Or, codify the idea that anyone running a business open to the public can legally choose to segregate by either gender identity or sex at birth and just let the market decide. I'm beyond sick of activists on both sides demanding that their preferred solution must be applied across the board.
Or, codify the idea that anyone running a business open to the public can legally choose to segregate by either gender identity or sex at birth and just let the market decide. I'm beyond sick of activists on both sides demanding that their preferred solution must be applied across the board.
Ok, fine for any private/member facility, but it seems like a place of public accommodation should have uniform access rules when they are opening their doors to the public at large? Also, the market will surely decide what politics the proprietor has by inference, resulting in yet more of the same demonstrations, etc?
Well yeah, but traditional chivalry relies on traditional values by nature, restating the conservative view. The more liberal would have a very different take on what modern chivalry looks like.
Rather a lot of people pointing out the double standards going on after the Met police chief declared that he had no alternative but to arrest Glinner under current legislation. This thread is good.
Also the numerous threads pointing out that if you're burgled or your bicycle is stolen or you're assaulted in the street the most you'll get from the police is a crime reference number.
While I agree regarding the police hypocrisy, especially given the harassment of anyone daring to point out the Israeli ethnic cleansing in Gaza, the (alleged) actions of Linehan were atrocious.
Many restaurants are kid friendly, others not so much. Some places say you must to be this tall to ride, others that you only need to be this tall. Korean spas have separate floors based on gender identity in California, birth sex in Texas. Hell, there was once a pizza place in my kids' hometown where they banned three specific officials due to a zoning dispute.
We used to have this expression, "It's a free country!" and we might well consider revisiting the idea.
- Challenge what a pro-Palestinian commenter has said on social media, and six officers will show up on your doorstep, and handcuff you while they search your house, including your wife's underwear drawer
- Post a comedic Tweet advising women to punch intransigent men "in the balls" if they refuse to leave you alone in a toilet, and five Policemen armed with GUNS will come and arrest you at the airport as you step off the aircraft.
And now you're just parroting the right-wing lies. You don't seem to want to educate your self about the actual facts of the case. Let me give you a few starters.
1. Linehan was arrested by armed police because they were operating at an airport.
2. Linehan's actions go far, far, beyond that tweet. He carried out a relentless, long term, campaign of harassment against a trans teenager, including confronting her in public, assaulting her, damaging her phone and alleging she engaged in child sexual exploitation.
But then it seems you don't care about the harassment of a woman if she doesn't pass you tests for sufficient femininity.
While I agree regarding the police hypocrisy, especially given the harassment of anyone daring to point out the Israeli ethnic cleansing in Gaza, the (alleged) actions of Linehan were atrocious.
There is no ethnic cleansing happening in Gaza. That is a frauduent claim being propagandized by biased media. There are, however, terrorist actions still being perpetrated by Hamas, and have been ever since October 7, 2023 - the terrorist action that kicked all this off. People like you seem to always conveniently forget that.
Which ones?
1. The very reasonable expression of hate for misogynists?
2. Stating correctly that bunch of protesters peeing in the street smell bad?
3. Giving perfectly reasonable advice to women being harassed in the women's toilets by men, to make noise to gain attention, then call the police, and as a last resort "punch them in the balls" to make them leave?
Which of these actions is "atrocious", and why?
Why are trans activists carrying placards imploring people to kill other people not "atrocious" actions, and why do they get a free pass while Linehan gets arrested by armed Police?
Is it really? Seems to me that the segregationists have well and thoroughly lost the culture.
We don't need laws to protect us from ideas which people don't want to implement, which is how we can know that the people who wrote the Old Testament had an ongoing problem with sheep-shaggers.
Prosecution tells hearing Father Ted writer’s posts about Sophia Brooks, 18, were ‘oppressive and unacceptable’
www.theguardian.com
This isn't an objective representation of events (most of which can be summed up as Linehan being mean to Brooks), but it does contain the allegations, which go beyond the tweets originally cited. The cell phone thing in particular isn't simply speech. Here's footage from Brooks' phone of that event:
Note that you can't see what Brooks is doing, so this video gives a very incomplete picture of the event, but it's still clear that Brooks approached Linehan, not Linehan approaching Brooks. And that's extremely relevant.
Meanwhile, I kind of suspect that the bathroom access debate is happening only because some trans allies view it as the only clutchable pearl left, now that fiat self-ID and trans-affirming medicine for minors are being dismantled.
You're a good person, and a trans rights ally. But you can't in good conscience support any of the trans rights agenda. Or can you? Can fiat self-ID still be worth something? Is there still some privilege we can afford trans-identified males?
I think that's what's going on. Even rational people sometimes struggle to give up cherished beliefs. Especially when those beliefs somehow speak to the moral character of the believer.
Meanwhile, I kind of suspect that the bathroom access debate is happening only because some trans allies view it as the only clutchable pearl left, now that fiat self-ID and trans-affirming medicine for minors are being dismantled.
You're a good person, and a trans rights ally. But you can't in good conscience support any of the trans rights agenda. Or can you? Can fiat self-ID still be worth something? Is there still some privilege we can afford trans-identified males?
I think that's what's going on. Even rational people sometimes struggle to give up cherished beliefs. Especially when those beliefs somehow speak to the moral character of the believer.
Probably a lot of truth here. My only quibble is that I don't see it as extending a privilege, but as acknowledging that it's where they should be. I know that gets into the whole "but it's *not* where they *should* be" argument, but that's... the whole argument.
@catsmate
OK, I'll pay your silly game. I'll post the evidence you asked for - not that it will make any difference to you. You will just handwave it away as usual, or pretend it doesn't exist, or claim the sources are all tranny-bashing right wing media outlets (although how you reconcile this with the most ideologically captured news outlet in the UK, the BBC, will be entertaining to watch).
The UK is not an "Orwellian society", warns a judge as he rules officers interfered with freedom of speech.
www.bbc.com
The court found the force's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with his right to freedom of expression.
Officers visited Mr Miller's workplace and then spoke with him on the phone, and he was left with the impression "that he might be prosecuted if he continued to tweet", according to a judge.
Speaking after the ruling, Mr Miller, from Lincolnshire, said: "This is a watershed moment for liberty - the police were wrong to visit my workplace, wrong to 'check my thinking'."
Among his most heinous Tweets was this one - I was assigned mammal at birth, but my orientation is fish. Don't mis-species me."
This man is intimidated away from the road by cops, while the other man, who was harassing him while carrying a Palestinian flag, is allowed to continue his actions unchallenged - a clear example of biased, two tier policing.
- Challenge what a pro-Palestinian commenter has said on social media, and six officers will show up on your doorstep, and handcuff you while they search your house, including your wife's underwear drawer.
Officers searched through personal belongings, including newspaper cuttings about his daughter's death and his wife's underwear. He was detained for eight hours before accepting a caution out of fear it would affect visits to his surviving daughter in Australia.
- Post a comedic Tweet advising women to punch intransigent men "in the balls" if they refuse to leave you alone in a toilet, and five Policemen armed with GUNS will come and arrest you at the airport as you step off the aircraft.
And now you're just parroting the right-wing lies. You don't seem to want to educate your self about the actual facts of the case. Let me give you a few starters.
1. Linehan was arrested by armed police because they were operating at an airport.
2. Linehan's actions go far, far, beyond that tweet. He carried out a relentless, long term, campaign of harassment against a trans activist teenager (with a history of violent protest actions), including confronting herhim in public, assaulting herhim damaging herhis phone and alleging shehe engaged in child sexual exploitation.
The Father Ted creator is on trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court days after a separate arrest at Heathrow.
www.bbc.com
Mr Linehan told police it did not amount to harassment. He also said exposing the tactics of trans activists was in the public interest, and that knocking the phone was a "reflex response", the court heard.
This trial is not connected to the allegations that led to his much-publicised arrest at Heathrow Airport on Monday.
He said he was met by five armed officers over messages he had previously posted about trans people on X, sparking a backlash from some public figures and politicians, and inflaming a fierce debate about policing and free speech.
Probably a lot of truth here. My only quibble is that I don't see it as extending a privilege, but as acknowledging that it's where they should be. I know that gets into the whole "but it's *not* where they *should* be" argument, but that's... the whole argument.
Who exactly is "they"? You've never actually given a workable answer to that. You've appealed to GRCs, but those are not actually workable. Isla Bryson could get a GRC.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
archive.is
www.andrewdoyle.org
www.theguardian.com
www.bbc.com
