|
Post by elystokie on Feb 8, 2024 12:29:26 GMT
Were they originally blue socks or did they change color in the wash? Sounds like you can't define a blue sock mate. Everyone knows blue socks have a blue colour. You can't just change the colour as it pleases you. It's like calling a blue sock a purple sock. I have so many odd socks go missing (fuck knows where they go!) I'm considering thinking bollocks to it and just start wearing socks that don't match.
|
|
|
Post by knype on Feb 8, 2024 12:29:28 GMT
You're going to have to explain what point you're trying to make knype. What is the relevance of whether she was or she wasn't, if, at the time, Sunak believed that she was? It's about as relevant as saying that Sunak wasn't wearing blue socks at the time. He hasn’t got one as usual I await a new thread about people on here calling him thick In fact I might give it a bump for posterity Small amount of posts, suggest that you are another poster logging in under a new username...I know where my money is
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Feb 8, 2024 12:34:48 GMT
Sunak could legitimately raise points about Starmer policy changes without resorting to his hugely distasteful 'must keep GB News onside' comment yesterday.
And whenever he points out Starmer changing policy, Starmer should reel off the dead sea scrolls of Tory u-Turns since the election.
That Sunak thinks he can claim the high ground on consistency is laughable but Starmer needs to bring more pots and kettles into the kitchen.
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 8, 2024 12:56:23 GMT
Radical tory rishi blaming starner fir his crass conent at pmqs
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Feb 8, 2024 12:57:51 GMT
If it is transphobic to ask for a definition of a woman surely it is transphobic therefore not to offer an answer?
If it is transphobic to ask for a definition of a woman why is it not also misogynistic leading again to it therefore being misogynistic to not offer an answer? Or is the importance of said definition from the leader of the opposition of less perceived importance to biological women and then if so that apparent bias is also misogynistic.
For me the question was poorly timed but it wasn't transphobic and I'd argue it's readily apparent Starmer's trying to make this question as toxic as possible because he knows every time it is asked he is dancing on the head of a pin. Are we genuinely suggesting that someone who in all likely hood will be running the country shouldn't be asked for his working definition of a woman because that's frankly ridiculous?
Unfortunately, much like Schrodinger's Cat, Starmer's Arse is both misogynistic and transphobic until he removes it from the fence - it is one or the other but can't possibly be neither as much as he clicks his heels together and wants this question to disappear.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Feb 8, 2024 13:26:24 GMT
Radical tory rishi blaming starner fir his crass conent at pmqs The only option he really has is to double down rather than backdown given the context and accusations he made of Starmer. It's a sad indictment of politics - with all the shit going on in the world, and as fucking useless as the Tories are, this is where we're at. It's mind-melting really - imagine having a time machine and going back just a decade and going to tell yourself 'In ten years time we'll still be struggling with Brexit and coming out of a global pandemic; the environment's turned into a cash cow; middle east is on the brink of exploding; the west is in proxy war with Russia; China are sniffing being top dog; folk are absolutely fucking skint; utility prices are ridiculous through greed; AI is looking increasingly scary; London's very stabby; multi-culturism is seeing increasing pushback; the US has the choice between a geriatric who probably pisses himself and a geriatric who maybe doesn't for president and; the unelected members of the Economic Forum continue to successfully predict upcoming doom to the point it is beyond sinister yet the main thing the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition are concerned with is a definition of a woman because the parent of a murdered biological boy who wished to be a girl was in the gallery - oh and Stoke are properly shit like!.' It's barking fucking mental.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2024 13:29:56 GMT
Sounds like you can't define a blue sock mate. Everyone knows blue socks have a blue colour. You can't just change the colour as it pleases you. It's like calling a blue sock a purple sock. I have so many odd socks go missing (fuck knows where they go!) I'm considering thinking bollocks to it and just start wearing socks that don't match. But then you would be bisoxual.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 8, 2024 13:30:24 GMT
If it is transphobic to ask for a definition of a woman surely it is transphobic therefore not to offer an answer? If it is transphobic to ask for a definition of a woman why is it not also misogynistic leading again to it therefore being misogynistic to not offer an answer? Or is the importance of said definition from the leader of the opposition of less perceived importance to biological women and then if so that apparent bias is also misogynistic. For me the question was poorly timed but it wasn't transphobic and I'd argue it's readily apparent Starmer's trying to make this question as toxic as possible because he knows every time it is asked he is dancing on the head of a pin. Are we genuinely suggesting that someone who in all likely hood will be running the country shouldn't be asked for his working definition of a woman because that's frankly ridiculous? Unfortunately, much like Schrodinger's Cat, Starmer's Arse is both misogynistic and transphobic until he removes it from the fence - it is one or the other but can't possibly be neither as much as he clicks his heels together and wants this question to disappear. Think the argument is more that its distasteful to say it when parents who's trans child was murdered are in the presence. Personally though I'm fed up with minority politics. All we hear about from these lot is the 0.0001% of the population which are illegal immigrants are the 0.05% which are trans etc.. How about wake up and talk about how shit the country is for the 90% these days rather than trying to get people angry at minorities.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 8, 2024 13:56:54 GMT
If it is transphobic to ask for a definition of a woman surely it is transphobic therefore not to offer an answer? If it is transphobic to ask for a definition of a woman why is it not also misogynistic leading again to it therefore being misogynistic to not offer an answer? Or is the importance of said definition from the leader of the opposition of less perceived importance to biological women and then if so that apparent bias is also misogynistic. For me the question was poorly timed but it wasn't transphobic and I'd argue it's readily apparent Starmer's trying to make this question as toxic as possible because he knows every time it is asked he is dancing on the head of a pin. Are we genuinely suggesting that someone who in all likely hood will be running the country shouldn't be asked for his working definition of a woman because that's frankly ridiculous? Unfortunately, much like Schrodinger's Cat, Starmer's Arse is both misogynistic and transphobic until he removes it from the fence - it is one or the other but can't possibly be neither as much as he clicks his heels together and wants this question to disappear. The flaw in Schroeder's Theory is that the Cat is an observer too but inside the Box his/her reactions are not observed. Different Cats have very different personalities, Humans are even more complex. Previous observation or interaction may give an insight into predicted behaviour but is fallible Biologically a person born Male or Female will always be a Male or Female Biologically but deterministically argues that a Biological Male or Female will always develop the characteristics of the Gender in which they were born. This is absurd Personally I don't understand why it is such a controversial issue when it effects at best about 0.5% of the Population other than to make it a Political Wedge Issue. Live and let live
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Feb 8, 2024 13:59:22 GMT
I don’t know. Do you think using transgender people as the butt of your joke for political point scoring in front of the mother of a murdered transgender child (murdered because of gender) is compassionate, empathetic and the type of behaviour we seek in our leaders? Was Brianna joked about? No, not her specifically. That doesn’t make it ok. Will you answer my above question?
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Feb 8, 2024 14:10:03 GMT
Agree with this - Rishi can’t apologise because if he does he won’t be able to use the comment again and the whole “culture war” angle is a key approach for the Tories.
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Feb 8, 2024 14:32:04 GMT
Sounds like you can't define a blue sock mate. Everyone knows blue socks have a blue colour. You can't just change the colour as it pleases you. It's like calling a blue sock a purple sock. I have so many odd socks go missing (fuck knows where they go!) I'm considering thinking bollocks to it and just start wearing socks that don't match. Join the club matey.....I cant be arsed to stand there sorting pairs out - mine just go straight in the drawer Annoys the fuck out of the missus when we go out ! I just tell her its old age creeping up on me and meekly apologise ( knowing full well Im just being a beligerent old fart)
|
|
|
Post by dutchstokie on Feb 8, 2024 14:33:27 GMT
Radical tory rishi blaming starner fir his crass conent at pmqs Again....that's just noise.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Feb 8, 2024 15:35:40 GMT
Radical tory rishi blaming starner fir his crass conent at pmqs The only option he really has is to double down rather than backdown given the context and accusations he made of Starmer. It's a sad indictment of politics - with all the shit going on in the world, and as fucking useless as the Tories are, this is where we're at. It's mind-melting really - imagine having a time machine and going back just a decade and going to tell yourself 'In ten years time we'll still be struggling with Brexit and coming out of a global pandemic; the environment's turned into a cash cow; middle east is on the brink of exploding; the west is in proxy war with Russia; China are sniffing being top dog; folk are absolutely fucking skint; utility prices are ridiculous through greed; AI is looking increasingly scary; London's very stabby; multi-culturism is seeing increasing pushback; the US has the choice between a geriatric who probably pisses himself and a geriatric who maybe doesn't for president and; the unelected members of the Economic Forum continue to successfully predict upcoming doom to the point it is beyond sinister yet the main thing the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition are concerned with is a definition of a woman because the parent of a murdered biological boy who wished to be a girl was in the gallery - oh and Stoke are properly shit like!.' It's barking fucking mental. ..........and breathe 😆 Good summary though chief 👍
|
|
|
Post by maxplonk on Feb 8, 2024 15:55:11 GMT
"It's the satirists I feel sorry for."
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 8, 2024 17:50:39 GMT
"It's the satirists I feel sorry for." A must read 👏 👏 👏 🤣 of laughter
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 8, 2024 18:46:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Feb 8, 2024 18:48:27 GMT
Render 2 bye bye elections next week
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Feb 8, 2024 18:55:24 GMT
Sounds like you can't define a blue sock mate. Everyone knows blue socks have a blue colour. You can't just change the colour as it pleases you. It's like calling a blue sock a purple sock. I have so many odd socks go missing (fuck knows where they go!) I'm considering thinking bollocks to it and just start wearing socks that don't match. Just go back to wearing black socks (remember those?)Dunner matter then
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Feb 8, 2024 19:13:07 GMT
Sounds like you can't define a blue sock mate. Everyone knows blue socks have a blue colour. You can't just change the colour as it pleases you. It's like calling a blue sock a purple sock. I have so many odd socks go missing (fuck knows where they go!) I'm considering thinking bollocks to it and just start wearing socks that don't match. Our house eats socks- there is no other explanation. I have now adopted a policy of buying two matching packs of socks so that when the house eats one sock I have a spare of the correct design for my good pair.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Feb 8, 2024 19:41:19 GMT
I have so many odd socks go missing (fuck knows where they go!) I'm considering thinking bollocks to it and just start wearing socks that don't match. Our house eats socks- there is no other explanation. I have now adopted a policy of buying two matching packs of socks so that when the house eats one sock I have a spare of the correct design for my good pair. This scandal needs investigating! Reckon Toby Jones could be booked up for a while tho.. 🤔
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Feb 8, 2024 20:03:34 GMT
All those times the Tories threatened to cut the BBCs funding maybe that actually meant they’d raise - good job Evan Davies, of the BBC, can explain the financials to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury of the United Kingdom:
/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1755664119531761703¤tTweetUser=bmay
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Feb 8, 2024 20:26:20 GMT
He has been saying the same thing numerous times ever since Starmer stated that a woman can have a penis? Why do you think whether Girls and Women may have a Penis is such an important issue? As we are talking about the Brianna Murder. While the Female Jenkinson's motivation was Sadistic Evil. In handing down the sentences, Justice Yip described the murder as "sadistic in nature" and, referring to Ratcliffe, "where a secondary motive was hostility towards Ghey because of her transgender identity" Do you think Rishi has a hostility towards Transgender People? Not saying he or anyone else who had those feelings would act upon it Starmer said 99.9% of Women don't have a Penis news.sky.com/story/keir-starmer-says-99-9-of-women-havent-got-a-penis-as-he-faces-questions-over-trans-rights-12848438This is factually correct according to the 2021 Census A total of 262,000 people (0.5%) answered “No”, indicating that their gender identity was different from their sex registered at birth. Within this group: 118,000 (0.24%) answered “No” but did not provide a write-in response 48,000 (0.10%) identified as a trans man 48,000 (0.10%) identified as a trans woman
30,000 (0.06%) identified as non-binary 18,000 (0.04%) wrote in a different gender identity www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/genderidentity/bulletins/genderidentityenglandandwales/census2021Its rather curious that Rishi focuses on 0.1% of the Population when asked a serious question about the State of the Economy They can identify all they want. Women don't have penises. Incidentally, in Clown World, why is there rarely, if ever, a discussion on whether men can have vaginas?
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 8, 2024 20:51:35 GMT
Why do you think whether Girls and Women may have a Penis is such an important issue? As we are talking about the Brianna Murder. While the Female Jenkinson's motivation was Sadistic Evil. In handing down the sentences, Justice Yip described the murder as "sadistic in nature" and, referring to Ratcliffe, "where a secondary motive was hostility towards Ghey because of her transgender identity" Do you think Rishi has a hostility towards Transgender People? Not saying he or anyone else who had those feelings would act upon it Starmer said 99.9% of Women don't have a Penis news.sky.com/story/keir-starmer-says-99-9-of-women-havent-got-a-penis-as-he-faces-questions-over-trans-rights-12848438This is factually correct according to the 2021 Census A total of 262,000 people (0.5%) answered “No”, indicating that their gender identity was different from their sex registered at birth. Within this group: 118,000 (0.24%) answered “No” but did not provide a write-in response 48,000 (0.10%) identified as a trans man 48,000 (0.10%) identified as a trans woman
30,000 (0.06%) identified as non-binary 18,000 (0.04%) wrote in a different gender identity www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/genderidentity/bulletins/genderidentityenglandandwales/census2021Its rather curious that Rishi focuses on 0.1% of the Population when asked a serious question about the State of the Economy They can identify all they want. Women don't have penises. Incidentally, in Clown World, why is there rarely, if ever, a discussion on whether men can have Some might very well think they do, but I couldn't possibly comment
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 8, 2024 21:01:41 GMT
All those times the Tories threatened to cut the BBCs funding maybe that actually meant they’d raise - good job Evan Davies, of the BBC, can explain the financials to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury of the United Kingdom: /mediaViewer?currentTweet=1755664119531761703¤tTweetUser=bmay The sheer incompetence here is terrifying.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Feb 8, 2024 21:30:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2024 21:49:12 GMT
All those times the Tories threatened to cut the BBCs funding maybe that actually meant they’d raise - good job Evan Davies, of the BBC, can explain the financials to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury of the United Kingdom: /mediaViewer?currentTweet=1755664119531761703¤tTweetUser=bmay The sheer incompetence here is terrifying. They do it on a constant basis. “Oh, we must have different figures in front of us”. It’s a lie that implies there are stark contrasts between what the OBR is saying and the Tory’s “true data”. That “true data” of course has never been shown. The interviewer is poor here. They should request a release of the information that the Tory’s are basing their argument on.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Feb 8, 2024 22:14:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 8, 2024 23:26:22 GMT
All those times the Tories threatened to cut the BBCs funding maybe that actually meant they’d raise - good job Evan Davies, of the BBC, can explain the financials to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury of the United Kingdom: /mediaViewer?currentTweet=1755664119531761703¤tTweetUser=bmay Even I can't accept she could reach this level of stupidity Government Ministers have become so accustomed to tell outright lies that they are not able to cope when challenged It was a shock to the system when the mild mannered Evan reacted incredulously to her lies and wasn't prepared to let her off the hook. I notice Laura has been Trotted (Pun intended) out to do the Radio and TV Interviews today, Evan, Politics Live, Sophie Ridge etc I expect she will be kept in the background for a while for more intensive training on the Art of Lying after today's debacle.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 9, 2024 0:08:36 GMT
Yes please!
|
|