User avatar
By Boiler
#101533
No, the bit I spotted was "You don't drive down a one-way street in the same direction".

Surely that should be "the opposite direction"??
User avatar
By Crabcakes
#101618
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Tue Nov 25, 2025 10:01 am He's got a point that some people have gone mad after becoming very gender critical, like Sharon Davies. I don't know if that's true of Hadley Freeman.
Well she’s now decided ADHD is made up, so disappointingly seems to be going full Hitchens minor.

User avatar
By The Weeping Angel
#101619
Doesn't change that what Maugham said was sexist. According to Maugham, Freeman should have stuck to writing about warm, fluffy things and not trans stuff or writing a book about anorexia.
User avatar
By Crabcakes
#101634
The Weeping Angel wrote: Mon Dec 08, 2025 1:27 am That isn't a sign she's gone mad.
Ok, agreed she’s not mad in the literal “has gone insane” sense. She’s just decided writing ragebait horseshit for right-wing rags for coins is a winner.

Personally I think being labelled as mad might be preferable.
By Bones McCoy
#101647
Crabcakes wrote: Sun Dec 07, 2025 7:50 pm
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Tue Nov 25, 2025 10:01 am He's got a point that some people have gone mad after becoming very gender critical, like Sharon Davies. I don't know if that's true of Hadley Freeman.
Well she’s now decided ADHD is made up, so disappointingly seems to be going full Hitchens minor.

Streeting is preparing as party-leader in waiting.

How long must he wait for Kemi to step down?
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#101654
Crabcakes wrote: Sun Dec 07, 2025 7:50 pm
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Tue Nov 25, 2025 10:01 am He's got a point that some people have gone mad after becoming very gender critical, like Sharon Davies. I don't know if that's true of Hadley Freeman.
Well she’s now decided ADHD is made up, so disappointingly seems to be going full Hitchens minor.
Freeman's article sounds dire. I have no intention of going behind the paywall on the off chance that it's not dire. I think she fits the pattern, as you say.

But I will defend the review, in principle. I don't think Streeting should be leader, nor perhaps health secretary, but there is a group for whom he's a hate figure. I think many genuinely think he banned puberty blockers without any expert advice. (Whether that advice was right or wrong, I can't say, but I think it's clear that the medical establishment aren't particularly keen).

We're already on to "Streeting targets benefit cuts" headlines, when MIND among others have welcomed the review.
User avatar
By Crabcakes
#101659
I think it’s the timing. As you say, a review in principle is fine. A review in our current times, where every group of miserable shits who has ever fancied turning the clock back on progressive policies feels emboldened, carries more risk of being skewed by the same.
User avatar
By Tubby Isaacs
#101663
Why though? The review isn't being carried out, as far as we know, by those people.

Various people, some lawyers, here talking about the WI decision. If I've understood it correctly, what the WI probably fear is being sued by men, rather than women, who might argue that they have to be allowed to join because trans women are allowed to join. Whether they'd win or not is a different question.

https://bsky.app/profile/legalclaret.bs ... 3tfyidlc2s
  • 1
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
The Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec[…]

Nargle Fargle

Are the Jews in the room with Arron now? It&[…]

Labour, generally.

That first letter is suggesting Reeves take over t[…]

The Gender Identity Issue.

Why though? The review isn't being carried ou[…]