Search results

I agree they are as likely to be catalysts. Aren't we meant to be the 5th biggest economy in the world though? How could Scandinavia have less social deprevation & poverty than us? Oh yeah, because they have governments that give a toss about people rather than lining their own pockets...

To be fair, I'm not even sure if I trust the Guardian in this arena, they too have a recent history of allowing articles to be printed far more transphobic than anything Richard Littlejohn wrote...

proof that the DM has no shame http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2332414/Press-criticised-inquest-death-transgender-primary-school-teacher.html They are now reporting on a judge criticising them but conveniently forgetting that they were ever involved. No surprise really, I guess.

Especially when this has absolutely sod all to do with your politics.

Do you not get the feeling that it is serving to deliberately belittle the magnitude of the issue? Why refer to it in that way, I thought it was at best patronizing. Other things that gave off a whiff of transphobia - constant references to "he", the headline which I felt insinuated that...

I'm lost. I really don't understand your point. I don't understand how the biological changes are "imposing on the rest of the world." Surely that's more the change of visual identity?

You miss my point. The term is frankly meaningless, I'm certain people think it is a synonym of normal. It serves only to highlight the life experience of the person using it. Reading your post, we're basically making the same point. To answer your direct question, the focus is too heavily...

I feel much better now I've said it. He's never anything less than erudite and thoughtful. He's not afraid to say something controversial but crucially I don't feel that he does it for the sole purpose of being controversial. There's always an exception to every rule. I do understand though...

Do you know what, I secretly like Peter Hitchins. Don't tell anyone though, it might blow my cover.

I'm not being deliberately confrontational but isn't "it's not natural" the bigots calling card? For years being gay was "not natural" despite there being evidence in nature to the contrary. I'm sure to some 22 grown men kicking an inflated sphere around isn't natural. "Natural" in this context...

The sex education thing is so complex though, I for one absolutely abhor the sexualisation of so much that children are exposed to. Take music as one example, music that is specifically designed to appeal to children is routinely marketed in a sexualised way. Is it better to arm children with...

Nope, Guinness Boy is right. Take Samantha Brick for example, that was pure trolling. And what exceptional trolling it was. The Mail has no views or opinions really, it exists to keep people in a constant state of fear. People who lack an active imagination need that to feel alive.

It really depends on your definitions doesn't it. Take the liberal Scandinavian attitude towards sex education. It would appall a lot of people in this country but guess what. Their teenage pregnancy stats make ours look like the embarrassment they are and from my (albeit limited) interactions...

Such as this thread? Nick Clegg Looks to be Honourable!

We fundamentally disagree then. My standpoint is you hide things from children if you think they are wrong or dangerous. A change of gender definition is neither of those things.

Well it's debateable, what I would say is that what we do currently means that we have one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the developed world & approximately half the total of drug related deaths in the entire EU. But it's a debate we'll never have.

Why does it need to confuse children, if it is explained to them in a sensible, well reasoned way? When would you say is the right time to explain to a child that this is a real thing that real people do? Or do we just let the likes of Littlejohn make their minds up for them? I'm not sure I see...

Not at all, did you miss the furore over Julie Birchill's transphobic rant in the Observer? It won't lead on the BBC because no one really cares and most secretly agree with it, that's the thing about bigotry, whilst the silent majority agree with you, you can fairly easily get away with...

I think you make a well reasoned and sensible argument but I do feel I have to disagree. In effect, you advocate giving Littlejohn the benefit of the doubt, fair enough. I personally feel the piece was written from a transphobic standpoint, merely stating that you feel someone is entitled to...

Merely fighting fire with fire, would you concede that this post is both dismissive & sarcastic? Oh dear! More fake facebook grief! The left wing v the daily mail case number 94! Boring!