A week ago.
Bev Jackson: Now there are people who believe that they were born in the wrong body. We personally don’t believe that anybody can be born in the wrong body –
Benjamin Butterworth: Hunhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
Bev Jackson: ……You find that shocking – but we don’t believe that someone can –
Benjamin Butterworth: I find that bigotry!
Today:
Hunhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
Two people have been stabbed and seriously hurt in Paris near the former offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.
Two suspects have been arrested. One of them was seized in the nearby Bastille area with blood on his clothing, police told the BBC.
…
A blade – described as a machete or a meat cleaver – was recovered at the scene of the attack near the Boulevard Richard-Lenoir.
The people stabbed worked at a tv company in the area.
“Two colleagues were smoking a cigarette outside the building, in the street. I heard shouting. I went to the window and saw one of my colleagues, covered in blood, being chased by a man with a machete in the street,” another member of staff at the Premières Lignes production firm said.
The firm has offices in the Rue Nicolas Appert, a side street off Boulevard Richard Lenoir where the former Charlie Hebdo offices are located. A mural to the 12 people killed in the Charlie Hebdo attack is nearby.
Right, so, the former offices of Charlie are there and other people work nearby because it’s a city and that’s how cities work, so it totally makes sense to take a machete to some of those other people who work near the building that used to contain the office of Charlie Hebdo.
Charlie Hebdo has marked the start of the trial by reprinting controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that sparked protests in several Muslim countries.
In response, the militant group al-Qaeda renewed its threat to the magazine.
Because Islam is a religion of peace.
Barr plans to steal the election for Trump.
Donald Trump’s astonishing suggestion at a campaign rally last weekend that the US president will deploy government lawyers to try to hit the brakes on the counting of ballots on election night relies on the complicity of one federal official more than any other.
It’s Barr, the boss of all those lawyers who could stop the count.
Conveniently for Trump’s stated plan, Barr appears not only ready to acquiesce, he seems eager to bring the lawsuits, having laid groundwork for challenging the election with weeks of misleading statements about the integrity of mail-in voting.
It also looks as if he’ll be willing to sic the military on us.
In order for Trump to steal the election and then quell mass demonstrations – for that is the nature of the nightmare scenario now up for open discussion among current and former officials, academics, thinktankers and a lot of other people – Trump must be able to manipulate both the levers of the law and its physical enforcement.
Barr has been letting us know he’ll do it.
The erstwhile mild-mannered Washington lawyer has been spouting attacks on election integrity and hostility toward street protests while describing, in explicitly religious terms, an epochal showdown between the forces of “moral discipline and virtue” – which he believes he represents – and “individual rapacity” manifesting as social chaos, embodied by leftwing protesters among others.
It’s hard to get the head around seeing Trump as the head of Team Moral Discipline and Virtue and not of Team Individual Rapacity. He’s the most rapacious individual I’ve ever had the misfortune to be governed by.
In recent weeks, Barr has reportedly asked prosecutors to weigh charging protesters under sedition laws, meant to punish conspiracies to overthrow the government, and to weigh criminal charges against the Seattle mayor for allowing residents to establish a small “police-free” protest zone. He has designated New York City, Portland and Seattle as “anarchy” zones that he says “have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract criminal activities,” threatening federal funding.
…
Barr has competed with Trump to erode faith in the upcoming election, peddling baseless conspiracy theories about foreign nations printing counterfeit ballots, spreading tales about mass mail-in ballot fraud – in a lie that was later retracted by the justice department – and expressing frustration that the United States uses mail-in voting and multi-day voting, which are common measures to accommodate voters going back decades.
It’s a holy war kind of thing to him.
[Barr’s social and religious] commitments, in turn, are a matter of public record, including in a speech Barr delivered at Notre Dame University about one year ago. In the speech, Barr described a political philosophy driven by the need to counter an “individual rapacity” in humans that quickly produces “licentiousness” and the destruction of “healthy community life” if not restrained. The only possible restraint, in Barr’s view, are “moral values [that] must rest on authority independent of men’s will – they must flow from a transcendent Supreme Being.”
But, again, if it’s individual rapacity that he fears (and I would agree it’s a bad thing), then how can he see Trump as a shield against it? Trump has done more to promote and flatter and normalize rapacity than almost any public figure I can think of. He’s comparable to mob bosses in his rapacity rather than to presidents, even the crooked ones.
It’s a mystery to me.
The NHS instructs trans women on how to do a “bum swish”:
In case the image isn’t legible – the underlined bit says: “As a trans woman with a more masculine appearance, you may need to compensate with other “elements” that convey that you are female.”
Trans women are women, but they have to jink around with their appearance so as to “compensate.” Compensate for what? They just are women, so why is there any need to compensate?
Sorry to interrupt; the rest of it is: “The “feminine walk” may help. If you place each foot across yourself each time you take a step this creates the “bum swish.””
And what else does it do? It slows down your walk, it throws you off balance, it makes you look affected and self-conscious and idiotic…all of which I guess is “feminine” and expected of women. Thanks, NHS. Much medical, very science.
Less than a month ago, though, Mermaids was energetically blaming JK Rowling for suicidal thoughts among trans youth and for sharing her non-expert opinions on what it is to be a woman.
Today, J.K.Rowling re-stated her position on transgender lives. We have previously reached out to her both publicly and privately, offering a calm conversation around the issues she has raised and today, we sent a further email to her team, renewing that offer. We are yet to receive a response…. Without giving personal detail, without betraying confidences, we must represent the seriousness of the situation. We are aware through our work with families that there have been cases of self-harm and even attempted suicide following J.K.Rowling’s statements and the public response on social media and in the press…. We do not believe J.K. Rowling ‘hates’ trans people. We also welcome and accept that she is sympathetic towards trans children and teenagers. Therefore, as a woman of great power and someone sympathetic to trans young people, we ask her to acknowledge the many young people around the world who fundamentally disagree with her position on trans acceptance and we beg her to at least consider the possibility that trans young people are able to express who they are for themselves.
But are trans young people “expressing who they are for themselves”? Or are they expressing who they think they are, which is shaped by what they have heard and read and picked up from social media and friends and tv documentaries and…organizations like Mermaids? Young (and not young) people don’t just decide they’re something called “trans” out of nowhere; they decide it because it’s a thing, a meme, a fashion, an item on the list of available “identities” and causes and opportunities for being special. How do we know? Because of the novelty of the whole thing. It simply wasn’t happening 20 years ago.
J.K. Rowling rightly speaks of brave ‘detransitioned’ young women. Yet, does she consider trans people, living openly in spite of public hostility, less brave? Are those who have fought for decades to be treated with respect and dignity in a society that ridicules and demonises them, less brave? Are those children and young people who state their true gender in the face of rejection from family and friends less brave?
But what is someone’s “true gender”? What does that mean? How does it differ from knowing one has a female or male body?
There’s a long and complicated rope of bullshit that’s been woven and it’s going to take a long time to unravel it.
It seems that Mermaids, in light of the new guidance, is…erm…trying to hide the bodies.
Creeeeeak…shiver…crack…shudder…will the great shambolic edifice topple?
David Smith at the Guardian on Trump’s prelude to dictatorship performance yesterday:
Trump careered from touting miracle vaccines to building supreme court suspense, from insulting a female member of the British royal family to abruptly departing for a mysterious “emergency” phone call. But first, there was the small matter of kneecapping American democracy.
Perhaps it was not chance that the president, ever eager to generate media outrage, gave the first question to Brian Karem, who describes himself on Twitter as a “Loud Mouth” senior White House reporter at Playboy. “Will you commit to make sure there’s a peaceful transferral of power after the election?” Karem asked.
And the answer was no, not unless I win.
“Get rid of the ballots and you’ll have a very peaceful — there won’t be a transfer, frankly. There will be a continuation. The ballots are out of control. You know it. And you know who knows it better than anybody else? The Democrats know it better than anybody else.”
Later, Karem remarked on Twitter: “This is the most frightening answer I have ever received to any question I have ever asked. I’ve interviewed convicted killers with more empathy. @realDonaldTrump is advocating Civil War.”
And Julian Castro, who served in Barack Obama’s cabinet, tweeted: “In one day, Trump refused a peaceful transition of power and urged the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice to hand him an election if the results are contested. This is fascism, alive and well in the Republican Party.”
No joke.
There there, they say, don’t worry, they say, he didn’t really mean he’s going to steal the election. It’s an uphill battle though seeing as how he said what he said.
Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, the sole Republican to vote to remove Trump from office at his impeachment trial earlier this year, drew comparisons with a crisis in Europe, tweeting: “Fundamental to democracy is the peaceful transition of power; without that, there is Belarus. Any suggestion that a president might not respect this Constitutional guarantee is both unthinkable and unacceptable.”
Right, but he did suggest it, so there we are.
But there were alarming signs of dissent on the Republican side. Thomas Massie, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, tweeted ominously: “In the spring, stores sold out of hand sanitizer and toilet paper. This fall, they sold out of ammo.”
…
The American Civil Liberties Union also registered its concern. David Cole, national legal director, said: “The peaceful transfer of power is essential to a functioning democracy. This statement from the president of the United States should trouble every American.”
And McConnell and Graham saying “don’t worry” is about as reassuring as an umbrella in an earthquake.
US President Donald Trump has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if he loses November’s election.
“Well, we’ll have to see what happens,” the president told a news conference at the White House. “You know that.”
No. Nobody knows that. It isn’t true.
“I’ve been complaining very strongly about the ballots,” Mr Trump, a Republican, said. “And the ballots are a disaster.”
When the journalist countered that “people are rioting”, Mr Trump interjected: “Get rid of the ballots, and you’ll have a very – you’ll have a very peaceful – there won’t be a transfer, frankly, there’ll be a continuation.”
Well yes, if we get rid of the ballots, there won’t be a transfer, and that’s called a coup. A continuation minus voting is a coup.
In an interview with France Bleu Alsace radio, Elisabeth said she was walking home when one of the three men said: “Look at that whore in a skirt.”
Two of the three men then held her while the third hit her in the face, leaving her with a black eye, she told the station. The men then fled.
They hate women, and they’re stronger than women. No deeper reason needed. She’s in a skirt! She’s in jeans! She’s a slut! She’s a bitch! There is no Acceptable State for a woman.
She said more than a dozen people witnessed the incident, but no-one intervened.
On Wednesday, junior interior minister Marlene Schiappa – who is in charge of citizenship and was previously in charge of equality issues – visited the eastern city to discuss the safety of women in public.
She told France Bleu Alsace that “the skirt is not responsible for the attack and the woman even less”.
“A woman is never hit because she wears a skirt. A woman is hit because there are people who are misogynistic, sexist, violent, and who free themselves from any law and any rule of civility by striking them.”
It’s weird, inspiring that kind of visceral hatred, yet it also becomes kind of familiar. “Oh yes, that again.”
On Thursday, France Bleu Alsace reported that two women had been attacked in another eastern city, Mulhouse, on Wednesday, after a man told one of them her skirt was “too short”.
Whores in skirts, they’re everywhere.
The UK has issued new guidance for schools on sex and relationships teaching. One passage in particular has drawn praise from people with sane views on children and “gender”:
We are aware that topics involving gender and biological sex can be complex and sensitive matters to navigate. You should not reinforce harmful stereotypes, for instance by suggesting that children might be a different gender based on their personality and interests or the clothes they prefer to wear. Resources used in teaching about this topic must always be age-appropriate and evidence based. Materials which suggest that non-conformity to gender stereotypes should be seen as synonymous with having a different gender identity should not be used and you should not work with external agencies or organisations that produce such material. While teachers should not suggest to a child that their non-compliance with gender stereotypes means that either their personality or their body is wrong and in need of changing, teachers should always seek to treat individual students with sympathy and support.
You should work together with parents on any decisions regarding your school’s treatment of their child, in line with the school’s safeguarding policy and the statutory guidance on working together to safeguard children.
Mermaids won’t like it though.
Welcome to the theocracy of the country called The Savior, where women are harshly punished for having miscarriages and stillbirths.
A woman sentenced to 30 years in jail after a stillbirth that was judged to be her fault has been released from jail in El Salvador.
First rule of theocratic misogyny: it’s always a woman’s fault. “It” means anything and everything.
Cindy Erazo, 29, from San Salvador, was granted conditional freedom on Wednesday after six years in jail.
Morena Herrera, head of the Citizen’s Group for the Decriminalisation of Abortion, said that Erazo, who has a son aged 10, had an obstetric emergency when she was eight months pregnant. She was accused of attempting to end the pregnancy and charged with aggravated homicide. A year after her conviction, her sentenced was reduced to 10 years.
Dozens of women have been convicted for manslaughter, homicide and aggravated homicide after having miscarriages, stillbirths and other obstetric emergencies since El Salvador introduced a total ban on abortion in 1998.
On the one hand, here, please gestate this baby for us. On the other hand, your miscarriage is your fault and you get 30 years in prison for it. It’s a sweet gig, being a woman.
Paula Avila-Guillén, executive director of the Women’s Equality Center, said: “Cindy’s case casts an international spotlight on the horrific reality of El Salvador’s extreme abortion ban, and the insidious culture of persecuting innocent women that it perpetuates.
It’s as if women are balky machines as opposed to humans.
Navalny is out of the hospital.
Navalny, who has built a huge following on social media, described his condition in an Instagram post featuring a photo in which he is staring into the camera from a Berlin park bench. He wrote that sleeping is still his biggest problem and that doctors decided the best treatment is a return to “normal life.”
Navalny said he is taking walks and spending time with his family and that his plans are “simple”: daily physiotherapy sessions so he’ll be able to stand on one leg again and regain full control of his fingers. He joked that he’ll find out if he can get a prescription for the PlayStation 5.
Colleagues of Navalny say they found traces of Novichok on a water bottle in his Tomsk hotel room. The nerve agent was also used to poison Russian defector Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Great Britain in 2018. Russia denied any role in that attack as well.
I hope the colleagues handled that water bottle with extreme caution.
After doctors removed Navalny from his coma more than a week ago, he wrote on Instagram that he does not intend to stay in Germany. Rather, he has vowed to return to Russia to continue his work of investigating corruption among the country’s elite and pressing for democratic reform.
We have similar problems here.
This guy is fascinating. He just can’t stop telling women what to do.
It seems there was a Mumsnet thread discussing surrogacy that included harsh remarks about him, and Justine Roberts of Mumsnet took it down after he complained about it.
Well is it? Justine?! I’d like an answer please!
Who the hell does he think he is? It’s no wonder Pink News is so awful, when he’s the CEO of it.
Speaking of Trump’s refusing to accept the election result…
President Donald Trump on Wednesday would not commit to providing a peaceful transition of power after Election Day, lending further fuel to concerns he may not relinquish his office should he lose in November.
“Well, we’re going to have to see what happens,” Trump said when asked whether he’d commit to a peaceful transition, one of the cornerstones of American democracy.
As if “American democracy” is something to boast of at this point.
His reluctance to commit to a peaceful transition was rooted in what he said were concerns about ballots, extending his false assertion that widespread mail-in voting is rife with fraud.
“You know that I’ve been complaining very strongly about the ballots and the ballots are a disaster,” Trump said at a press briefing at the White House, presumably referring to mail-in ballots, which he has baselessly claimed will lead to voter fraud.
Of course we know that, and we know he’s been doing it because he’s laying the groundwork for saying the election was stolen.
Trump has previously said his rival Joe Biden would only prevail in November if the election is “rigged,” and suggested earlier in the day it was likely the results of the election would be contested all the way to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court full of friends of Trump.
So, about this election…
If we are lucky, this fraught and dysfunctional election cycle will reach a conventional stopping point in time to meet crucial deadlines in December and January. The contest will be decided with sufficient authority that the losing candidate will be forced to yield. Collectively we will have made our choice—a messy one, no doubt, but clear enough to arm the president-elect with a mandate to govern.
As a nation, we have never failed to clear that bar. But in this election year of plague and recession and catastrophized politics, the mechanisms of decision are at meaningful risk of breaking down. Close students of election law and procedure are warning that conditions are ripe for a constitutional crisis that would leave the nation without an authoritative result. We have no fail-safe against that calamity.
And we do have a lot of very worked-up angry resentful heavily armed people, mostly on the right, especially the heavily armed ones.
A lot of people, including Joe Biden, the Democratic Party nominee, have misconceived the nature of the threat. They frame it as a concern, unthinkable for presidents past, that Trump might refuse to vacate the Oval Office if he loses. They generally conclude, as Biden has, that in that event the proper authorities “will escort him from the White House with great dispatch.”
The worst case, however, is not that Trump rejects the election outcome. The worst case is that he uses his power to prevent a decisive outcome against him. If Trump sheds all restraint, and if his Republican allies play the parts he assigns them, he could obstruct the emergence of a legally unambiguous victory for Biden in the Electoral College and then in Congress. He could prevent the formation of consensus about whether there is any outcome at all. He could seize on that uncertainty to hold on to power.
It’s long and it’s scary.
H/t YNnB
Well you see it’s like this…
Male same-sex couples can’t reproduce. It’s that simple. They don’t need reproductive healthcare services because of the not being able to reproduce thing. Female same-sex couples can’t reproduce on their own either, but the fix for that is technologically quite simple and quick and entirely non-invasive. It’s very different from pregnancy that way. The obstacles that exist for male couples that don’t exist for straight couples are all about the presence or absence of a uterus. That’s not because of unfair laws or homophobia, it’s just how female and male bodies work.
Harrop puts it the way he does because he wants us to think that access to female reproduction is there for the asking, or taking.
He’s a medical doctor.
Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi has defended 17-year-old Illinois double murder suspect Kyle Rittenhouse as a “little boy” who was merely “trying to protect his community” during the shootings in Kenosha, Wisconsin last month.
Bondi appeared on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show to discuss new video footage released by Rittenhouse’s attorney which paints the suspect in a favorable light and suggests his actions were justified in the “war zone” which had broken out in Kenosha in the wake of the police shooting of Jacob Blake.
“You have got a 17-year-old out there trying to protect his state,” Bondi said, despite the fact the teenager traveled from his hometown in Antioch, Illinois, to attend the protests on August 25.
Well it’s the megastate of Illiconsin, or is it Wisckinois.
This morning former Florida Attorney General and outspoken Republican Trump supporter Pam Bondi called Kyle Rittenhouse “a little boy out there trying to protect his community.”
So, to review:
A 17-year-old black kid walking home from the store with a bag of Skittles, who had done absolutely nothing wrong? A criminal who deserved to die.
A 17-year-old white kid who illegally crossed state lines with assault weapons and murdered two people? Little boy hero.
That’s America, right there.
That’s the Republican Party, right there.
And THAT’s the goddamn problem, right there.
And it’s taking over.
Ah you see it’s a long-term relationship, not at all a rent a woman’s uterus situation.
(First of all, the inelegance of the grammar – “us “demanding” a random woman is our surrogate” – ick. Should be “our ‘demanding'” because gerunds are nouns, but much more…demanding a woman is our surrogate? Come on. That’s what the subjunctive is for. Demanding that something is just makes no sense: who needs to demand it when it already is? If you hate the subjunctive too much to use it then make it “demanding a woman should be” but NOT “demanding a woman is.” Guy’s barely literate.)
But the substantive part is this “it’s building a long-term relationship with someone as a friend and a member of our extended family who [gestates a baby to give to us] for altruistic only reasons.”
I’m trying to picture how that’s going to work. I wonder if they’re working on such a relationship now, and if so, if the woman they’re grooming knows that’s what’s going on. I wonder – do they not already have woman friends? No, probably not, given how obviously Benjamin Cohen hates women. But so then how do they expect to be able to start now, when Benjamin C is being so frank about their plans? What kind of long-term relationship as a friend and a member of their extended family would they be able to create when their goal is not friendship and extended family but the opportunity to exploit the body of their “friend”?
In short how fucking creepy is that? What woman in her right mind would ever want anything to do with this guy?
