Alphabet comment
This is just plain lying. The BBC telling whoppers right out in the open – whoppers that damage women and delight men who pretend to be women and take all our stuff.
Greens expel ex-spokesperson after LGBTQ+ comment row
You already know what the lie is, of course. It’s not an “LGBTQ+” comment.
The Green Party of England and Wales has expelled its former health spokesperson eight months after an investigation was launched into her comments on LGBTQ+ hate crimes.
Documents seen by the BBC show the Greens expelled Dr Pallavi Devulapalli for breaking party rules by attending a party event while under investigation for calling reports of rising LGBTQ+ hate crimes “mischievous”.
…
Green Party documents show Dr Devulapalli was originally placed on an emergency suspension pending a code of conduct investigation last September. The councillor, who sits on West Norfolk Council, was at the time one of the Green’s most high-profile figures and stood for the party at last year’s general election in South West Norfolk, against former Conservative Prime Minister Liz Truss.
During the election she spoke at a hustings event hosted by Friends of the Earth, where she was asked to respond to reports on rising LGBTQ+ hate crime, as well as her opinion on single-sex spaces and where the Green party stood on that issue. She told the meeting: “I’ve yet to meet anyone that actually says somebody should not have the right to be addressed as they please, and to dress as they please.
“I really think there is something mischievous in the air – to make those out to be an issue.” Following the hustings Dr Devulapalli clarified her comments, telling the BBC “there is no trans-hate in society in general”.
This one simple trick: pretend a truth claim about trans people is a truth claim about LGBTQ+ people. Boom: job done: your target stands accused of bashing lesbians and gay men and bisexuals when that is not the case.
Yeah, that annoys me, too. It’s extra annoying in that it’s such a common tactic, not just in this particular form. Say something about an individual, and whatever you said gets characterized as being about a group as a whole. You don’t even have to explicitly name the group in order for someone to pull this nonsense, because the opponent can just pick a demographic membership and turn it into, “So, you’re saying [group] is [bad thing]!”
Even if described as a comment “about” only T, WTH is wrong with it? It seems wholly positive and consonant with party principles to me. To the councillor’s knowledge, people generally agree that T can dress as they please, and be addressed as they please. And that there is such a wide agreement about these issues that it’s “mischievous” to stir up controversy about it. Isn’t that what T campaigns for? And what organizational support for T wants to be the case? What’s investigatable or disciplinable about the opinion that T are an ordinary presence in society?