Progress with Rosie
Summons a lot of memories, this does.
Heather Peto is a man who identifies as a woman. It’s classic the way men who identify as women tip their hands by being so comfortable and at home with bullying women. Heather here takes it for granted that he gets to tell Rosie Duffield MP what to do and even – and especially – WHAT TO THINK. That’s the bit that especially summons memories, that telling women what to think and the bullying when they refuse to be told.
Heather Peto’s profile says “LGBT-Labour Co-Chair (she/her).” That makes it sound (or at least it did to me) as if it’s a branch of the Labour party, but (I looked it up) it’s an independent group allied to Labour. It’s not in any way the boss of Rosie Duffield MP.
Anyway – that patronizing de haut en bas “Each time we thought we had made progress with Rosie by explaining” just makes me bristle with rage. I’m not the only one.
And many more.
Another one for the Peto file?
Heh.
What a name to choose, eh? Means fart. Ok…
“Nevertheless, she persisted…”
It would be interesting to have Duffield and Peto both write out 1.) what the other position is asserting and 2.) what their motivations are. I suspect the MP has been educated regarding the nature of the claim, and doesn’t assume Peto et al are acting in bad faith. The description will be accurate; she simply disagrees.
If my own experience is anything to go by, Peto wouldn’t be coming up with anything recognizable.
Sastra, that could be interesting. It might be like two plays written by my collective (one by me) about what an atheist is thinking and doing. The other one would be unrecognizable to most atheists.
It does amaze me how similar all this is to religious ways of “knowing”, and yet religious skeptics swallow it hook, line, and sinker.
iknklast, trans ideology is absolutely religious in nature. People who consider themselves religious skeptics swallow it hook, line, and sinker because us humans have an innate attraction to religious and magical thinking. The trans cult comes clothed in scientio-babble and wokeness, and sneaks in under their sentries, tuned only to old-fashioned religions.
…yet religious skeptics swallow it hook, line, and sinker.
You know, when I first read that I thought it said stinker. Somehow appropriate.
Rob, it’s an ill wind that blows no good.
And yet, Rosie persisted.
That’s Peto. :)
“LGBT+ Labour demands ‘swift action’ after MP Rosie Duffield targets group with bitter attack.”
WHAT f*ing “bitter attack”? MP Duffield, as I understand it, liked or retweeted something that objected to characterizing cervixes as not an organ/structure pertaining exclusively to females. Who the f* is “targeting” whom? And that some of Duffield’s defenders couch their defense as a disagreement or difference of “opinion.” That’s the wrong principle. It’s not a matter of “opinion” whether cervixes are structures exclusively applying to females. That’s a matter of scientific fact. Duffield has fact/science on her side. She hasn’t “attacked” anyone. That’s just bullshit. She has acknowledged scientific fact. She is the one who is being “targeted” for wholly irrational and “bitter attack.”
You can’t “explain” falsehood or fantasy to make it coherent. There’s no “explanation” that makes “only women/girls have cervixes” a false or doubtful statement.
This “we explained,” but “she didn’t cave in” reminds me of the FtB “you’ve been told” bullying mantra. Never mind that what “you’ve been told,” hasn’t been shown to be actually true.
I’d better go put in my bite guard. My jaws are grinding.
maddog, #11.
When a member of a minority tells you you’re wrong you do not get to argue. You shut up, you listen and you learn. Yeah, and they never did spot the flaws in that piece of bullshit, but then how could they when they classed any further attempt at clarification as ‘doubling down’, then introduced their ‘three strikes’ rule. In effect, if they had told you three times that you wrong but you persisted with your wrongthink, they would get PZ to ban you.
But they weren’t shutting down dissenting voices, no, no, no, not at all. They were merely ooh, squirrel!
It isn’t like that now, though. Just one dissenting comment is all it takes these days. Ah well, I suppose it must add weight to his delusion-defending distortions of science when the comments are all agreeing with him and/or inventing new bad things that TERFs and GC feminists believe.
It reminds me of that too. That’s what I meant by the introductory sentence: “Summons a lot of memories, this does.” All this “how dare she refuse to submit to our will” bullshit…yes, very reminiscent.