Crazy Scots...

[noseall]

Whoever is ramming gay rights, trans, multiculturalism, climate emergency, etc, etc, etc down our throats

That'll be the gammons. Any chance they get.

 

[JohnD]

Who was writing your posts while you were arguing with Nemesis about Laurel Hubbard?

surely you are not silly enough to think that I, or anybody else, is obliged to espouse every cause that Regan dislikes?

 

[ReganAndCarter]

That'll be the gammons. Any chance they get.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

its rammed down their throat that its something special

You do, of course have evidence of this "ramming"?

Its not just some groundless swivel-eyed mouth-frothing invention?

 

[Captain Nemesis]

Warning - throwback alert!

Beware of brain-atrophied ignoramuses who dont ever want anything whatsoever to change!

They're trying to feminise males in this country. Saw a young boy walking along pavement with his mother yesterday. Boy had a small 'man bag' with strap over his shoulder. Looked just like a woman's handbag. When I was that age, I would have had the Mickey ripped out of me ruthlessly if I took to mincing along with what to all intents and purposes is a ladies handbag. My parents certainly would not have funded or encouraged such a thing. But luckily I grew up in normal times (relatively), ie. The 70s.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

They're trying to feminise males in this country.

Who are "they"?

What do you mean by "feminise"?

Do you have actual evidence of this "feminisation" that "they" are doing, or are you just spouting some groundless swivel-eyed mouth-frothing invention?

Saw a young boy walking along pavement with his mother yesterday. Boy had a small 'man bag' with strap over his shoulder. Looked just like a woman's handbag.

It doesnt sound like it?

Which of your conflicting claims should we believe? That it "looked just like a woman's handbag" or that it was mans shoulder bag?

Maybe your eyes were swivelling so rapidly you couldnt see straight?

And I take it you were either close enough or you looked inside to see that it wasnta school bag, or binoculars,or held vital medical items etc? I mean - you would have done that, right? You wouldnt just start sounding off without a clue what you were talking about, would you?

When I was that age, I would have had the Mickey ripped out of me ruthlessly if I took to mincing along with what to all intents and purposes is a ladies handbag

This boy you saw - he was "mincing", was he?

I grew up in normal times (relatively), ie. The 70s.

Oh yes, the '70s

Or did you mean the 1870s, when it was common for boys under 7 to be dressed as girls?

Or was it the 1770s, when men wore powdered wigs and used makeup?

Just trying to understand at what point in the past things were OK and should still be the way things are done.

I mean - there is something in your philosophy which is understandable, right? You wouldnt just come out with groundless swivel-eyed mouth-frothings, would you?

 

[Notch7]

groundless swivel-eyed mouth-frothings, would you?

have you ever read any of your posts?

 

[ReganAndCarter]

Can someone tell Captain Necro's carer that his medication needs 'adjusting'. Thank you.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

And thats the best you can come up with in response to the exposure of the total absence of any logic or facts whatsoever in your stated position?

I suppose it does show that even you cant avoid seeing that your entire belief system is nothing more than completely fabricated nonsense.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

They're trying to feminise males in this country. Saw a young boy walking along pavement with his mother yesterday. Boy had a small 'man bag' with strap over his shoulder. Looked just like a woman's handbag. When I was that age, I would have had the Mickey ripped out of me ruthlessly if I took to mincing along with what to all intents and purposes is a ladies handbag. My parents certainly would not have funded or encouraged such a thing. But luckily I grew up in normal times (relatively), ie. The 70s.

Strangely, in the example I gave above, the woman didn't carry a handbag. It's all gone upside down!

In the 50's, I was bought a (very) red cap for school by my mother when I got to school wearing it was laughed at, at being a girly colour. I never wore it again. These days we are not so sensitive to colour/gender, you even see normal males wearing pink shirts.

I don't know what a 'man bag' looks like from the description above, though I do think there is too much emphasis on colour/gender and wear/gender. One time I would have felt a bit silly holding my partners handbag for her, it bothers me much less now.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

i am re considering my position
And may well make a further transition

Your having a giraffe?

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Whoever is ramming gay rights, trans, multiculturalism, climate emergency, etc, etc, etc down our throats 24/7. So that's the MSM for starters and whoever is behind them.

Only have to look at the disproportionate levels of non-whites in tv adverts these days to know an agenda is being forced.

A statement I very much agree with, it has become extremely noticeable over recent years, the sheer number of mixed families in ads and none-whites. in the general population I would see such extremely rarely.

Likewise, the number of obvious gays during the actual content of TV.

 

[SirGalahad]

https://www.irishpost.com/news/chil...nder-at-school-without-parents-consent-218140


Why can't we just let kids be kids without trying to force them down a path they have no clue about

Has anyone seen this 70 page document that the news refers to?

 

[Captain Nemesis]

A statement I very much agree with,

Do you agree with it because you have actual evidence you can produce that shows that people are "ramming gay rights, trans, multiculturalism, climate emergency, etc, etc, etc down our throats 24/7"?

Or do you have another reason?

Also, are you (or R&C) able to present an intelligently argued explanation of why "gay rights, trans, multiculturalism, climate emergency" are related?

I am really struggling to see how either you or R&C are actually putting any thought into anything youre saying here.

it has become extremely noticeable over recent years, the sheer number of mixed families in ads and none-whites.

Firstly, has it become "extremely noticeable over recent years" to people who can produce actual figures for the percentages of adverts showing mixed families or non-whites? Or might you, I wonder, be the sort of person who has a particular set of beliefs that would make you prone to consider the "sheer number" of mixed families or non-whites "extremely noticeable"?

Can you produce actual figures for the percentages of such adverts, or will we be left to conclude that there might be something else driving you to agree with the claim?

Secondly, in any event, what on earth is wrong with seeing mixed families or non-whites in adverts? Surely you dont find it objectionable in any way, do you?

in the general population I would see such extremely rarely.

Do you live somewhere where the ethnic mix of the population is representative of the whole of the UK?

Likewise, the number of obvious gays during the actual content of TV.

Basically the same set of questions to you about "obvious gays" as those regarding mixed families and non-whites, inclusing the one about whether you find it objectionable to see gay characters on TV.

If you dont have any evidence to back up your claims, what conclusion can we draw apart from they are invented because that serves some bigoted ideology you have?

 

[sxturbo]

Has anyone seen this 70 page document that the news refers to?

Nope only the parts that have been extracted by the press.