Also in the News - Part 2

[urban.spaceman]

12 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

BBC got a quote of some random saying she had "had enough". 

 

Very odd. 

Do they mean Stuegeon or Scotland?

[LiberalFox]

That's a bit sad if that's the case. I don't want Indy but she's been a good ally for human rights. 

[Otis]

1 minute ago, LiberalFox said:

That's a bit sad if that's the case. I don't want Indy but she's been a good ally for human rights. 

Except for adult human female rights. You know the ones that she thought it was OK for biological males to share private spaces with.

 

[Dunge]

Sturgeon’s one of those people to me where I disagree with her a lot but I respect her just as much as an “opponent”. She’s a powerful leader and orator who means well even if I take major issue with her policies.

 

Surely great news for Labour if she’s stepping down as I can’t see the next SNP leader being so dominant.

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, Dunge said:

Sturgeon’s one of those people to me where I disagree with her a lot but I respect her just as much as an “opponent”. She’s a powerful leader and orator who means well even if I take major issue with her policies.

 

Surely great news for Labour if she’s stepping down as I can’t see the next SNP leader being so dominant.

Most of the SNP’s other prominent senior figures come across as completely insane, so it will be interesting to see who they go for.

[BKLFox]

20 hours ago, BKLFox said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64584541

 

It's going to happen sadly, football "fans" believe they have the right to do & say what ever they want to another human being be it face to face or on a social platform, these people obviously haven't had enough jeopardy within their own lives to be able to stop, think & say.. it's just a game!

👏 Graham Potter, for calling out the media on why he didn’t show anger when Chelsea didn’t get the pen v WHam, with the media were basically saying they wanted him to.

 

In his pre-match press conference before Chelsea's Champions League tie against Borussia Dortmund on Wednesday, Potter was asked what does make him angry and replied: "Apart from these questions? I must be careful not to get into a discussion with the media."

He continued: "Of course, I get angry. I am a human being just like you. But I choose to conduct myself the way I choose to conduct myself on the side.

"The same media talking about me [needing to be] more angry are then running stories about the problems of referees in grassroots football and don't see the connection.

"It is an emotional thing. I have a responsibility to myself, Chelsea and the game to act the right way for me.
 

again 👏 

 

Never sat right with me when poster used this lack of emotion as a stick to hit Rodgers with and used the example of Pep, Klopp, Conte, Jose [insert a few others] as to how they would like their manager to act, flick flaking down the sideline or getting up in the 4th officials grill? Yeah perfect way to conduct yourself!

 

How people can’t see that Of course there is a direct connection to what these managers & players do & say to what happens out on the park Saturday/ Sunday morning, people mimic what they see even down to the kids robotic movements & goal celebrations seen on FIFA for goodness sake.

 

Passion’a, what a load of old bull.

 

[Scotch]

I'm am SNP voter amd will be until the point that we get independence but admittedly, they are getting harder and harder to defend over the last few years and I think it's right for a change in leadership. 

[Sampson]

5 minutes ago, Scotch said:

I'm am SNP voter amd will be until the point that we get independence but admittedly, they are getting harder and harder to defend over the last few years and I think it's right for a change in leadership. 

Interesting to see who you get into replace. SNP is quite a broad church with politicians across the whole spectrum.

 

I've heard Kate Forbes talked about for example, but how would an evangelical Christian who is famously anti-abortion and voted against the Gender Recognition Act go down in Scotland? Especially amongst younger voters, who are more likely to vote SNP and be pro-independence, but also are way less religious and more in favour of Trans rights or legalised abortions.

Think Sturgeon was a great speaker and a big part of the increased independence movement following the referendum. Always heard loads of English people saying Sturgeon was hands down the best leader and speaker of the major parties, even if they couldn't vote for her and didn't want Scotland to get independence, so it's a huge appointment for the future of the UK and the Scottish independence movement coming up.

[leicsmac]

45 minutes ago, Otis said:

Except for adult human female rights. You know the ones that she thought it was OK for biological males to share private spaces with.

 

... it's rather darkly ironically amusing how this particular issue is a lightning rod for a lot of people concerning women's rights... but when other examples concerning that particular matter arise, nary a peep from the same people.

 

It's almost as if (and I'm just spitballing here) the thoughts are almost entirely performative self-gratifying dunking on a demographic considered somehow inferior for whatever debunked reason and has nothing actually to do with the welfare of women at all.

[foxy boxing]

She was the best of all the political leaders but like all politicians they want their cake and to eat it! 

She wanted independence yet wanted to keep the pound. 

She wanted a independent Scotland yet wanted to remain shackled to the EU.

She's let the whole trans rights destroy her. 

It was incredibly dangerous having a trans rapist inside a female prison. 

 

[Foxdiamond]

15 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

... it's rather darkly ironically amusing how this particular issue is a lightning rod for a lot of people concerning women's rights... but when other examples concerning that particular matter arise, nary a peep from the same people.

 

It's almost as if (and I'm just spitballing here) the thoughts are almost entirely performative self-gratifying dunking on a demographic considered somehow inferior for whatever debunked reason and has nothing actually to do with the welfare of women at all.

Have not some of the concerns come from women?

[leicsmac]

Just now, Foxdiamond said:

Have not some of the concerns come from women?

Certainly they have, certainly the concerns are in some cases legitimate and certainly they should be listened to.

 

However, I have no time for hangers-on using the issue only to disparage trans people who are mostly just trying to live their lives without being discriminated against, either institutionally or everyday.  Those people aren't interested in the balance and nuance needed to resolve this issue, and they're likely not interested in women's welfare beyond this either.

[Foxdiamond]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Certainly they have, certainly the concerns are in some cases legitimate and certainly they should be listened to.

 

However, I have no time for hangers-on using the issue only to disparage trans people who are mostly just trying to live their lives without being discriminated against, either institutionally or everyday.  Those people aren't interested in the balance and nuance needed to resolve this issue, and they're likely not interested in women's welfare beyond this either.

Agree with the points you have made

[Scotch]

25 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Interesting to see who you get into replace. SNP is quite a broad church with politicians across the whole spectrum.

 

I've heard Kate Forbes talked about for example, but how would an evangelical Christian who is famously anti-abortion and voted against the Gender Recognition Act go down in Scotland? Especially amongst younger voters, who are more likely to vote SNP and be pro-independence, but also are way less religious and more in favour of Trans rights or legalised abortions.

Think Sturgeon was a great speaker and a big part of the increased independence movement following the referendum. Always heard loads of English people saying Sturgeon was hands down the best leader and speaker of the major parties, even if they couldn't vote for her and didn't want Scotland to get independence, so it's a huge appointment for the future of the UK and the Scottish independence movement coming up.

I can't say that I know too much about Forbes but someone with those kind of views, I don't think will sway the votes too much one way or another. 

 

There is no getting away from the fact that the biggest factor on how the SNP will do and the direction Scotland goes in is Independance. You either vote for the SNP because of that or you vote against them because of that. I don't think the two groups you mentioned will change their opinion regardless of someone like Forbes. I don't see the younger Liberal voter shying away from independence because they don't agree with her abortion views and I don't see the older Conservative voter suddenly voting for independence because this religious lady who shares their view. It really depends on those 40 somethings who are still on the fence about the issue and getting someone who sways that vote but I really don't know anyone like that so it's hard to say who it would take to convince them. 

 

When it comes to independence (which is the same as saying, when it comes to the future of the SNP) I think it'll take more than a shiny new FM. It's going to take someone who will organise the party, set out a clear plan for what will happen to the country afterwards, and give people the stone cold facts on the matter on what they are really voting for because previously people voted either way against the idea of it as opposed to the realities of it. 

 

Once that is settled either way, then I think views like anti abortion and trans will become more important on how the country is run.

[Otis]

35 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

... it's rather darkly ironically amusing how this particular issue is a lightning rod for a lot of people concerning women's rights... but when other examples concerning that particular matter arise, nary a peep from the same people.

 

It's almost as if (and I'm just spitballing here) the thoughts are almost entirely performative self-gratifying dunking on a demographic considered somehow inferior for whatever debunked reason and has nothing actually to do with the welfare of women at all.

It has everything to do with the welfare of women, NS shown a complete disregard to. 

[leicsmac]

Just now, Otis said:

It has everything to do with the welfare of women, NS shown a complete disregard to. 

Then I must ask where the performative outrage at manifold other, much more common and often worse, offences against women is.

 

Otherwise, quite frankly, I've no reason to believe the above.

[Jattdogg]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

Some sort of scandal incoming?

The real woman behind taking prince harry's virginity? Lol

[Otis]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Then I must ask where the performative outrage at manifold other, much more common and often worse, offences against women is.

 

Otherwise, quite frankly, I've no reason to believe the above.

To be clear... are you saying I don't care about the welfare of women?

 

We're getting side tracked. I was pointing out NS human rights record is far from good, as per her gender reform nonsense which she ended up backing down on.

[FoyleFox]

2 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

Some sort of scandal incoming?

Krankies reunion tour?

[bovril]

quite the hill to die on

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, Otis said:

To be clear... are you saying I don't care about the welfare of women?

 

We're getting side tracked. I was pointing out NS human rights record is far from good, as per her gender reform nonsense which she ended up backing down on.

I'm saying that when someone seemingly only speaks up on this particular aspect of women's welfare (and indeed human rights) and not any other at this time, I'm inclined to hypothesise that they have more of a viewpoint on trans folks rather than that women's welfare, otherwise why only contribute then?

 

Of course, whether or not that's actually true or not is a matter between you and your own conscience - if you say it's so, I'll take it at face value.

 

Anyhow, I fear this may be getting a little political which is against current site ToU so I'll leave you with the right to reply. The only thing I'll add is that I have a personal stake in this and I will zealously defend friends of mine, good friends, from horrendously inaccurate and scientifically ignorant comments about them from those who would view them as something lesser simply because of who they are and hide behind a veneer of supposedly looking out for women (as long as they behave the way blokes want).

 

NB. To avoid getting "side-tracked" (though this whole conversation is highly relevant to Sturgeon), I think Sturgeon had the right idea but there would need to be due care in how it was applied, as there always is with such things.

Edited 15 February 2023 by leicsmac

[Tommy G]

Following their statement the Police are seemingly no further down the track in solving the Nicola Bulley case. 

[foxy boxing]

1 minute ago, Tommy G said:

Following their statement the Police are seemingly no further down the track in solving the Nicola Bulley case. 

They said she had vulnerabilities and was "high risk". Are they trying to suggest she commited suicide!. Do they think she went into the river voluntarily.

[Tommy G]

16 minutes ago, foxy boxing said:

They said she had vulnerabilities and was "high risk". Are they trying to suggest she commited suicide!. Do they think she went into the river voluntarily.

I don't think they have a scoobey personally

[Innovindil]

51 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm saying that when someone seemingly only speaks up on this particular aspect of women's welfare (and indeed human rights) and not any other at this time, I'm inclined to hypothesise that they have more of a viewpoint on trans folks rather than that women's welfare, otherwise why only contribute then?

I find it odd that this is your go to slap down whenever someone opposes anything regarding trans rights tbh. 

 

In Britain right now, what exactly other aspects of women's welfare aren't being addressed? Or even championed by the vast majority of people both on here and in the country as a whole? 

 

Not sure where you are expecting other people to contribute tbh, especially on here. Can't remember the last time I saw a thread about women's welfare. Probably about that scumbag copper who raped and killed that young woman, and iirc he was wiiiiiiiiidely comdemned by all colours of the spectrum.