There are some opinions people hold on to, that remain consistent throughout their lifetimes, because they are decent people. What about sex is encoded in every cell of the body is so hard to understand? What about having sex with someone unable to consent is rape, and rape strips someone of bodily autonomy and that is traumatizing, is so hard to understand?
He almost certainly has tenure, but could writing letters to the university president, or starting a petition asking for Bailey to be fired, do any good?
Nah, the tranny lobby already tried getting him fired after he published The Man Who Would Be Queen. If the the trannies couldn't get him fired in Canada what chance would Terfs have? Zero.
I read about that. It must have been so terrifying!
One of the more famous sociopathic ringleaders has a real fixation on poor Prisha Moseley and keeps publishing her private details to ever broadening populations of unhinged men.
Chris Williamson wasn't talking about paedophiles when Bailey hijacked his post and I'm sure if the position was put to Chris he would do an about face on a dime! Some sins are unforgivable. Child murderers and child rapists are two such offenders. There are no mitigating circumstances, no excuse and no redemption for such crimes and those who commit them.
Bailey and his group suffer from an unshakable case of neo-liberalism they cannot get past the "Not All" to separate the person from the inherent danger. It's understandable because unless the dangers are explained and clarified for them most people don't see the danger.
Just read the hatchet job The Distance/Matt Osborne did on Karen. I was going to comment in defense of Karen (including pointing out what a borderline pedophile-defender James Cantor is (by his own verifiable admission on his own website) whose views on all things I don't always agree with, and I know she doesn't mind that, but I'd have to pay $8 to join his Substack to make the comment and I don't want to give him a dime, for that and other reasons. Controversial Karen may be, but MO is no less controversial. I'll defend the right of both of them (and others too) to express their views on Substack and elsewhere, in the name of free speech, because if we don't defend that principle, we're truly sunk (IMHO). Who I support with a subscription and who I don't, though, ought to say who I consider to be a better human being, in my view anyway and FWIW.
That's the first thing I've seen from Osborne so I don't know enough to form a view of him. Guess I have some reading to do. Let's see if Karen responds.
There are some opinions people hold on to, that remain consistent throughout their lifetimes, because they are decent people. What about sex is encoded in every cell of the body is so hard to understand? What about having sex with someone unable to consent is rape, and rape strips someone of bodily autonomy and that is traumatizing, is so hard to understand?
He almost certainly has tenure, but could writing letters to the university president, or starting a petition asking for Bailey to be fired, do any good?
Nah, the tranny lobby already tried getting him fired after he published The Man Who Would Be Queen. If the the trannies couldn't get him fired in Canada what chance would Terfs have? Zero.
I read about that. It must have been so terrifying!
One of the more famous sociopathic ringleaders has a real fixation on poor Prisha Moseley and keeps publishing her private details to ever broadening populations of unhinged men.
Poor Prisha.
Objecting to sexually predatory behaviour is not an "ideological belief", and even if it were I wouldn't much care.
BTW: Anyone who hasn't yet seen Menno's newest video is (in my humble opinion) missing out. He gives that Thai Rivera 🤡 a well overdue spanking, too.
https://youtu.be/iM_VlChiDQY?si=dgUsAFkYitwZQBR9
Another fantastic video.
You mean the video where Menno say's what? "He changed his mind 5 years ago" Is that nuanced enough for Chris Williamson doe you suppose. LOL
🤷🏼♀️ Who knows?
Probably not, LOL.
Thank you, Karen xxx
Chris Williamson wasn't talking about paedophiles when Bailey hijacked his post and I'm sure if the position was put to Chris he would do an about face on a dime! Some sins are unforgivable. Child murderers and child rapists are two such offenders. There are no mitigating circumstances, no excuse and no redemption for such crimes and those who commit them.
Bailey and his group suffer from an unshakable case of neo-liberalism they cannot get past the "Not All" to separate the person from the inherent danger. It's understandable because unless the dangers are explained and clarified for them most people don't see the danger.
You're sure, are you?
Just read the hatchet job The Distance/Matt Osborne did on Karen. I was going to comment in defense of Karen (including pointing out what a borderline pedophile-defender James Cantor is (by his own verifiable admission on his own website) whose views on all things I don't always agree with, and I know she doesn't mind that, but I'd have to pay $8 to join his Substack to make the comment and I don't want to give him a dime, for that and other reasons. Controversial Karen may be, but MO is no less controversial. I'll defend the right of both of them (and others too) to express their views on Substack and elsewhere, in the name of free speech, because if we don't defend that principle, we're truly sunk (IMHO). Who I support with a subscription and who I don't, though, ought to say who I consider to be a better human being, in my view anyway and FWIW.
That's the first thing I've seen from Osborne so I don't know enough to form a view of him. Guess I have some reading to do. Let's see if Karen responds.