Alberta MLA Jennifer Johnson was booted from her UCP caucus in the middle of an election campaign last year for "insensitive" comments regarding gender ideology in the public school curriculum. Even though the Premier turfed her out, she still got almost 70% of the vote and now sits as an independent - because regular people don't care at all about this bull shit. They just want someone who will represent their interests.
Now she's in a viral video where she's basically forced to sit and listen to a bunch of mansplaining by a deranged trans-activist in order to "do the work to rebuild trust and relationships in the LGBT+ community," so that she might be accepted back into the UCP fold.
And apparently she failed at doing this work when she refused to state for the record that "a trans-woman is a woman" 😲(*oh, the horror!*)😲
Even Elon Musk and J. K. Rowling now know where Alberta is on account of this.
You can watch the video here if you really want to:
Doesn’t this case in particular go against your thesis that we’re on a ‘slippery slope’? I mean, for starters you’ve had to find an obscure news item from Scotland to illustrate your point, but the case you’ve dug up shows that this very incident is apparently being dealt with in a reasonable manner by the authorities in charge. Where’s the slippery slope? No doubt this case never would have even been brought to your attention were it not for the social media feeding trough of rage bait and click farming that informs most of our civil discourse.
Quick follow-up question: why do you insist on referring to Mridul Wadhwa as ‘he’, a ‘dude’ etc. She’s clearly a person who identifies and presents as a woman. Even your boy Jordan P would have no problem referring to such a person using the female pronouns. I ask this question because it seems like a deliberate and provocative choice that sort of undermines your whole premise of being reasonable and open minded on these issues.
Well, I guess we'll see how this case is eventually dealt with in the end. As I said, this is merely the inevitable conclusion of the decisions we've made in our current society, so is it really that bizarre?
I refer to Wadhwa as a dude because he literally is a dude. Here's the thing about respect, Ned: no one just gets respect because they want it, you need to earn it. Wadhwa basically gamed the system in order to further his own agenda, so he can kiss my ass. Why should I be required to play his game?
Yes, it’s true - the ‘decisions we’ve made as society’ mean that a trans woman can now hold an important local government job (if that’s what you mean) at a rape crisis center.
If we turned the clock back to the 1960s, we wouldn’t have these kinds of shenanigans. Men were men and women were women dagnabbit! If we turned the clock back to the 60s, we also wouldn’t have rape crisis centers, and these pesky rape victims would keep their yappy mouths shut! am I right?
But aren't we on a slippery slope? Aren't we living under a repressive regime of compelled speech? How can the tribunal rule against her? And how can the Guardian report on it? I thought we aren't allowed to go against the woke overlords?
A court-ordered apology posted to their website and a court order to refer sexual assault victims to Beira’s Place, the rape centre founded by the Queen of Terf Island herself, J.K. Rowling. Now that's poetic justice.
Well, I guess you could ask the woman who was fired what she thinks about it (the actual woman, I mean).
This kind of a case would seem to be a bit of an outlier - especially in Scotland. But they did just get rid of one woke PM because of trans issues so it would also seem the tide is beginning to turn.
Years from now I sincerely hope we can look back on this mania and just shake our collective heads.
You really think that having a "trans" person (for which exists only an extremely ambiguous and nebulous definition) in a position of authority is a huge win for human rights? What about freedom of conscience and religion? What about freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression? You know, the rights that this trans person trampled on. What about those rights?
Maybe it's high time these people who are apparently under "constant threat" take a good long look in the mirror and figure out why these threats are there in the first place. Maybe "who she is" as a trans person isn't really the problem, but who she is as a Kafka-esque asshole is the real problem.
The decisions we've made collectively have allowed people like Wadhwa to get away with infringing on other people's rights in the guise of "diversity" and they've discovered that the easiest way to do that is by playing the victim card, which is pretty much every card in their deck.
“Gamed the system” LOL, Ah yes… Every young boy’s dream is to one day land that dream role: top dog at the rape crisis center of Edinburgh. The fame, the glory, the riches! All it took was a brilliant plan and someone with the balls (heh) to carry it out - to become a trans woman. Genius! All he had to do was to live life as a woman, and before h… she knew it, she’d have all the traumatized rape victims one could ever dream of.
Honestly though, whatever you think of the whole controversy (and we do not have enough information to know the full story), this is a person who’s dedicated their life to helping people in horrific and desperate circumstances, and done this thankless job in the face of a vile campaign of vilification and threats simply for being who she is.
You don’t think that’s deserving or respect, well ok. I shudder to think what kind of things DO earn your respect. The crisis center had to end their open door policy due to the constant threats, so maybe that makes you feel good about yourself I guess.
Presumably the employment tribunal "knows the whole story." At least as much as can be known. They called Wadhwa's actions a "heresy hunt":
"Wadhwa, who identifies as a woman but was born a man, emerged as a key figure in a 'Kafka-esque' investigation into Ms Adams' opinions. Employment judge Ian McFatridge stated Wadhwa and other staff wanted to "make life unpleasant" for Ms Adams because they "disapproved of her views".
Maybe Wadhwa had a desire to help women, but it's obvious she saw her role there was also to police the morality and ideals of the staff and their clients.
So no, I don't have respect for a 'Kafka-esque' CEO who has used the system to further a twisted ideological agenda. Do you?
A certain judge has expressed an opinion that you happen to like the sound of, that doesn't mean the 'the tribunal agrees'. It means that two public servants are having a slinging match. - one which has found its way to the social media feeds of reactionaries simply because it contains all the right buzzwords (trans, pronouns etc).
Since many of these same trans folk loudly support Hamas and their fight against Zionist oppression - and quite proudly I might add, it seems there's been perhaps an overlooked, yet simple solution: Airdrop them into Gaza where, you know, their 'rights' will be recognized and cherished. Just a thought.
Brilliant analysis, and I love the ever so subtle endorsement of lynching at the end.
Have you ever by chance saved/screen-shotted/scrapbooked a documented, or even a here-say, example of a transgendered person claiming support for Hamas?
This is a genuine question, though I suspect you won't respond for perhaps obvious reasons.
“Since many of these same trans folk loudly support Hamas and their fight against Zionist oppression - and quite proudly I might add..”
- this is a quote directly from the above comment from Mr. JFAO. I’m not sure how YOU read his words but to MY eyes he’s claiming there’s a group ot transgender people “loudly” and “proudly” supporting the militant Islamist group, Hamas.
That’s an extraordinary claim and, as Carl Sagan liked to say, ‘extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’. In my response, I didn’t demand extraordinary evidence. I asked for ANY evidence in ANY form to back up his bizarre claim.
Below you can see that he responded in precisely the way we would expect, confirming he has no evidence of any kind to support his claim but is either too spineless or juvenile to admit as such, pretending instead that my question is not worthy of a response.
This is one (presumably trans) person's take. The bottom line is this: when you see yourself as a victim of "colonization" or "erasure" or "genocide" as this person apparently does, then there's a common fight and a common enemy and it makes perfect sense to support the cause of Hamas.
Anyone opposed Israel's occupation of Palestinian land shares a common enemy with Hamas. That's the vast majority of people though. The vast majority of people, including many Israelis, believe that colonization and ethnic cleansing are bad things, and that Israel's actions should be opposed. Yes, they 'share a common enemy' with Hamas but that's like me calling you a Justin Trudeau supporter simply because Trudeau opposes something which you also happen to oppose. It's absurd.
Yes. As I said, the common thread here is the belief that the world is divided into two groups: oppressors and oppressed. If you "identify" as the latter, then you must by default be against the former.
A bit simplistic, but it seems to serve the purposes of those promoting this belief.
Ned, you have my word if you ever, even accidently, say something that's worthy of a response, I'll gladly do so. Also, please remember, silence is not agreement. Seriously, what does an eye-roll sound like?
Here's the latest chapter in Everything Trans:
Alberta MLA Jennifer Johnson was booted from her UCP caucus in the middle of an election campaign last year for "insensitive" comments regarding gender ideology in the public school curriculum. Even though the Premier turfed her out, she still got almost 70% of the vote and now sits as an independent - because regular people don't care at all about this bull shit. They just want someone who will represent their interests.
Now she's in a viral video where she's basically forced to sit and listen to a bunch of mansplaining by a deranged trans-activist in order to "do the work to rebuild trust and relationships in the LGBT+ community," so that she might be accepted back into the UCP fold.
And apparently she failed at doing this work when she refused to state for the record that "a trans-woman is a woman" 😲(*oh, the horror!*)😲
Even Elon Musk and J. K. Rowling now know where Alberta is on account of this.
You can watch the video here if you really want to:
https://x.com/babybeginner/status/1835951437672800631?t=Y8cRTC7Thyo_fDBXsBtnyw&s=19
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/first-reading-alberta-mla-goes-viral-for-video-in-which-shes-berated-by-trans-activist
What a bizarre case.
Doesn’t this case in particular go against your thesis that we’re on a ‘slippery slope’? I mean, for starters you’ve had to find an obscure news item from Scotland to illustrate your point, but the case you’ve dug up shows that this very incident is apparently being dealt with in a reasonable manner by the authorities in charge. Where’s the slippery slope? No doubt this case never would have even been brought to your attention were it not for the social media feeding trough of rage bait and click farming that informs most of our civil discourse.
Quick follow-up question: why do you insist on referring to Mridul Wadhwa as ‘he’, a ‘dude’ etc. She’s clearly a person who identifies and presents as a woman. Even your boy Jordan P would have no problem referring to such a person using the female pronouns. I ask this question because it seems like a deliberate and provocative choice that sort of undermines your whole premise of being reasonable and open minded on these issues.
Well, I guess we'll see how this case is eventually dealt with in the end. As I said, this is merely the inevitable conclusion of the decisions we've made in our current society, so is it really that bizarre?
I refer to Wadhwa as a dude because he literally is a dude. Here's the thing about respect, Ned: no one just gets respect because they want it, you need to earn it. Wadhwa basically gamed the system in order to further his own agenda, so he can kiss my ass. Why should I be required to play his game?
Yes, it’s true - the ‘decisions we’ve made as society’ mean that a trans woman can now hold an important local government job (if that’s what you mean) at a rape crisis center.
If we turned the clock back to the 1960s, we wouldn’t have these kinds of shenanigans. Men were men and women were women dagnabbit! If we turned the clock back to the 60s, we also wouldn’t have rape crisis centers, and these pesky rape victims would keep their yappy mouths shut! am I right?
This appears to be the resolution of this craziness. It looks like there's still a tiny ray of hope for a rational world.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/sep/13/edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-boss-resigns-review
But aren't we on a slippery slope? Aren't we living under a repressive regime of compelled speech? How can the tribunal rule against her? And how can the Guardian report on it? I thought we aren't allowed to go against the woke overlords?
This is all very confusing.
Well here's a breath of fresh air:
A court-ordered apology posted to their website and a court order to refer sexual assault victims to Beira’s Place, the rape centre founded by the Queen of Terf Island herself, J.K. Rowling. Now that's poetic justice.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c6248z383x7o
Well, I guess you could ask the woman who was fired what she thinks about it (the actual woman, I mean).
This kind of a case would seem to be a bit of an outlier - especially in Scotland. But they did just get rid of one woke PM because of trans issues so it would also seem the tide is beginning to turn.
Years from now I sincerely hope we can look back on this mania and just shake our collective heads.
You really think that having a "trans" person (for which exists only an extremely ambiguous and nebulous definition) in a position of authority is a huge win for human rights? What about freedom of conscience and religion? What about freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression? You know, the rights that this trans person trampled on. What about those rights?
Maybe it's high time these people who are apparently under "constant threat" take a good long look in the mirror and figure out why these threats are there in the first place. Maybe "who she is" as a trans person isn't really the problem, but who she is as a Kafka-esque asshole is the real problem.
The decisions we've made collectively have allowed people like Wadhwa to get away with infringing on other people's rights in the guise of "diversity" and they've discovered that the easiest way to do that is by playing the victim card, which is pretty much every card in their deck.
“Gamed the system” LOL, Ah yes… Every young boy’s dream is to one day land that dream role: top dog at the rape crisis center of Edinburgh. The fame, the glory, the riches! All it took was a brilliant plan and someone with the balls (heh) to carry it out - to become a trans woman. Genius! All he had to do was to live life as a woman, and before h… she knew it, she’d have all the traumatized rape victims one could ever dream of.
Honestly though, whatever you think of the whole controversy (and we do not have enough information to know the full story), this is a person who’s dedicated their life to helping people in horrific and desperate circumstances, and done this thankless job in the face of a vile campaign of vilification and threats simply for being who she is.
You don’t think that’s deserving or respect, well ok. I shudder to think what kind of things DO earn your respect. The crisis center had to end their open door policy due to the constant threats, so maybe that makes you feel good about yourself I guess.
Presumably the employment tribunal "knows the whole story." At least as much as can be known. They called Wadhwa's actions a "heresy hunt":
"Wadhwa, who identifies as a woman but was born a man, emerged as a key figure in a 'Kafka-esque' investigation into Ms Adams' opinions. Employment judge Ian McFatridge stated Wadhwa and other staff wanted to "make life unpleasant" for Ms Adams because they "disapproved of her views".
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/edinburgh-rape-centre-boss-carried-32848117
Maybe Wadhwa had a desire to help women, but it's obvious she saw her role there was also to police the morality and ideals of the staff and their clients.
So no, I don't have respect for a 'Kafka-esque' CEO who has used the system to further a twisted ideological agenda. Do you?
A certain judge has expressed an opinion that you happen to like the sound of, that doesn't mean the 'the tribunal agrees'. It means that two public servants are having a slinging match. - one which has found its way to the social media feeds of reactionaries simply because it contains all the right buzzwords (trans, pronouns etc).
Do the tribunal doesn't agree? What precisely do they not agree with?
Bizarre unhinged rant. Are you pretending to be Scots now?
Since many of these same trans folk loudly support Hamas and their fight against Zionist oppression - and quite proudly I might add, it seems there's been perhaps an overlooked, yet simple solution: Airdrop them into Gaza where, you know, their 'rights' will be recognized and cherished. Just a thought.
Brilliant analysis, and I love the ever so subtle endorsement of lynching at the end.
Have you ever by chance saved/screen-shotted/scrapbooked a documented, or even a here-say, example of a transgendered person claiming support for Hamas?
This is a genuine question, though I suspect you won't respond for perhaps obvious reasons.
Your going to have to explain that one, Ned. I have no idea what you're talking about.
“Since many of these same trans folk loudly support Hamas and their fight against Zionist oppression - and quite proudly I might add..”
- this is a quote directly from the above comment from Mr. JFAO. I’m not sure how YOU read his words but to MY eyes he’s claiming there’s a group ot transgender people “loudly” and “proudly” supporting the militant Islamist group, Hamas.
That’s an extraordinary claim and, as Carl Sagan liked to say, ‘extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence’. In my response, I didn’t demand extraordinary evidence. I asked for ANY evidence in ANY form to back up his bizarre claim.
Below you can see that he responded in precisely the way we would expect, confirming he has no evidence of any kind to support his claim but is either too spineless or juvenile to admit as such, pretending instead that my question is not worthy of a response.
Is this still confusing?
This is one (presumably trans) person's take. The bottom line is this: when you see yourself as a victim of "colonization" or "erasure" or "genocide" as this person apparently does, then there's a common fight and a common enemy and it makes perfect sense to support the cause of Hamas.
https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/s/i5lZUqOYsp
Anyone opposed Israel's occupation of Palestinian land shares a common enemy with Hamas. That's the vast majority of people though. The vast majority of people, including many Israelis, believe that colonization and ethnic cleansing are bad things, and that Israel's actions should be opposed. Yes, they 'share a common enemy' with Hamas but that's like me calling you a Justin Trudeau supporter simply because Trudeau opposes something which you also happen to oppose. It's absurd.
Yes. As I said, the common thread here is the belief that the world is divided into two groups: oppressors and oppressed. If you "identify" as the latter, then you must by default be against the former.
A bit simplistic, but it seems to serve the purposes of those promoting this belief.
one of the comments on that Reddit post puts it better than me:
"Fuck yeah.
"Support genocide, because their government hates gays" is such a bad take that it melts my brain."
*You're
Ned, you have my word if you ever, even accidently, say something that's worthy of a response, I'll gladly do so. Also, please remember, silence is not agreement. Seriously, what does an eye-roll sound like?
Well, that answers my question nicely, doesn't it