

*How on earth have we got to the stage where our politicians are going along with this?*
Because it was framed as ‘be kind’, and presented as a tolerance issue. The whole script of the trans lobby is designed to portray dissenters as uncaring, reactionary and out of touch.

We see it on here - constant references to the 70s, comparisons with homophobia and even racism, how ‘young people’ are more accepting (as though they are a homogeneous mass with one mind between them), dubious figures about suicide risk that don’t correlate or screen out mental health issues that might have led to people trying to change their lives in the first place, paranoia about right-wing conspiracies along with the suggestion that anyone who questions the idea that sex can be changed is a ‘rabid righty’ - it’s all a deliberate attempt to narrow the Overton Window to the point where discussion is impossible.

It worked until recently, but some of the more egregious examples of trans extremism have made people realise that it is not about ‘inclusion’ at all, but about the imposition of a dangerous ideology, and politicians have realised that.

When you want to shift the Overton Window, what better way than to suggest a ridiculous and extreme concept - that a man can become a woman by a simple declaration that he is... then any thinking between that extreme and the middle point becomes more acceptable by comparison - thus shifting the window along a notch!

I agree. Wherever did this ‘gender neutral’ come from. You are born either male or female and I do think that all this nonsense tempts developing adolescents to experiment just because they can.

Yes, and a notch further away from an acceptance that women’s rights are as important as men’s.

Please could someone explain the ideology to me. Because on this I'm with the Chair of the London Assembly -Gender ideology- there's no such thing!

I agree with what you say Doodledog and just wish that Starmer and the Labour Party would now come out as strongly about this as Sunak and the Conservative Party have just done.I don’t care if it’s done for votes or not, just do it!!

Oreo

I agree with what you say Doodledog and just wish that Starmer and the Labour Party would now come out as strongly about this as Sunak and the Conservative Party have just done.I don’t care if it’s done for votes or not, just do it!!

So how has he "come out strongly" and what does it actually mean?
What is he going to do?
Personally I think it is just words and meaningless. He may claim to know what a man is and what a woman is, but he has absolutely no concept of what a poor person is, or of their needs.

In addition to crimes being incorrectly documented, some with the lie that a woman has committed rape, is the horrific fact that some victims have been forced to refer to their assailant in court as 'she' because between the alleged offence and appearing in court, the accused has decided to identify as a woman.

Sunak and the Conservative Party have just done. I don't care if it's done for votes or not, just do it!! yes Oreo just do it.

What does that have to do with this particular issue Glorianny? The answer is nothing.

Nice attempt at diversion, Glorianny. But you’re right about one thing.
Nobody who isn’t actually living in poverty now has any idea what it’s like today.
Even if you (generic) think you were poor when you were younger, it’s not the same.

I see no explanation of gender ideology then just attacks.
As for what Sunak intends to do- well you have really no idea (and I'm not sure he has!)

Oreo

I agree with what you say Doodledog and just wish that Starmer and the Labour Party would now come out as strongly about this as Sunak and the Conservative Party have just done.I don’t care if it’s done for votes or not, just do it!!

I agree that it would be good to have a clear idea about what either Sunak or Starmer would actually do about the problem if they were in power. Deeds, not words etc.

I am far from convinced that either man believes that men have cervixes or women have penises. They are both too intelligent for that. But they have both been scared of the bullying tactics used by the trans lobby. They know that had they refused to bow to Stonewall's demands they would have been accused of all the things I mentioned above, and until recently a significant number of people would have believed that protecting women meant being 'unkind', exclusionary, out of date, behaving like the homophobes and racists of the 70s.

I have a certain sympathy with Starmer, who took office when the LP had a very long way to go to become electable. He had to do a lot of no-doubt unpalatable things to turn things round. Sunak doesn't have that excuse - his party had a huge majority, and could have nipped the whole thing in the bud, but didn't.

Neither of them has behaved truly honourably, IMO. Sunak has no excuse for waiting until now to say anything, and it comes across as little more than a dig at Labour. Starmer's definition of 'woman' is not clear - when he says that 'women should have safe spaces' does he include transwomen in that?

This is why I believe the 'Transwomen Are Women' mantra was so important to the trans lobby, and also why I believe it is so dangerous. Messing with the language removes the ability to discuss in meaningful ways, and to take people at what may or may not be face value. It's insidious, and if I am out of touch, unkind, exclusionary etc for saying so, I really don't care.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Glorianny

Please could someone explain the ideology to me. Because on this I'm with the Chair of the London Assembly -Gender ideology- there's no such thing!

The ideology is that people can choose which sex they want to be.

That so-called 'gender' trumps biology (despite the obvious fact that gender is societally formed and is not innate at all).

That there is no need for safe spaces for biological women, as there is no difference between them and transwomen.

That men just need to say that they are women to become so, and thus gain access to anywhere that women can go, and compete against women in sports that require strength and are designed to test male bodies, and that women can say they are men and that will come true as well.

That children should be encouraged to believe that there are countless 'genders' and that they might be 'in the wrong body' - a concept that cannot be properly explained.

That a confused child who says that he or she is, in fact, the opposite sex should have this 'affirmed' by parents and schools, and that it should be legal for them to take puberty blockers and/or bind their breasts to prevent them from developing as nature intended.

That adolescents be given drugs that have radical effects, and that they will have to take them, at huge expense, for the rest of their lives.

And in common with most ideology it says that anyone not on board with all of that is a heretic and deserves to be silenced at all costs, with the use of threats if necessary.

It's not a cervix or a penis that makes a woman a woman or a man a man it's the chromosomes in their DNA.
Until science finds a way to manipulate this they are stuck with what they are born with however they feel.
My experiences in the hospital toilet did not really affect me but I could see the distress it caused the other elderly ladies especially the ones with Zimmer frames who really needed their husband's help. Their husband did not feel they could come into the ladies, so why did the chap feel he could and take up the time of three women getting himself organised and coming out like a street walker powdering his beard to hide it and pulling and tugging at what ever restrictive garment he had on.
What would have happened if he had gone into the Gents and done the same? He obviously felt safer with the non confrontational women and knew he could get away with it.

Well done Doodledog the ideology explained.

And in common with most ideology it says that anyone not on board with all of that is a heretic and deserves to be silenced at all costs, with the use of threats if necessary.

That so many organisations have been cowed into accepting and enforcing this is what I find so disturbing, it's as if intelligence and logic flew away.

Doodledog

Glorianny

Please could someone explain the ideology to me. Because on this I'm with the Chair of the London Assembly -Gender ideology- there's no such thing!

The ideology is that people can choose which sex they want to be.

That so-called 'gender' trumps biology (despite the obvious fact that gender is societally formed and is not innate at all).

That there is no need for safe spaces for biological women, as there is no difference between them and transwomen.

That men just need to say that they are women to become so, and thus gain access to anywhere that women can go, and compete against women in sports that require strength and are designed to test male bodies, and that women can say they are men and that will come true as well.

That children should be encouraged to believe that there are countless 'genders' and that they might be 'in the wrong body' - a concept that cannot be properly explained.

That a confused child who says that he or she is, in fact, the opposite sex should have this 'affirmed' by parents and schools, and that it should be legal for them to take puberty blockers and/or bind their breasts to prevent them from developing as nature intended.

That adolescents be given drugs that have radical effects, and that they will have to take them, at huge expense, for the rest of their lives.

And in common with most ideology it says that anyone not on board with all of that is a heretic and deserves to be silenced at all costs, with the use of threats if necessary.

But none of that is an ideology Doodledog
The definition is
a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy

What you have posted are ideas which are being used to cope with some very real problems in society which sadly society seems to be unable to cope with.
The solutions used may not have been perfect but they offered many parents and children a chance to find some happiness.
Now there is nothing and they are left in limbo..

And no one is being silenced.
Asking that the sensitivities of others be respected is not silencing people. It is saying you can preach your discrimination but not in my backyard. That's been the case for centuries hence the Battle of Cable Street.

Glorianny I knew that you would pick up on what you see as a difference in interpretation of the word 'ideology'. It's a shame GN don't have a bookie on here - I'd be worth a fortune if I could bet on your responses.

Here's another one for you:
Ideology' is a particularly slippery term that is still widely used in sociology. Its core meaning is identified as 'a set of beliefs treated as distinctive to a particular group or category of person'. There are many other definitions. Take your pick. All the same, what I posted is a system of ideas and ideals which form the basis of a number of policies in workplaces, hospitals, prisons, schools and other areas, which fits with your own choice of definition.

When you say 'now there is nothing', what do you mean?

Yes, people are being silenced - I say it again, just because you may have had no experience of trans dictatorship when you were in the workplace does not mean that it is not there now. And look at people like Graham Linehan, or Kathleen Stock, Allison Bailey etc etc. They may or may not gave been silenced because of the success of campaigns to stop it from happening, but the ideology decreed that they should have been, and it is absolutely the case that the attempt was made.

And please cease and desist with the unsubtle fascist digs? Your Cable Street reference is exactly the sort of thing I was talking about above - I rest my case .

Indeed.

Yes.

Sunak is saying/doing anything the right/boomers/bigots want to hear. And you’re being taken in by it. He doesn’t give a flying fuck in reality he just wants votes.

Buttonjugs

Sunak is saying/doing anything the right/boomers/bigots want to hear. And you’re being taken in by it. He doesn’t give a flying fuck in reality he just wants votes.

Oh, I think he's just wanting votes - not just from boomers/bigots or the right though . He'll already have a lot of their votes.

And again - this is a perfect example of what I was getting at above. Frame opposition to the idea that a man can be a woman on demand as something only the old, the rabid and the bigoted. It says a lot more about the people who do it than it does about those they attack, you know.

Nature plays some very cruel tricks on the human body. We see the external ones; indeed myriad TV programmes are made about people with astonishing physical difficulties.

I for one do not feel qualified to say that equally astonishing ‘tricks’ cannot occur with chromosomes.

That's a fair point, Bellzy. But it doesn't explain the surge in the number of people wanting to 'change sex' in the past ten years or so.

nothing like tory splitting, divide and rule, when will they realise it does not work......