Congratulations Stu Peters

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, Max Power said:

Oops, is that even a word? Asexual I meant!

It could well be, but I doubt it means the same thing!

[manxman1980]

24 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

Well keir starmar was having a go at one of his own party members who dared to say that only women have a cervix so maybe it's that type of thing stu Peters is talking about. 

He also has a point that discussions need to be had without fear of being called a bigot, racist etc just because someone disagrees with what you say.

@HeliX has given you a good response.

All that I would add is that I do think that transgender rights is an area that needs further discussion and debate.  It is not a topic that I am an expert on and I can see, and empathise with, both sides of the argument.  What I don't see at the moment is a solution.

I think we are generally doing well with addressing the big and obvious elements of sexism, racism, homophobia and disability discrimination but there are still day to day issues that people do encounter that makes them feel less valued but that other people would not see.

I think the discussion on disabled access to the polling stations is a good example.  How many of us gave a thought to that topic when casting our vote?  As an able bodied person did you notice the lack of ramps or lifts?  That is only one example that should have been blatantly obvious if we were all truly aware of the issues. 

The same applies with the other "isms".  We tend to miss things unless they are pointed out to us by someone who is suffering unfair treatment as a result.  

[thommo2010]

9 minutes ago, HeliX said:

"In August, Ms Duffield liked a tweet by broadcaster Piers Morgan, who criticised a news story from CNN about cancer screening for "individuals with a cervix", responding: "Do you mean women?"

When the MP was called transphobic for appearing to endorse the tweet, she replied: "I'm a 'transphobe' for knowing that only women have a cervix… ?!".

She later acknowledged that some trans men have a cervix.

Appearing on the BBC's Andrew Marr show, Sir Keir Starmer was asked if it was transphobic to say only women have a cervix.

The Labour leader replied: "Well, it is something that shouldn't be said. It is not right."

Sir Keir added: "We need to have a mature, respectful debate about trans rights and we need to... bear in mind that the trans community are amongst the most marginalised and abused communities."

 

Seems like a fairly level-headed response to me, is that seriously something we need some sort of anti-woke rally against?

It's hardly an actual issue though is it? Someone likes a tweet and the leader of the party gets involved. 

The world is full of different people who have different opinions. All we ever seem to hear is I'm offended,  this needs cancelled etc etc whilst real issues are missed. 

[P.K.]

56 minutes ago, Declan said:

Oh you're so easily offended. 

I am saying he's fighting imaginary demons i.e. the woke agenda

Just pointing out that what some might think is a smart remark "tilting at windmills" others could, quite rightly in this case, construe it as something offensive. Especially if they, like you, have an agenda...

[HeliX]

8 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

It's hardly an actual issue though is it? Someone likes a tweet and the leader of the party gets involved. 

The world is full of different people who have different opinions. All we ever seem to hear is I'm offended,  this needs cancelled etc etc whilst real issues are missed. 

That depends how close an issue is to you personally I expect. To a trans man, the tweet effectively says "If you've not had surgery to remove your cervix your identity is invalid". Which isn't very good. Particularly from somebody aiming to be a representative of the people, which will include trans men.

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, Zarley said:

Sounds to me like SP engages in a fair amount of faux outrage himself, and is lacking a sense of proportion.

Where do you see any "faux outrage"?

[Declan]

28 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Just pointing out that what some might think is a smart remark "tilting at windmills" others could, quite rightly in this case, construe it as something offensive. Especially if they, like you, have an agenda...

It’s a common English expression meaning fighting imaginary foes.

In saying “some might … construe it as construe it as offensive” you are conjuring  up imaginary victims too. 

[P.K.]

7 minutes ago, Declan said:

It’s a common English expression meaning fighting imaginary foes.

In saying “some might … construe it as construe it as offensive” you are conjuring  up imaginary victims too. 

Nice try.

Don Quixote had "issues" shall we say and as you are clearly mocking Mr Peters by association you shouldn't be surprised if some take offence.

[Declan]

Quixote is also quite heroic though. 
 

I suspect someone who’s just stood successfully on a freedom of speech platform doesn’t need a Sancho Panza being offended on his behalf. 

[P.K.]

2 hours ago, Declan said:

Quixote is also quite heroic though. 
 

I suspect someone who’s just stood successfully on a freedom of speech platform doesn’t need a Sancho Panza being offended on his behalf. 

Is that right Dapple...?

(Sp - El Rucio)

Edited September 28, 2021 by P.K.
Translation

[Happier diner]

5 hours ago, Ramseyboi said:

Question.

Do you think you would have been elected if it were not for the radio “personality” and relatively high profile?

I don’t, and that is my issue with the way the electorate are so short sighted when it comes to casting a vote.  Most just vote for someone they know rather than the best candidate.

Better the devil you know.

[pongo]

Honestly. I'm probably not one of @Stu Peters 's favourite posters having disagreed with him about just about everything over the years.

But I kind of think that people are getting a bit crazy. He's clearly not that bad. And it's all relative.

Perspective etc.

Edited September 28, 2021 by pongo

[Chinahand]

The cartoon has a laziness which marks a certain attitude which is passing into the night, it's time past. 

Finding a political path for the Island with changing times is going to be really hard. It is going to take real effort and dedication. It is also going to need a strong sense of pragmatism and resistance to bunkham. 

Stu needs to beware lazy clichés and bunkham, get on with the hard work of holding those who spend our taxes to account and goodness knows maybe earn some responsibility to actually direct its spending. 

Not a particular good first impression but it is be early days. 

[Freggyragh]

I don't think Stu is too bad at all - I like the guy - his radio job was often to initiate debate, and in the absence of more interesting content or wider research, his stock in trade was to tackle cultural shibboleths and take a slightly controversial slant on whatever was in the English newspapers, wouldn't have been of any interest if he hadn't aired alternative opinions - unfortunately, his style was a bit charmless and hackneyed. When it came to his more controversial moments  I wouldnt say he was bigot by any stretch - he just sometimes didn't know what he didn't know.

I wanted Keiran to get the second seat - he seems like a genuine guy - I thought he could be a modern day Peter Karran. I hope he stands again - fat chance in Middle though. 

[WTF]

18 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

  How do you think those women would feel about being seen to be bringing "civilizing touches to improve the environment"? 

 

good point, especially as they're only  there for the cock.

Edited September 29, 2021 by WTF