The Green Party has some serious questions to answer

[Wilf]

Flashing amber I reckon. As U75 kick-offs go this is quite genteel. It’s the kind of scrap you imagine could go off in Suburban but never quite has. I just searched the thread for the word “cunt” and it’s only been used once in 10 pages and that was with regards to the GP themselves.

It’s a sneaky tactic though. Putting “Green Party” in a thread title is guaranteed to stop most people opening it so you can have it all to yourself. As I said though, once it gets a bit lengthy people think “who the fuck can post about the Green Party for 10 pages without dying of boredom” and they open it to have a look.

Ta da!

I quite like the idea of innocuous titles with raging spats going on within them. Fist fights in Cake Recipe discussions, legal threats in Recycle Your Stuff. All good.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Well, personally I think that someone's private sex life being based around an adult baby fetish and other fetishes based on infantilised fantasy stuff like bronies (based on a toy marketed heavily to primary school aged girls) means that they ARE unsuitable for public office, certainly for public office in which they are pushing for women and girls' sex based protections to be removed. Apparently that's an unfashionable thing to say but I don't really give a fuck. Aimee Challenor shouldn't be advising policy if that's what she gets off on. She's not a suitable person.

Aye. This quite frankly.
What also makes me laugh is that accusations of not accepting kink/weird sex practices tied to power imbalances and tied to sex and/or age as "prude" or "boring" is somehow meant to shame women into being more "accepting" of whatever boundaries they might like to set.

Really it's just another form of misogyny.

Being a "prude" is a position of power that allows a woman to dictate the terms and quality of intimacy. Men, quite obviously, do not like that.

The concept of a woman being a "slut" and her being a "prude" are concepts more alike than you might care to realise.

"Women are private property" is a known historical pattern, and it hasn't gone away with liberal progressiveness, merely it has changed shape.

What happened was society went from seeing women as private property (meaning she was supposed to have sex with her husband and him alone and act as his submissive broodmare), to seeing women as public property - meaning she's supposed to be sexually available to all men and participate in hookup culture, kink, whatever else abuse, and then of course bear the brunt of the liability when it comes to sex, reproduction and safety.

Notice that this shift ISN'T really a CHANGE OF CONTRACT between men and women because women still have no negotiating power. Especially when stuff like TERFblocker exists. Rather, the power remains amongst men in how THEY would rather relate to women (and now with this baby diaper kink thing -it seems children too). So instead of a 1-1 correspondence codified by marriage and a private sex life, those who run modern society have realised you can have all the sex and kink and beatings and "kiddie role play" with none the liability (for men of course). All women for all men became a more appealing option.

When a woman is a "prude", she is blatant about not giving men the opening to sexually exploit her (or kids) in an uneven playing field. And when a women is shamed in "feminist" (and I use air quotes deliberately) circles for not being "sex positive" or "kinky" or being "too vanilla"... well then it isn't feminism. It's just more misogyny, more ignoring of boundaries, and more social gas lighting.

I am a proud prude. And fuck you if you think that's boring. I will judge men for their BDSM, sissy and baby diaper fetishes, and have every right to say "I do not want those types speaking for women". And I will judge those people who push those men's agendas onto women and kids.

And really, if you stop thinking of "sex positive" liberal feminism as feminism, and start thinking of it as patriarchy with glitter and catchy soundbites of "choice" you're not even making which you can sell on a T-Shirt - then really the horseshit that it really is starts to make a lot more sense.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I will judge men for their BDSM

What about women into BDSM? And not wanting to do kinky stuff but feeling like you should to please another is also not something only women experience.

 

[Santino]

What about women into BDSM? And not wanting to do kinky stuff but feeling like you should to please another is also not something only women experience.

It's ok for women to talk about something relevant to them without having to mention that it's also relevant to some men.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's ok for women to talk about something relevant to them without having to mention that it's also relevant to some men.

You have missed my point. BDSM isn't a typically man-thing in the way FLB is suggesting.

 

[Santino]

You have missed my point. BDSM isn't a typically man-thing in the way FLB is suggesting.

I was referring to your second point.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

What about women into BDSM? And not wanting to do kinky stuff but feeling like you should to please another is also not something only women experience.

,
What about them? Kink is primarily a male thing. And women into it don't exist in a vaccum, there might be reasons why they are into it, and it does play on societal power imbalances.

I'm sure men feeling like you should be some sort of sex hound and that you should be horny all day (because that's what society says), when that isn't the case, happens to men quite often too.

Either way both of these work on social power-play.

Men aren't in the main kinky (IME) but most kinksters are men, and it absolutely is about power play with those men and I certainly don't want their sissy, or beating fetishes or whatever being imposed on women by calling them "boring" or "prude" or whatever who in the majority of cases do not want it, or people like are into that, speaking up for what is, and isn't a safeguarding and safety issue.

Women's boundaires should be respected, specifically when it comes to their rights and protections.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

,
Kink is primarily a male thing. .

Is it? That's pretty much specifically the thing I'm disputing.

 

[Spymaster]

I quite like the idea of innocuous titles with raging spats going on within them. Fist fights in Cake Recipe discussions, legal threats in Recycle Your Stuff. All good.

That'd be brilliant, esp in Suburban.

Anyone Got A Recipe For Lemon Posset That Actually Works?



GO FUCK YOURSELF, PAEDO!

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Is it? That's pretty much specifically the thing I'm disputing.

Yes. The majority of people that end up having fetishistic disorders are men. Sometimes psychological help is needed to overcome it. That's not the same thing as saying all men are fetishists.

 

[Pickman's model]

.

 

[Wilf]

Aye. This quite frankly.
What also makes me laugh is that accusations of not accepting kink/weird sex practices tied to power imbalances and tied to sex and/or age as "prude" or "boring" is somehow meant to shame women into being more "accepting" of whatever boundaries they might like to set.

.

I think there are certainly echoes of the 60s/70s 'sexual revolution', something portrayed as liberating for women - which it was in the sense of opening up debates about female desire - but ultimately played out to men's advantage (along the predictable lines of existing power relationships).

 

[SpackleFrog]

,
What about them? Kink is primarily a male thing.

This is probably the most vile example of mysogyny on the whole thread.

Women! Remember not to let the men folk corrupt you. Stay true to your innate and natural sexual preferences.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

This is probably the most vile example of mysogyny on the whole thread.

Women! Remember not to let the men folk corrupt you. Stay true to your innate and natural sexual preferences.

No. I don't think so. Keep reaching though.

 

[co-op]

,
Kink is primarily a male thing. .

I think debating this is a bit of a dead end? It may be that fetishistic sexuality/paraphilia etc is distributed more equally between men and women than it appears but that (a) the nature of male sexuality means that it manifests more obviously and (b) the nature of patriarchal society means that women are well-advised to keep their sexuality hidden. So how can we know? Sexuality is complex stuff.

But I completely agree that the kind of prophet-of-kink types who flaunt their 'openness' about sexuality are often little more than abusers on a confidence trick. And it's pretty clear that the people who use their power to damage others via sex, sexuality etc are overwhelming men.

 

[Wilf]

I think debating this is a bit of a dead end? It may be that fetishistic sexuality/paraphilia etc is distributed more equally between men and women than it appears but that (a) the nature of male sexuality means that it manifests more obviously and (b) the nature of patriarchal society means that women are well-advised to keep their sexuality hidden. So how can we know? Sexuality is complex stuff.

But I completely agree that the kind of prophet-of-kink types who flaunt their 'openness' about sexuality are often little more than abusers on a confidence trick. And it's pretty clear that the people who use their power to damage others via sex, sexuality etc are overwhelming men.

I don't know much about the fetish scene, but get the impression it has 'democratised' in terms of gender. But how could it ultimately be other than you describe, in the contest as it is of existing gender inequalities.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

I think debating this is a bit of a dead end? It may be that fetishistic sexuality/paraphilia etc is distributed more equally between men and women than it appears but that (a) the nature of male sexuality means that it manifests more obviously and (b) the nature of patriarchal society means that women are well-advised to keep their sexuality hidden. So how can we know? Sexuality is complex stuff.

Yes. I think your right about all of this. It probably is a dead end. These things are always difficult if not impossible to untie.

But I completely agree that the kind of prophet-of-kink types who flaunt their 'openness' about sexuality are often little more than abusers on a confidence trick. And it's pretty clear that the people who use their power to damage others via sex, sexuality etc are overwhelming men.

Innit. Those people saying women as a class setting their boundaries, and saying they do not want representation, or what rights they should have being discussed by male kinksters, or those heavily influenced by them as "boring" or "prudes"... you gotta laugh really.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I think debating this is a bit of a dead end? It may be that fetishistic sexuality/paraphilia etc is distributed more equally between men and women than it appears but that (a) the nature of male sexuality means that it manifests more obviously and (b) the nature of patriarchal society means that women are well-advised to keep their sexuality hidden. So how can we know? Sexuality is complex stuff.

But I completely agree that the kind of prophet-of-kink types who flaunt their 'openness' about sexuality are often little more than abusers on a confidence trick. And it's pretty clear that the people who use their power to damage others via sex, sexuality etc are overwhelming men.

This is fantastic double think - on the one hand you (quite rightly) point out that women are likely to feel safer by not being open about their sexual preferences. And then you go on to state that if they are they're abusers! Amazing.

 

[andysays]

Who made you the Bigot-finder General? Which side has ensured that this entire goat-fuck of a debate has been conducted in the most extreme, abusive and morally repugnant terms?

If you don't like something I've posted why not actually quote it and say why it's wrong? Instead you reach automatically for the most extreme abuse.

Neither side in this debate (the whole Trans Activist vs TERF debate, which is what this current thread has quickly become a proxy for) has a monopoly on extremism, abuse and morally repugnance.

And there's a certain irony in you asking people to quote something specific which demonstrates what they're saying, given your utter refusal to do that earlier in the thread...

 

[Pickman's model]

This is fantastic double think - on the one hand you (quite rightly) point out that women are likely to feel safer by not being open about their sexual preferences. And then you go on to state that if they are they're abusers! Amazing.

he'll put you on ignore if you show up his paucity of thought.

 

[co-op]

Neither side in this debate (the whole Trans Activist vs TERF debate, which is what this current thread has quickly become a proxy for) has a monopoly on extremism, abuse and morally repugnance.

Fair enough, there's a lot of shit on both sides, that's obvious. But if one side starts from a pov that the *only* response to their demands is "ok whatever you say or you are a bigot" then I think it's fair to lay this one at their feet. On this thread it's been clear who has been hurling abuse, some of it pretty nasty.

And there's a certain irony in you asking people to quote something specific which demonstrates what they're saying, given your utter refusal to do that earlier in the thread...

Are you still beefing about me not linking to sources that show the GP is arguing for self-id? TBH that just seemed crazy. You were at the point that you said even if there were utterly clear links from other posters you that what I posted was true, my credibility was irreparably damaged. That just looks like bulletin board ego-fight stuff to me.

Maybe I missed some other stuff, I don't live on here. My point re Spacklefrog was that they just yell obscenities - no arguments.

 

[nyxx]

What's the betting that he's going to shortly publicly announce that he's TG too? There's nothing like 22 years on the nonce wing vs 22 years in a women's prison with a chance to act out some more rapey fun with other inmates to concentrate the mind.

I wish people would do some very basic research into how the prison system works.

Someone convicted of these kind of crimes would be kept in solitary confinement.

Coming out as transgender would not get them transferred to an open wing of a women’s prison.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Serious, but also funny...

But of course, in the looking-glass world of transgender politics, this is not OK to talk to people who might take a different view of the world to your own. It is bad, and must be punished.

Never mind that Lucas had been an outspoken advocate of trans rights in general, and of Aimee Challenor in particular. Never mind that all she said she would do is meet some people and listen to them. None of that could mitigate her sins against transgenderism. The online mob quickly gathered to ensure Lucas was suitably chastised: she said she’d talk to witches, so she must be a witch! Burn her!

(As is common here, lots of the abuse directed at Lucas came from men keen to tell women what to do, say and think. My favourite reprimand was this one: “Sincere word of warning Caroline: the people you’re agreeing to have dialogue w/ may appear to be reasonable & well-meaning individuals – couldn’t be more untrue. #WPUK and its associates spread hateful rhetoric, & seek to deny #trans people their existing legal rights. Avoid.” That came from a person using the name Adrian Harrop and claiming to be an NHS doctor; I assume it’s a parody account because the alternative explanation – that an actual real person is so comically stupid and awful – is too troubling to contemplate.)

Fittingly enough for this topsy-turvy world, the final sentence on Lucas was passed by none other than Aimee Challenor. In a statement on Twitter (of course) she announced she was resigning from the Green Party, saying that Lucas’ proposed meeting with WPUK was proof the Greens have a “significant transphobia problem”.

At around the same time, it emerged that Lucas had been added to Terfblocker, an online widget that allows someone to ensure that they are never exposed to the hateful words of people who fail to follow trans orthodoxy, by automatically blocking them on Twitter. According to Lucas’ own account, Aimee Challoner helped run Terfblocker, helping to ensure the voices of thousands of women (and a few men) are kept quiet online.

How Caroline Lucas fell foul of the transgender thought police | Coffee House

ETA: It looks like Lucas has now been removed from Terfblocker (I did a search on her username), a case of AC coming to her senses or someone else involved telling her to grow the fuck up?

 

[weepiper]

Fine, alright then. Weird sexual fetishes don't make someone unsuitable for public office. Why do you think they do? What is it about you that thinks "oh dearie me I don't want the person cutting benefits and axing jobs to be into latex or enjoy shitting themselves that would be terrible".

I mean, adult baby fanatics would literally be an improvement on the actual violent criminals which inhabit Parliament.

You're right it wasn't constructive. But how constructive was it for you to repost that twitter thread basically saying that because someone is into weird stuff and their dad is guilty of heinous sexual violence against a child so they must be to? How is that useful? Why do you expect your view that people you consider to be sexually deviant are unsuitable for public office to be taken seriously? Would you take me seriously if I said someone shouldn't be an MP if they were Catholic or gay?

I'm sorry, I'm too busy with boring old dickhead stuff (you know, working, childcare, looking after an ill relative, YAWNSVILLE I know) to waste my precious free time by bothering my arse to answer your 'questions' that you don't really want to hear my answers to anyway. Perhaps you'll understand once you're a boring old dickhead too.

 

[Wilf]

I find this collective blocking thing almost like some sort of religious excommunication (and whilst this is a trans activist thing, I mean the phenomena more widely). It's akin to saying 'don't contaminate me', really shitty and a bit embarrassing. And in this particular case, Caroline Lucas going from friend to enemy in a day is just as bad pre-teens excluding people from their friendship group - and telling everybody about it. Just dreadful.

 

[cupid_stunt]

I find this collective blocking thing almost like some sort of religious excommunication (and whilst this is a trans activist thing, I mean the phenomena more widely). It's akin to saying 'don't contaminate me', really shitty and a bit embarrassing. And in this particular case, Caroline Lucas going from friend to enemy in a day is just as bad pre-teens excluding people from their friendship group - and telling everybody about it. Just dreadful.

Actually, Lucas has gone from friend to enemy, and back to friend again.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I'm sorry, I'm too busy with boring old dickhead stuff (you know, working, childcare, looking after an ill relative, YAWNSVILLE I know) to waste my precious free time by bothering my arse to answer your 'questions' that you don't really want to hear my answers to anyway. Perhaps you'll understand once you're a boring old dickhead too.

Fair enough, maybe I will! And sorry to hear of all your burdens I hope you're having a good day.

You are wrong though.

 

[Wilf]

Actually, Lucas has gone from friend to enemy, and back to friend again.

'Unblock Lucas, but don't leave the gate open, we don't want any more escaping!'

 

[SpackleFrog]

I find this collective blocking thing almost like some sort of religious excommunication (and whilst this is a trans activist thing, I mean the phenomena more widely). It's akin to saying 'don't contaminate me', really shitty and a bit embarrassing. And in this particular case, Caroline Lucas going from friend to enemy in a day is just as bad pre-teens excluding people from their friendship group - and telling everybody about it. Just dreadful.

Yeah I'm not really sure what terfblocker is, hadn't heard of it until now, but agree it seems utterly bizarre, childish and pointless. Having said that I've also seen people suggesting that it's some sort of attack on Nazi-esque free speech which seems odd, I mean it's not like free speech involves the right to have your tweets read by people who don't want to read them.

I sometimes feel like there's an attitude developing that Twitter is in some way more important than real life, and that restricting someone's ability to reach an audience on Twitter is somehow a violation of their rights. Maybe it is in some way, I dunno, maybe in a couple of decades we'll all tweet more than we talk to each other. The FBPE thing makes me think of that too, the way it's designed as a tactic to 'win' Twitter as if Brexit will be decided through discussions involving 140 characters or less.

 

[Athos]

We need as a society to get better at supporting women and girls who are victims of sexual abuse.

We need to prevent sexual abuse. Which is why there's so much concern about what little protection females have being eroded to accommodate a relatively tiny number of people born biologically male and raised and socialised as boys and men.