Which things? The hoax?Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19820170.jk-rowling-guardian-claims-paper-pulled-poll-revealed-hoax/
Printable View
Which things? The hoax?Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19820170.jk-rowling-guardian-claims-paper-pulled-poll-revealed-hoax/
RebelNews :faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Absolute textbook example of fake news.
Sounds like a fudge from the Guardian 😉Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
To their credit I see they have included her among those nominated, which will likely bring them plenty flak from the more extreme trans activists.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/30/guardian-readers-nominate-their-person-of-the-year
The daft thing about the abuse she takes (and the pathetic haste with which those ropey young acting 'talents' who owe their careers to Rowling have turned on her lest they too be 'cancelled' for saying and believing things shared by the vast majority of the population) is that those who actually take the time to read what she had to say will see that her views are incredibly measured and sympathetic.
Have some of the Harry Potter cast spoke out against JK Rowling?!Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Your desperate to make this an issue.[emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
If JK Rowling has been cancelled then it’s the worst attempt in history given her book sales even now, 25 years in. [emoji23] As for attacking actors because they hold a different view? Are they not allowed?
This thread has been running three months and it’s at about 70 posts. Given how much we love to debate issues people care about, you’d think it would be much bigger?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-53023580Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
Some of the others, most notably Robbie Coltrane and Ralph Fiennes, however, have strongly supported her.
Thanks. Not sure Ron Weasley saying he stands with the trans community is worth a rant about actors owing their careers to Rowling though!Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
There's no fudge by the Guardian. Someone set up a hoax on them. That's all. You, like others, fell for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
No need to read the thread if you're not interested in it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Might not be a priority issue among the dozen or so regular (almost exclusively male?) posters on here but there's no doubt the trans debate has become a polarising national debate in recent years. If you work among the teenage/student community in particular it's eye-popping to see how fiery an issue it is.
Sure, Rowling's legacy makes her uncancellable but it doesn't mean she just needs to accept the c**p that gets thrown at her.
If the criticism centred around how poorly written the Harry Potter books are then I might have some sympathy for it...
What are your views on ‘trans rights’ in that case? Other than it being a national debate and people not being allowed to challenge JK Rowling?Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Anyone can criticise her if they like but to demonise her for believing in biological sex is absurd IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
I stand with her on that. As she points out if you erase the concept of sex you erase the lived reality of women. That's not a criticism of trans people, just a belief that we shouldn't abandon the current gender recognition legislation in favour of a gender free for all (ie whereby if a man simply says he's a woman he literally IS one - or vice versa). That, I feel, paves the way for as many practical issues as philosophical ones.
Haven’t seen her demonised on here?Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I never said she had been.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I wonder what drives all of this stuff. It seems to be having a hugely disproportionate influence on the Scottish Government?Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
My instinct is to say that a significant majority of people don't really care all that much and in simplistic terms would agree that if you have a cock, then you're a man. You have the right to remove said cock, if you meet the criteria etc, otherwise go and pay for it. Equally, this applies to possessors of tits and fannies.
We are entering the realms of absurdity when advice to pregnant woman, and I use the term woman here deliberately, because as we all know, only biological females have the capacity to give birth, omits references to motherhood etc. That turns the whole thing into farce.
It’s a hot topic for the Greens and due to the SNP/Green coalition that’s why it’s becoming more prominent. I’m sure they have to implement some sort of law by a certain date this year under the agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
Yep, gender reform bill to be introduced within the first year of this parliament. The price of getting the Greens on board. Essentially means a man can be legally declared a woman simply by stating he is one - and vice versa.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs4185
You would have thought the Greens had greener things to press an agenda with. Maybe starting with land use, planning processes and the demolition of so called green belt around our towns and cities.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
What a load of nonsense. Men should be able to call themselves women and live as one, as long as we agree there is a difference. It not fair but its true you were born a dude. You can't be a female rape counselor, you can't smash **** out of women in the ring. If you want to your pathetic get grip. I can't run the 100 metres at the European championships, its unfair but nature made me slow as ****Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Perfectly represents my views on this so much as I care.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’d say I’m not far away from this either. I’ll defend anyone’s right to dress and live as whatever gender makes them comfortable, and if they don’t want to call themselves a man OR a woman, so be it. It’s not harming anyone else and I’ll stand by them against any bullying or abuse they may get for their choices.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
But I’ll stop short of denying that men and women exist through being born that way.
A well known Green Councillor has an investment property in Edinburgh that he rents out at full price. Harps on about affordable housing etc to anyone who will listen though.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
Utter hypocrisy
If everyone felt that way it wouldn't be such a contentious issue. Decent summary here of what it's all about:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
https://www.theweek.co.uk/news/society/954778/the-trans-debate-a-fiercely-fought-battleground-in-uk-culture-wars
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
Your viewpoint is described nowadays as Gender Critical and would be widely condemned by many.
Though it sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
I imagine you're probably right, Keith. My use of the word gender rather than sex wasn't deliberate but I guess my failure to distinguish between the two would be condemned also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith_M
This is why I haven't ventured too far into this debate :greengrin
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/p...-quit-25880300
Harsh to treat him like this.
Love the comment at the end of the pieceQuote:
Originally Posted by James310
"I guess having been a member of the green party, potential employers have quickly realised that he has no employable skills. Why else would he have been a green msp, other than to join the gravy train!"
Andy Wightman was probably the most respected Green due to his work on land reform, but he wanted to vote to allow rape victims the choice to choose the sex of the person examining them after a rape, but the Greens (and Lib Dems) were against this so threatened him with expulsion from the party.Quote:
Originally Posted by w pilton hibby
Apparently that makes him transphobic, but I see nothing wrong with letting a woman choose a woman examiner after she has been raped by a man.
I think what most people feel and the drivers of some political agendas have little in common.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
I'm just quoting you because the link isn't active, for some reason quoting makes it accessible.
Surprised someone like Andy Wightman has had trouble finding work. He always seemed very capable. Blotted his record slightly with the leaked finding that NS broke ministerial code when she clearly hadn’t. Still, seems strange he can’t find work although he prob hasn’t had to try that hard given the package that MSP’s get when they lose their seat.
He is also a lesson to all MSP’s and MP’s who think that they are in any way unique. The vast majority are voted in on a party ticket and their personal qualities are not a factor at all in their election. He had no chance of winning a seat as an independent. There are very few who manage that.
As for the young greens? What a bunch of clowns. They won’t go very far in politics if they can’t avoid basic errors like they made last night.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I thought the suspicion it was Fraser or ACH. Has it been confirmed it was Wightman ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Also, I thought the committee did find the code was breached. It was the other chap who concluded differently?