Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
***"" To all fans of Saintsfc, I have been told by the club to either step aside or they will totally disown me"
Sounds to me that the club told him not to make this any harder than it needs to be. This way both parties can save some face.
Sex, sexual orientation and gender reassignment are all protected characteristics of the Equality Act 2010. The recently published Cass Interim Report states that there is 'A lack of a conceptual agreement about the meaning of gender dysphoria' If you can't define something, how can you make good law and public policy?
Maya Forstater's tribunal appealed on the Rights to Freedom of Belief and Freedom of Expression as set out in Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human rights, and the limits to their expression via Article 17, which prohibits citizens from abusing the rights of others.
Maya said that she believes that sex is immutable and not to be conflated with gender identity. She won the case because it's her belief and, as she has not set out to harm anyone with that belief, she has every right to express it.
JK Rowling supported Maya in this by tweeting: Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?
(What the ruling also clarifies is that people who believe in or identify as trans have every right to express that belief too)
Maya Forstater's second tribunal, claiming she was discriminated against by her employer because of her protected belief, has only just ended. I'm not sure when the ruling will be given.
Stonewall will be in court soon too. Criminal Barrister Allison Bailey, who set up the LGB Alliance charity, is suing Stonewall Diversity Limited. Last week someone donated £50,000 to her crowd-funder, there is speculation on who that person might be...
https://allisonbailey.co.uk/
garysfc
Well-Known Member
Tbh, I’d prefer he stayed ambassador & stopped his social comments. Love him as a player but …
If he's more concerned with his social media disgraces and posting his widely debunked conspiracy theories so be it. More twatter than twitter.Tbh, I’d prefer he stayed ambassador & stopped his social comments. Love him as a player but …
Tbh, I’d prefer he stayed ambassador & stopped his social comments. Love him as a player but …
I put a like to this because of your second sentence but I think it is best for the club to keep a distance between them. The more he is in the public eye for his views the more it overshadows the memory of the player he was and the club's reputation by association. In my opinion he's the best player we've ever had and despite his crazy ramblings that's how I still think about him but he's in danger of only being known as a crackpot who used to play football.
Sadly, I don't get the feeling he minds too much about how his comments are received, actually quite the opposite.
meanwhile in Australia, their department of health are unable to define what a Woman is:
You must log in or register to see media
I have great respect for Trans people and the Transgender community, but there comes a point where you have to start calling out some of this stuff as ridiculous.
The part where it gets silly is, for example, that a big song and dance is made that the Supreme Court nominee who said she couldn’t define it either is the “first black woman justice”. But can’t or won’t define what a woman is
Same as everywhere now has to publish gender pay gap reports (the less said about that the better) - but how? How could this be possible
It is starting to seem a lot like cherry picking
Oxford Languages definition.
woman
/ˈwʊmən
noun
woman
/ˈwʊmən
noun
- an adult female human being.
"a drawing of a young woman"
- a female member of a workforce, team, etc.
"thousands of women were laid off" - a female person associated with a particular place, activity, or occupation.
"she was the first Oxford woman to take a first in Physics"
- a female member of a workforce, team, etc.
They already changed the definition of ‘vaccine’
I imagine it won’t be long until these are edited too
I think the point is that there isn’t even an attempt to at least deflect that question by citing what you just have
I say “deflect” because it is likely the follow up would be things like:
- “what is female”
- “what do YOU think”
- “do you agree
But to say “I don’t know” or “I can’t answer”…
I would have answered 'in what context' To my mind those not answering are avoiding a trap given the sound bite nature of the question.
They may well be but to the ears of many they still sound foolish. “I will need to consult and expert”.
But what is the trap for some of those people? Risk of losing some supporters by saying what you really believe ? I mean if they double down it isn’t too much different from the response currently given by the mentioned people in terms of outcome and perception.
You must log in or register to see images
“the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention was seen modifying its definition of the words “vaccine” and “vaccination” on its website.
Before the change, the definition for “vaccination” read, “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.” Now, the word “immunity” has been switched to “protection.”
The term “vaccine” also got a makeover. The CDC’s definition changed from “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease” to the current “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”