Category: Notes and Comment Blog

  • To the surprise of no one

    Telegraph headline:

    More than 70 per cent of transgender prisoners are in for sex offences or violent crimes

    What to do, what to do. I know! Force women to submit to men who claim to be women, and it will all be smoothed out.

    More than 70 per cent of transgender prisoners in British jails are serving sentences for sex offences and violent crimes, government figures have revealed.

    At least 181 of the 244 transgender inmates, more than 74 per cent, are in jail for crimes including rape, forcing under-age children into having sex, grievous bodily harm and robbery.

    Yes but it’s the women who made them do it.

    The high levels of violent crimes among male prisoners who identify as women demonstrates why they should not be detained in female prisons, women’s rights campaigners argue.

    Campaigners and former prison chiefs, however, were insistent that the high level of violent crimes among trans prisoners did not imply that they were inherently violent, adding that the vast majority lived crime-free lives.

    The vast majority of what? Trans prisoners? How does that make sense?

    The figures released by the Ministry of Justice also reveal that a further 25 transgender males, women who identify as men, located in female prisons have been convicted of violent crimes and sexual offences. Just a year ago there were fewer than five, according to the Ministry of Justice.

    The figures were released after a former female remand prisoner told The Telegraph how one trans woman inside a female high-security prison continuously bullied other prisoners.

    Well, you know, non-stop bullying is kind of a feature of trans “activism”. It may even be most of the point of being trans, at least for the male ones. “Oh hey, I get to browbeat women who don’t let me push them aside, count me in.”

  • In practical terms

    Won’t someone please think of the anguish of men who are told they can’t barge into women’s toilets?

    The Guardian will!

    The equalities watchdog has updated its guidance on how to implement the supreme court ruling on gender after the government requested changes to the original proposals submitted last year.

    …

    The code sets out how businesses and other organisations should respond in practical terms to the supreme court ruling that sex in the Equality Act refers only to biological sex.

    How about the way they always did until way too many people suddenly decided that men can be women simply by saying so? That used to work.

    In January, the Guardian reported that under its new chair, Mary-Ann Stephenson, the EHRC was looking at ways to adapt the formal code to lessen its impact on businesses and to ensure it tried to balance the protection of single-sex spaces with the lives of transgender people.

    Sigh. You can’t “balance” the protection of single-sex spaces with the grotesque misogynistic demands of men who claim to be women. It can’t be done.

    Maya Forstater, the chief executive of the sex-based rights campaigners Sex Matters, raised concerns about “negotiations and horse-trading” between the government and the EHRC.

    Government sources rejected this, saying Phillipson was seeking both to get the guidance right and to take a sober, collaborative approach.

    What’s that supposed to mean? Is telling men they can’t use women’s changing rooms drunken? A “collaborative approach” is not a good plan when one of the parties is ruthlessly self-serving and misogynistic.

    In a written statement, Phillipson thanked the EHRC for its updates and said: “This government has always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex.”

    She said the government was unable to make further announcements because it was within the pre-election period for the Scottish and Welsh parliamentary elections.

    However, Forstater rejected this, saying: “It’s extraordinary that a year after the supreme court judgment, and seven months after the independent regulator first submitted its code of practice, the government has found another excuse for delaying the guidance,” she said.

    “The past year’s delay has caused serious harm to countless women. The statement that the government has ‘always supported the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex’ is a slap in the face to these women and girls who have faced harassment and hounding from jobs and services for saying the same thing.”

    They seem to think women deserves slaps in the face. Funny how that works.

    The Guardian does not give women the last word.

    Alex Parmar-Yee, the director of the Trans+ Solidarity Alliance group, said: “We’re glad that the government has heard how cruel and unworkable the EHRC’s original proposals were. A national bathroom ban under the guise of equality law is not in line with Labour’s values, and we hope any new guidance scraps that idea for good.

    “For trans people and inclusive organisations, the last year has been horrific – now we have to find out whether this government has taken its responsibilities seriously and fixed this mess or not.”

    The equalities charity Stonewall welcomed the “constructive working” between the government and EHRC. “Following a year of complex judgments in the courts and the uncertainty this has created, it is essential that organisations can look to the code for practical, workable guidance and feel confident about their legal obligations,” said a spokesperson.

    The end. Clear enough? Pesky stupid women, causing all this trouble, being so selfish and demanding about their rights. Thanks, Graun.

  • Wipe out

    Dragging those last few boxes out of the attic.

    Federal prosecutors are seeking to wipe out the seditious conspiracy convictions of 12 members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers who helped plan the Jan. 6, 2021, riots and led the charge into the U.S. Capitol, according to court documents filed Tuesday.

    The request, from U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro of D.C., is likely to be granted because prosecutors have broad discretion to pursue or drop criminal charges, even after defendants have been convicted. Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers and a lead organizer behind the riots, is among those whose convictions Pirro is seeking to erase.

    The move to undo the most serious convictions stemming from the assault on the Capitol marks the latest step in President Donald Trump’s quest to rewrite the event’s violent history. A mob of Trump supporters gathered in D.C. and disrupted Congress’s certification of Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 presidential race, echoing Trump’s false claims that the election had been stolen.

    A lot of people were injured. Some of them died. Never mind; those boxes are taking up too much space. Just throw them out. No not recycle; I said throw them out.

    Trump, on the first day of his second term, issued a blanket pardon that cleared more than 1,500 rioters’ criminal records for offenses related to the insurrection. That pardon did not extend to the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers who had been convicted of seditious conspiracy.

    Instead, Trump at the time commuted the prison sentences of 14 of those defendants, freeing them from federal custody. That clemency grant, however, did not delete the convictions from their records.

    Well thank god we’ve finally corrected that tragic injustice.

    Pirro said that once the latest slate of convictions is vacated, she intends to file motions to dismiss all the underlying charges in the trial court. That move, once approved by a judge, would fully clear all 12 defendants’ criminal records for having participated in the Jan. 6 riots.

    In court filings Tuesday, Pirro gave no details explaining her action, saying only that “the United States has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice.”

    What kind of justice is that exactly?

  • Timidity strikes again

    The NY Times editorial board has a piece explaining how opponents of Trump should do what Peter Magyar did to expel the monster.

    But they draw the usual tactful [aka terrified] veil over one of the larger items.

    The second lesson may be harder for Democrats — and center-left parties in Europe — to absorb. Mr. Magyar, who identifies as center right, won partly by avoiding the social progressivism that dominates elite left-leaning circles and alienates many voters. He ran as an economic progressive and a cultural moderate if not conservative.

    He used patriotic symbols like the flag and benefited from having a last name that means “Hungarian.” (Imagine a candidate named “Joe American.”) He portrayed himself as a nationalist and suggested he might expel Slovakia’s ambassador over its treatment of Hungarians living there. He campaigned in rural areas that Mr. Orban’s previous challengers had overlooked. Mr. Magyar promised not to send troops or weapons to Ukraine. He declined to attend a Pride march in Budapest, making it harder for Mr. Orban to paint him as captive to L.G.B.T.Q. activists.

    There it is. Forced teaming strikes again. LGB activism is one thing and T activism is quite another. The T makes the LGB radioactive for a lot of people. It’s not helpful for mainstream media to keep pretending that the two are inseparable.

    We certainly do not endorse all of Mr. Magyar’s tactics, and we hope no American politician would feel the need to avoid a Pride march.

    Yes but a Pride march is one thing and a Trans Pride march is quite another.

    Mr. Magyar is one of many contemporary politicians who have won elections with a mix of economic progressivism and social moderation. Other national candidates have done so in the Netherlands, Poland, Denmark and elsewhere. In the United States, as we have documented, congressional Democrats who have won tough races in recent years almost all offered feisty economic messages while rejecting far-left positions on crime, immigration and other subjects

    They’re afraid to say it. “and other subjects” – they mean the T. Don’t say it! Don’t touch the third rail!

  • Not your call bro

    He doesn’t get it.

    No, feminism is not “about equality” you bonehead. It’s about the fact that we don’t have it, and guess what, you’re a shining example of not getting it.

    It’s about the fact that humans have always extrapolated from sexual dimorphism to women are inferior. It’s about the fact that male animals tend to police female animals so as not to be tricked into wasting resources on some other male animal’s offspring. It’s about thousands of years of contempt and suspicion. It’s complicated, and there’s a lot of it. It can’t be summed up with vapid “it’s about equality” from men like you.

  • Lane? What lane?

    JD Vance tells the pope to stick to his own job.

    JD Vance has weighed in on Donald Trump’s feud with Pope Leo, effectively telling the pontiff to stay in his lane after the head of the Catholic church criticized the White House over the Iran war.

    “It would be best for the Vatican to stick to matters of morality, to stick to matters of what’s going on in the Catholic church and let the president of the United States stick to dictating American public policy,” the vice-president – a Catholic convert himself – said in an interview on Fox News on Monday night.

    But that wouldn’t be the Vatican, hon. The Catholic church sees itself as the boss of all of us, much the way Trump sees himself as the boss of all of us. You’ve got megalomaniacal people and institutions? They’re gonna megalomania.

    Vance’s entrance into the dispute, and loyal defense of his boss, came after Leo responded on Monday by declaring he did not fear the Trump administration, and would continue to “speak strongly” against war, and for peace.

    Asked what he made of the episode, which has angered many in Trump’s evangelical base, Vance tried to brush aside the controversy.

    “Sometimes we’re going to have disagreements on matters of public policy,” he said.

    But how can that be? Trump is divine and never wrong, and the pope is divine and never wrong. Where is there room for disagreements? If you disagree…one of you is wrong. But neither of you can ever be wrong! You know this!

  • Wrong and right

    The Beeb reports:

    A nurse from south London who was suspended over an alleged breach of a transgender patient’s confidentiality has won a settlement against the NHS trust she works for.

    Jennifer Melle from Croydon, was removed from duty after speaking publicly to the media about receiving a warning for using the wrong pronouns.

    But of course she used the right pronouns. She was removed from duty after talking to the press about getting a warning for not using the wrong pronouns. Medical professionals are now being bullied and punished into pretending patients are the sex they are not. The malpractice suits must be piling up.

    In May 2024, Melle was racially abused by a transgender woman – who was born a biological male – after she addressed them as “Mr”.

    Pitiful compromise. BBC refers to one person as “them” by way of splitting the difference between calling him “her” and calling him…er…him.

    The 41-year-old was given a written warning at the time and continued in her role, and Epsom and St Helier Hospitals NHS Trust also wrote to the patient to warn them that threatening and racist language was not tolerated.

    To warn ___? Who was warned? Oh the patient – so you mean “to warn him” not to warn “them” – aren’t journalists supposed to know the language they are reporting in?

    Anyway, she did win the settlement.

  • Tell no one

    What could possibly go wrong?

  • Bright golden light

    Trump says oh hey now, he wasn’t saying he was Jesus, he was saying he was a doctor.

    The image showed President Trump in a white and red robe, commonly used in renderings of Jesus Christ and in scripture prophesying his return. Bright golden light, which is used to depict divine intervention in religious imagery, radiated from Mr. Trump’s hand as he touched the forehead of a sick man. A woman observed the scene with her hands steepled in prayer.

    As he received two bags of a McDonald’s food delivery to the Oval Office on Monday morning, Mr. Trump told reporters that he did not catch all that religious imagery. He said he had thought the image he had posted to his Truth Social account had depicted him not as Jesus — but as a physician.

    Hahahahaha the bags of McDonald’s hahahahachoke. This guy has top class chefs on the government payroll and he orders in McDonald’s. Tells you everything about him.

    As a rule, Mr. Trump does not apologize for doing and saying things that hurt or offend people, and officials in his White House characterize his behavior as radically refreshing and transparent.

    That could be true. Harsh realities can hurt or offend people who need harsh realities. We know it offends Trump to be told he’s wrong about something. His insults and lies are indeed transparent, but refreshing, not so much.

  • Don’t let the door hitcha

    Oh hooray, the first good news in what feels like years – Orban is out.

    Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, a lodestar for MAGA culture warriors and right-wing populists in Europe, conceded defeat on Sunday in a general election, breaking the momentum of a global nationalist revival promoted by President Trump.

    …

    Sunday’s vote was widely seen as showdown between friends and foes of liberal democracy, a cause that Mr. Orban has battled against for years to applause from his fans in the United States, Europe and Latin America. The race was closely watched by the Trump administration and the Kremlin, both of which wanted Mr. Orban to win and both of which offered support in his campaign.

    The implications of the outcome extend far beyond Hungary’s borders. The next prime minister may help alter the course of the war in Ukraine, a neighbor that Mr. Orban has cast as an enemy of Hungary, and affect European security. And the results will be looked at by populists around the world who view the Hungarian leader as a model of success and of pugnacious defiance of the mainstream.

    …

    Long a thorn in the side of E.U. officials in Brussels, Mr. Orban has consistently blocked European assistance to Ukraine, worked to water down sanctions on Russia and presented Ukraine, not Russia, as the principal threat to Europe’s security.

    Those positions made him an invaluable ally for the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.

    Well any ally of Putin is…

  • How to ruin a good adventure

    Well that was interesting.

    I went to the other side of the city for a walk along the Lake, and very nice it was. Then I got on the third and last bus of the homeward trip. I sat in the only nearby vacant seat, next to a very beefy man who made no effort to make room for me. This meant I had to kind of wedge myself in, with much more contact with beefy man than I wanted. The result was that he then punched me hard with his elbow. I don’t mean he nudged me, or pushed or leaned sideways, I mean he lifted his arm and slammed me hard.

    I yelled “OW!” and he explained that I deserved it for wedging myself in. I said it’s called sitting down in a vacant seat. People nearby stared but said and did nothing. This is life in Trump’s America I guess. I hate Trump’s America.

  • The blasphemy law is not a blasphemy law

    They’re trying to square the circle.

    A new tsar is to be created to tackle growing hatred towards Muslims. The ‘special representative on anti-Muslim hostility’ will be appointed to ‘strengthen understanding, reporting and response’, the Government said.

    …

    But ministers insisted the new definition would also guarantee ‘the fundamental right to freedom of speech’ amid fears it would create a blasphemy law by the back door.

    The Government ditched a plan to give a definition for the word ‘Islamophobia’ amid free speech concerns and decided to adopt a definition of ‘anti-Muslim hostility’ instead. 

    In other words they tried to hide the fact that they are working to make it illegal to criticize Islam. It won’t fly. You can’t specify a particular religion as under government protection from debate without making it taboo to criticize that religion.

    Islam is not like race or sex or place of birth or social status aka class. Islam is a religion, a bunch of rules and taboos in a book written 1400 years ago. The book is intensely hostile to women. How is The Government going to square protecting that hatred of women with its duty to protect the rights and freedoms of women?

  • The M word

    Daniel Martin in The Telegraph:

    Bridget Phillipson has been accused of blocking guidance on upholding women’s right to single-sex spaces over fears it could damage her career.

    Baroness Falkner – who drew up the equality law changes – said Ms Phillipson was putting her “personal ambition” before her role as women and equalities minister over fears pro-trans backbenchers would scupper any chance of promotion if she publishes the guidance.

    Well, you know: it’s a tough call. On the one hand the rights of women and girls, on the other hand one woman’s career.

    Lady Falkner, who led the Equality and Human Rights Commission until the end of last year, suggested the Government risked making the same mistake over trans rights as it did with grooming gangs, by failing to take action for fear of upsetting a minority group.

    Well, you know, not all “minority groups” should be protected from being “upset”. Murderers are a minority group; so what? Their feelings don’t become the standard of what we can say and do about murder just because they’re a minority group. It’s the same with men who pretend to be women. If they’re taking our stuff and barging into our spaces we get to tell them to stop, no matter how “minority” they are.

    Before Lady Falkner left her previous role in November, the EHRC submitted an updated code of practice to Ms Phillipson, instructing businesses and public bodies to ensure that trans women were barred from toilets and changing rooms.

    But almost 12 months after the Supreme Court’s ruling and the updated code being submitted to the Government for sign-off, Ms Phillipson has still not proceeded with its publication, claiming time is needed to get it right.

    It means hospitals and sports centres across the country are still allowing trans women into female spaces.

    Men’s desire to invade women’s spaces continues to outweigh women’s desire not to have men invading our spaces – what does that sound like? It sounds rapey. Men blithely ignoring what women want is the main ingredient of rape.

  • Short and to the point

    Well? Anything?

  • Kanga wore boxer shorts

    Uhhhhno.

    Victorian boys were gender-fluid, museum claims

    Yeah sure, and they told each other so on their phones.

    Subhead:

    The Bowes links 19th-century breeching practice to LGBTQIA+ ideology but gender-critical campaigners say it is ‘rewriting history’

    Because of course it is. “Gender fluid” was neither a concept nor a condition that 19th century people discussed. They were too busy wishing they had fast cars and Buddy Holly and the internet.

    The Bowes Museum in Barnard Castle, County Durham, tells visitors that “gender fluidity” was a feature of 19th-century childhoods because some boys wore dresses up to the age of eight.

    A leaflet produced by the museum claims the fashion trend – known as breeching – was equivalent to the modern phenomenon of gender nonconformity.

    Well gender nonconformity is not the same thing as gender fluid. But in any case having small boys wear tunics instead of trousers when a lot of other small boys were doing the same thing is not gender nonconformity, it’s just a minor trend in children’s clothing.

    The LGBTQIA+ leaflet is offered to visitors at the museum and art gallery, which opened in 1892, and contains pictures of two boys’ dresses dating to the 19th century.

    “It’s often assumed that gender binaries (the classification of gender into two opposing categories: male and female) have always been strictly enforced and that gender fluidity is a recent development,” it reads.

    “However, this is not true. Throughout history, gender distinctions in children’s clothing were less rigid, especially in early childhood.

    “Both boys and girls commonly wore dresses during infancy and toddlerhood for practical reasons.

    Yes, for practical reasons – for ease in changing diapers/nappies, to be exact. Being able to put the kid on a flat surface, hoist its bum into the air, remove the used diaper and replace it with a clean one, is obviously simpler if you don’t have to undo buttons or zippers and then peel the garment down the legs, trying not to smear poop everywhere. It’s all about the poop. (For more see: dogs, passim.) It’s not about “gender”. It‘s about poop.

    Helen Joyce, director of advocacy at Sex Matters, told The Telegraph: “The idea that Victorian children were ‘gender fluid’ because of practicalities relating to clothing is absolute nonsense.

    “The so-called ‘opposing categories’ of male and female, as the museum puts it, are to do with biology and have nothing to do with little boys wearing dresses instead of trousers because elastic was a brand new invention and not widely used.”

    Elastic. Good old Victorians. Imagine not having elastic! We wouldn’t have sweatpants. I couldn’t stand not having sweatpants. I hasten to assure you I don’t wear them in public, but at home I live in them. Jeans are too cold on the legs. That too is not a genner idenniny choice, it’s a practical one.

    Anyway. Christopher Robin was not “gender fluid”.

  • Even the parks?

    Tim Dickinson at The Contrarian:

    Like fragile strongmen everywhere, Donald Trump wants to plaster his name and likeness in as many official places as possible.

    Toxic narcissism has led Trump on a crusade to rebrand navy ships, federal buildings, and international airports in his own honor, as well as to splash his face on everything from immigration documents to national park passes to banners draped outside of federal department headquarters. If Trump gets his way, he’ll soon get his face on a gold coin, his signature on U.S. currency, and — who knows — maybe even an NFL stadium named for him.

    The currency is a good deal more outrageous than the stadium.

    If you want to vacation a America’s crown jewel national parks you’ll now have to contend with Trump scowling at you every time you flash your America the Beautiful annual pass. (Trump also announced free admission to parks on his birthday, while revoking free admission on Martin Luther King Jr. day and Juneteenth, because racism.)

    I just…I just can’t…

  • One Year Later

    There’s an uprising.

    These men are the establishment. Led by men such as Jolyon Maugham who promise us men with balaclavas and hammers if we won’t get in line. These men exist because of the cowardice of our Government. I am so glad to see you here today. This is a direct threat to women’s safety, dignity and the rule of law. We need to keep saying NO.

    We need to keep saying NO in thunder.

  • Larger than arches of antiquity

    Philip Kennicott at the Washington Post on Trump’s self-aggrandizement project:

    But renderings of the arch, submitted to the Commission of Fine Arts in advance of its discussion of the project Thursday, refer to it as the Triumphal Arch. And it will be as big as feared — 250 feet high — larger than arches of antiquity, taller even than ghastly monuments to authoritarian triumphalism, including the victory arch in Pyongyang, North Korea.

    Of course. What’s the point of it if it’s not bigger than everyone else’s? Big dick, big brain, big arch – whatever. It all has to be the biggest.

    It is an insult to the men and women who risk their lives toprotect democracy, who have fought in wars against fascism, who have actually achieved victory rather than merely declared and celebrated it. Its symbolism is borrowed and confused, and it will block a sacred vista that connects the Lincoln Memorial to the final resting place of the Civil War dead, and veterans from every major war and conflict this country has fought.

    It will be grandiose and ugly, in line with everything Trump does and with Trump himself.

    The main body of the arch will rise 166 feet from an elevated base. Atop that will be a 60-foot-tall gilded statue that looks like an AI-mash-up of the Statue of Liberty holding a torch and the Greek goddess of victory, Nike, resembling in its glittering ostentation the statue atop a victory column in Mexico City erected by the brutal dictator Porfirio Díaz in 1910. The design of the arch is a little simpler than some of the more garish proposals Trump floated earlier. Gigantic Corinthian columns have been removed, and there are no longer gilded statues in the niches on the two main supporting legs.

    But there is no lack of gilding in other places, including the ornamental relief on the face of the attic, with lettering spelling out “One Nation Under God” and “Liberty and Justice For All,” and on the four sculpted lions that flank the arch.

    But “one nation under god” contradicts “liberty and justice for all”. It’s neither liberty nor justice to impose a dictator god on 350 million people. I don’t consider myself “under god”; it’s not liberty or justice to enroll people in such a theology from the top down.

  • Similar but way bigger

    Can we not?

    The Interior Department has submitted renderings of President Trump’s proposed triumphal arch near Arlington National Cemetery, showing that the structure would dwarf the Lincoln Memorial across the Potomac River. 

    The proposal calls for the arch to be roughly 250 feet tall, more than twice as high as the 99-foot tall Lincoln Memorial. It would be the tallest triumphal arch in the world, like the president said he wanted, roughly 30 feet taller than the Plaza de la República in Mexico City. 

    As he said he wanted, you mean.

    Anyway, let’s not. Let’s not do that. Let’s not add yet more oversized vulgar tat to DC just because Trump wants to.

    American taxpayers will help fund the construction of the arch, according to the spending plan for the National Endowment for the Humanities released by the administration earlier this week. 

    Don’t want to.

    The president said he wants the arch to be the “biggest one of all” in the world. The proposed site is situated along a flight path for nearby Reagan National Airport, raising questions about it might affect planes’ approach.

    Or, as the peasants say, about how it might affect planes’ approach.

    Anyway, how about no. Enough already. He’s trashed the Kennedy Center and the Rose Garden and the East Wing of the White House; basta.

  • A safe, inclusive, and welcoming space for everyone

    The boilerplate language of huffy cancellation is always interesting. Stroud Brewery’s apology & cancellation is no exception.

    We were made aware of concerns regarding an upcoming private booking within the last 24 hours. After fast-tracking our usual internal processes and careful consideration, we have concluded that the event will not proceed.

    Stroud Brewery is committed to being a safe, inclusive, and welcoming space for everyone. Our values guide every booking, and we take community concerns seriously. This decision reflects our commitment to ensuring that all members of our community feel respected and safe.

    It’s almost funny. Almost. Our commitment to ensuring that all members of our community feel respected and safe EXCEPT THE ONES WHO WANTED TO HEAR THESE SPEAKERS.

    In other words they’re trying to square the circle. We love our communinny, we love everyone in our communinny, we are nice lovable kind enlightened compassionate people, EXCEPT of course when it comes to those evil people who fail to believe that men can be women. Those people we hate and want to harm. Aren’t we lovely?

    One comment from Team Cancel Them:

    Thanks for flagging this – it does look like the author of the book holds views that would make members of our community feel extremely unwelcome which isn’t what the brewery is about at all (and why I love it so much as a space!)

    Appreciate it’s a private booking, but the brewery is such a community space I think it would send the wrong message to allow the event to go ahead. It could taint the otherwise inclusive and welcoming feeling we all love.

    Really glad you’re taking this seriously x

    Oh that inclusive and welcoming feeling we all love – we all having the identical thoughts and knowledge that we all have, which empowers us to shun and banish people who have different thoughts and knowledge. That is the true incloosivity we practice.

    Allowing and enabling a forum where people can gather and discuss their exclusatory views about how their opinions are more important than others wellbeing is not good community spirit. Well done stroud brewery for holding your inclusive policies and actively demonstrating your support for historically marginalised groups

    Well done Stroud Brewery for cancelling a talk, there is nothing more incloosive than cancelling a talk by people who know that men are not women.

    Many of the comments echo this rather blatant contradiction.