Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

The gender jihadists are out of control
Trans activism is now little more than a witch-hunt of disobedient women.

The gender jihadists are out of control

Imagine if mainstream British politicians were photographed at a demo at which someone was holding a placard that said ‘Decapitate coconuts’. A demo at which there were open, horrendous expressions of violent contempt for black people who hold the supposedly wrong views. A demo at which it was stated that such sinful ethnic-minority people should not only be executed but eaten, too. ‘I eat coconuts’, one of the signs might say. There would be uproar, rightly so. It’s unlikely the politicians would keep their jobs for long.

Well, the sexist equivalent of this scenario did happen, for real, in Glasgow on Saturday. Politicians were seen standing in front of protest signs that fantasised about visiting bigoted violence, not upon morally disobedient black people, but upon morally disobedient women. TERFs, as they’re called, which literally means ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminist’, but which really means witch, bitch, scold, hag. Anyone who has witnessed a hardline trans activist spit out the word ‘TERF’ will be under no illusion as to the misogynistic menace that underpins that four-letter slur. Yet while there is concern over what happened in Glasgow, there isn’t as much public fury as one might expect.

And yet there is a very important question that Oswald, Stewart and the other Sturgeonites at that Glasgow gathering must answer: you might not have seen those particular placards, but how have you not seen the frenzied woman hate that is now a key feature of the ideology of transgenderism? How have you missed the misogynistic bile that flows not only through that Glasgow demo you gladly attended, but also through so much of the trans lobby? How are you unaware that while ‘Decapitate TERFs’ might be a new one, there have been many explosions of violence-tinged fury with TERFs in recent years, both online and off? Not seeing two hateful placards is kind of forgivable – not seeing that trans activism now seems to consist of little more than angry men bellowing ‘witch’ in the faces of women who have the temerity to disagree with them is not.

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia #enbyphobia spiked-online.com

It’s time to call out the nonsense of nonbinary

That’s the other point – the staggering narcissism of the nonbinary ideology. These people really do believe that the entire world should mould itself around their ideology. Male and female awards must be scrapped. Female toilets, changing rooms and other private spaces must be thrown open to men who feel like women. Even language itself must be twisted and bent to these people’s identity feels. So we’re all expected to use ‘preferred pronouns’ and even to mangle grammar by using ‘they’ to refer to one person. My use of the he pronoun for Smith and the she pronoun for Corrin and D’Arcy will be judged by some a heinous act of bigotry. But I am not willing to sacrifice the sense and universalism of the language I use to appease the fever dreams of a minority movement.

‘For the narcissist, the world is a mirror’, said Christopher Lasch. The narcissist must always see ‘his “grandiose self” reflected in the attentions of others’, he said. So it is with the trans movement. It expects every realm of society – every awards ceremony, every woman’s space, every linguistic tradition – to bow and scrape before its post-truth, ahistorical belief that people are whatever sex they say they are. The truly oppressive force was not the Brits having male and female categories but the pressure put on the Brits to scrap those categories in order to flatter the narcissistic delusions of a few nonbinaries. This is the opposite of a civil-rights movement. Progressive movements in the past were concerned with changing the world to make it better for all. The regressive, navel-gazing cult of gender play is obsessed with altering the world so that its own adherents never have to encounter an idea or a space that dents their fragile egos. The irony of their misuse of the word ‘they’ is that they are myopically focused on me, me, me.

There is a serious philosophical question in all this: should people have the right to liberate themselves from reality? I say no. Sam Smith and Emma Corrin and the rest can wear what they want, call themselves what they want and use whatever pronouns they want. But why should the rest of us have to play along with them and abandon everything we know to be true and right? Sam Smith is a man, Emma Corrin is a woman, and it is not bigotry to say so. Truth is never bigotry.

Brendan O'neill #enbyphobia spiked-online.com

It’s time to call out the nonsense of nonbinary

What’s more important – women’s rights or Sam Smith’s feelings? We’ve had a loud and clear answer to that maddest of questions over the past few days. It’s Sam Smith’s feelings. Of course it is. The right of this ear-piercing nonbinary balladeer not to suffer the indignity of winning an award with the word ‘male’ on it – despite his obviously being a bloke – takes precedence over the right of female pop artists to have their own sexed awards category and to pick up gongs for their work. Smith’s eccentric identity trumps your right to win prizes, ladies. Suck it up.


It’s their surprise that is surprising. Gender-critical voices warned that collapsing the male and female categories into one flabby, woke, unsexed Artist of the Year field would disadvantage pop’s women. Even the Brits itself seemed to see the downsides to genderfluidity. In 2021, in response to the trans lament that having male and female categories excludes those, like Smith, who fantasise that they’re post-sex, the Brits said it would make changes. But if change ‘unintentionally leads to less inclusion, then it risks being counterproductive to diversity and equality’, it warned. That’s now happened. The infinitesimally small number of nonbinary pop acts are included, women are not. In 2023, anyway.

There are some important points to make here. First, Sam Smith was not ‘excluded’ from the Brits. That’s just nonsense. It is demeaning to those who have suffered real oppression to describe a bloke’s infantile, hammy refusal to accept a gong with the word ‘male’ on it as oppression. A man saying ‘Ooh, I can’t accept that award because its wording will offend my outlandish identity as a “they”’ is about as far from Rosa Parks as you can get. Smith excluded himself from the Brits by being in denial about his maleness. He, and Corrin and D’Arcy and the other fashionably post-gender celebs, opted out of sex, and by extension out of sexed awards. It’s on them. Why should awards change to accommodate the faddish beliefs of a nonbinary clique?


papercut 100 #psycho spiked-online.com

Alternatives to 'raping a child':

1sublimating the sexual urge in good works and sporting activities
2 consensual sensual activities with an adult
3 consensual sex with an adult
4 consensual sex with several adults
5 masturbation
6 auto-erotic activities
7 celibacy
8 consensual sexual or sensual activities with a non-human animal.
9 sex with a prostitute
10 consensual sensual activities with a child
11 consensual non-penetrative sexual activities with a child (i.e; not legal in the UK but definitely not 'Rape'.)

There, that's 11 alternatives you can contemplate next time you haven't had sex for a long time and are thinking that your only option is to go and 'rape' someone.

papercut 100 #fundie spiked-online.com

It's just that if a child finds she likes and trusts a particular adult, and the adult likes and feels love for that child - why shouldn't part of their closeness have a sensual element - the adult can teach the child about hygiene, biology, physical development, interpersonal relationships, mutuality, love and respect, as well as how to safely experience and give pleasure - so many things which another child wouldn't be able to.

Whilst such a relationship would risk being harmful to the child in the context of modern, consumer society because of the intense stigma the child will eventually become aware of, I don't think that such a nurturing, consensual, child-led relationship would be intrinsically any more harmful than children playing at sex with other children.

george #fundie spiked-online.com

If family's are so closed off,ain't that a good case for incest? providing it's
consensual and loving,again just a taboo,I'm not talking penetration here,until past puberty,how much of it goes on anyway,farther daughter,daughter bro,bro younger bro etc?

As far as a non family member is concerned,the owner of the property,can legally eject anyone out their house at any time,regardless of the age of consent,but hay some parents don't give a fuck about their kids,falling into the arms of a benign pedo,could be just what they need.also don't forget
kids who have no parents,due to accident etc.

holocaust21 #fundie spiked-online.com

Couldn't have made the case better myself. The only thing I'd add is that ages of consent across the world used to be about 12 at the most with some places (e.g. Delaware, USA) being 7. So really the idea of legalising 'paedophilia' being excessively liberal is ridiculous - it is in reality our society now that is excessively puritanical.

The body of evidence in favour of the legalisation of 'paedophilia' is so enormous that there really is no reason not to. The only reason why the arguments are not heard is because governments have clamped down on and arrested those who try to speak the truth, such as the members of PIE, the members of the Dutch organisation Martijn and so forth.

The war on paedophiles really is a war on freedom of speech.