Warning.

HAYSIE

Scottish civil servants warned of ‘fa rts’ in the workplace



https://uk.yahoo.com/news/****-women-transgender-ideology-described-172326946.html

Essexphil

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

HAYSIE

Essexphil said:

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

I just posted it because of the weird headline.
I thought it was about fa rts.
It seems the link has disappeared.

Essexphil

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

I just posted it because of the weird headline.
I thought it was about ****.
It seems the link has disappeared.

A FA RT is a term similar to TERF.

It stands for "Feminism-Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe".

Is it a bit offensive? Yes. some would say a lot offensive.

But here's the thing. Groups like this want their way to be the only way, rather than 1 of a range of lifestyle choices.

They are not "for women"-their only campaigns are against Trans people, and demanding the right to belittle them.

They cannot be defined simply as "radical feminists"-simply because most radical feminists are concentrating on promoting radical feminism, not oppressing a minority. Indeed, a lot of people defending the rights of Trans people are Radical Feminists.

Take the example of the current action against Survivors' Network in Brighton.

Rape Crisis Charities tend to be very small. They only have a tiny budget. They have to make a judgment call as to whether to include Trans people. A difficult call. Without a "right" answer. So, in practice, the Charities normally make it abundantly clear which approach they are taking.

"Sarah" was made aware of this at the beginning. She chose to attend Survivors Network, rather than an alternative. She is now suing the Charity for allowing a Trans Woman to attend a Meeting.

She didn't say-this isn't for me. could you refer me to a different Charity. No. She has to sue the Charity-which will cause colossal legal fees, which will now not be available to help women in need. Claiming that a Charity must always have a group that excludes Trans people. Regardless of the fact that many of these Charities can only fund 1 group.

In the workplace, anyone who seeks to attack any Minority is a major issue. Should the term "FA RT" have been used? No. But the issue is rather more important.

HAYSIE

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

I just posted it because of the weird headline.
I thought it was about ****.
It seems the link has disappeared.

A FA RT is a term similar to TERF.

It stands for "Feminism-Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe".

Is it a bit offensive? Yes. some would say a lot offensive.

But here's the thing. Groups like this want their way to be the only way, rather than 1 of a range of lifestyle choices.

They are not "for women"-their only campaigns are against Trans people, and demanding the right to belittle them.

They cannot be defined simply as "radical feminists"-simply because most radical feminists are concentrating on promoting radical feminism, not oppressing a minority. Indeed, a lot of people defending the rights of Trans people are Radical Feminists.

Take the example of the current action against Survivors' Network in Brighton.

Rape Crisis Charities tend to be very small. They only have a tiny budget. They have to make a judgment call as to whether to include Trans people. A difficult call. Without a "right" answer. So, in practice, the Charities normally make it abundantly clear which approach they are taking.

"Sarah" was made aware of this at the beginning. She chose to attend Survivors Network, rather than an alternative. She is now suing the Charity for allowing a Trans Woman to attend a Meeting.

She didn't say-this isn't for me. could you refer me to a different Charity. No. She has to sue the Charity-which will cause colossal legal fees, which will now not be available to help women in need. Claiming that a Charity must always have a group that excludes Trans people. Regardless of the fact that many of these Charities can only fund 1 group.

In the workplace, anyone who seeks to attack any Minority is a major issue. Should the term "FA RT" have been used? No. But the issue is rather more important.

I thought the article was about people being warned about far ting in work.
Probably should have read it first.
If I had, I wouldnt have posted it.

Essexphil

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

I just posted it because of the weird headline.
I thought it was about ****.
It seems the link has disappeared.

A FA RT is a term similar to TERF.

It stands for "Feminism-Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe".

Is it a bit offensive? Yes. some would say a lot offensive.

But here's the thing. Groups like this want their way to be the only way, rather than 1 of a range of lifestyle choices.

They are not "for women"-their only campaigns are against Trans people, and demanding the right to belittle them.

They cannot be defined simply as "radical feminists"-simply because most radical feminists are concentrating on promoting radical feminism, not oppressing a minority. Indeed, a lot of people defending the rights of Trans people are Radical Feminists.

Take the example of the current action against Survivors' Network in Brighton.

Rape Crisis Charities tend to be very small. They only have a tiny budget. They have to make a judgment call as to whether to include Trans people. A difficult call. Without a "right" answer. So, in practice, the Charities normally make it abundantly clear which approach they are taking.

"Sarah" was made aware of this at the beginning. She chose to attend Survivors Network, rather than an alternative. She is now suing the Charity for allowing a Trans Woman to attend a Meeting.

She didn't say-this isn't for me. could you refer me to a different Charity. No. She has to sue the Charity-which will cause colossal legal fees, which will now not be available to help women in need. Claiming that a Charity must always have a group that excludes Trans people. Regardless of the fact that many of these Charities can only fund 1 group.

In the workplace, anyone who seeks to attack any Minority is a major issue. Should the term "FA RT" have been used? No. But the issue is rather more important.

I thought the article was about people being warned about far ting in work.
Probably should have read it first.
If I had, I wouldnt have posted it.

Fair comment.

HAYSIE

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

I just posted it because of the weird headline.
I thought it was about ****.
It seems the link has disappeared.

A FA RT is a term similar to TERF.

It stands for "Feminism-Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe".

Is it a bit offensive? Yes. some would say a lot offensive.

But here's the thing. Groups like this want their way to be the only way, rather than 1 of a range of lifestyle choices.

They are not "for women"-their only campaigns are against Trans people, and demanding the right to belittle them.

They cannot be defined simply as "radical feminists"-simply because most radical feminists are concentrating on promoting radical feminism, not oppressing a minority. Indeed, a lot of people defending the rights of Trans people are Radical Feminists.

Take the example of the current action against Survivors' Network in Brighton.

Rape Crisis Charities tend to be very small. They only have a tiny budget. They have to make a judgment call as to whether to include Trans people. A difficult call. Without a "right" answer. So, in practice, the Charities normally make it abundantly clear which approach they are taking.

"Sarah" was made aware of this at the beginning. She chose to attend Survivors Network, rather than an alternative. She is now suing the Charity for allowing a Trans Woman to attend a Meeting.

She didn't say-this isn't for me. could you refer me to a different Charity. No. She has to sue the Charity-which will cause colossal legal fees, which will now not be available to help women in need. Claiming that a Charity must always have a group that excludes Trans people. Regardless of the fact that many of these Charities can only fund 1 group.

In the workplace, anyone who seeks to attack any Minority is a major issue. Should the term "FA RT" have been used? No. But the issue is rather more important.

I thought the article was about people being warned about far ting in work.
Probably should have read it first.
If I had, I wouldnt have posted it.

Fair comment.

I should have been more careful.

VespaPX

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

I just posted it because of the weird headline.
I thought it was about ****.
It seems the link has disappeared.

A FA RT is a term similar to TERF.

It stands for "Feminism-Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe".

Is it a bit offensive? Yes. some would say a lot offensive.

But here's the thing. Groups like this want their way to be the only way, rather than 1 of a range of lifestyle choices.

They are not "for women"-their only campaigns are against Trans people, and demanding the right to belittle them.

They cannot be defined simply as "radical feminists"-simply because most radical feminists are concentrating on promoting radical feminism, not oppressing a minority. Indeed, a lot of people defending the rights of Trans people are Radical Feminists.

Take the example of the current action against Survivors' Network in Brighton.

Rape Crisis Charities tend to be very small. They only have a tiny budget. They have to make a judgment call as to whether to include Trans people. A difficult call. Without a "right" answer. So, in practice, the Charities normally make it abundantly clear which approach they are taking.

"Sarah" was made aware of this at the beginning. She chose to attend Survivors Network, rather than an alternative. She is now suing the Charity for allowing a Trans Woman to attend a Meeting.

She didn't say-this isn't for me. could you refer me to a different Charity. No. She has to sue the Charity-which will cause colossal legal fees, which will now not be available to help women in need. Claiming that a Charity must always have a group that excludes Trans people. Regardless of the fact that many of these Charities can only fund 1 group.

In the workplace, anyone who seeks to attack any Minority is a major issue. Should the term "FA RT" have been used? No. But the issue is rather more important.

I thought the article was about people being warned about far ting in work.
Probably should have read it first.
If I had, I wouldnt have posted it.

Fair comment.

I should have been more careful.

The clue was there in the words on the link...

HAYSIE

VespaPX said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

HAYSIE said:

Essexphil said:

In shock "news", haters continue hating. And you just can't resist publishing every time someone wants to practice their own special brand of Eugenics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_Women_Scotland

You know when racists object to being called "Racist"? Because what for them is a badge of honour is somehow not fair if people call them what they are?

What next? Going after brown people? Or the Welsh, perhaps?

I just posted it because of the weird headline.
I thought it was about ****.
It seems the link has disappeared.

A FA RT is a term similar to TERF.

It stands for "Feminism-Appropriating Ridiculous Transphobe".

Is it a bit offensive? Yes. some would say a lot offensive.

But here's the thing. Groups like this want their way to be the only way, rather than 1 of a range of lifestyle choices.

They are not "for women"-their only campaigns are against Trans people, and demanding the right to belittle them.

They cannot be defined simply as "radical feminists"-simply because most radical feminists are concentrating on promoting radical feminism, not oppressing a minority. Indeed, a lot of people defending the rights of Trans people are Radical Feminists.

Take the example of the current action against Survivors' Network in Brighton.

Rape Crisis Charities tend to be very small. They only have a tiny budget. They have to make a judgment call as to whether to include Trans people. A difficult call. Without a "right" answer. So, in practice, the Charities normally make it abundantly clear which approach they are taking.

"Sarah" was made aware of this at the beginning. She chose to attend Survivors Network, rather than an alternative. She is now suing the Charity for allowing a Trans Woman to attend a Meeting.

She didn't say-this isn't for me. could you refer me to a different Charity. No. She has to sue the Charity-which will cause colossal legal fees, which will now not be available to help women in need. Claiming that a Charity must always have a group that excludes Trans people. Regardless of the fact that many of these Charities can only fund 1 group.

In the workplace, anyone who seeks to attack any Minority is a major issue. Should the term "FA RT" have been used? No. But the issue is rather more important.

I thought the article was about people being warned about far ting in work.
Probably should have read it first.
If I had, I wouldnt have posted it.

Fair comment.

I should have been more careful.

The clue was there in the words on the link...

Well spotted Sherlock.