deathrey Posted May 29 Share Posted May 29 Bring back down votes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted May 29 Paid Members Share Posted May 29 3 hours ago, Keith Houchen said: Upvotes and running jokes. 3 hours ago, deathrey said: Bring back down votes Bodge bodge bodge bodge bodge bodge bodge No income tax, no VAT... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westlondonmist Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 14 hours ago, Fog Dude said: I find myself getting a tad uncomfortable with some aspects of charity at this point. It seems to be what right-libertarians say would provide welfare if we got rid of pesky government altogether. So that way rich people get to decide which "good causes" get funding, and people who can't afford philanthropy have no say in the matter. Is it so weird to believe the state should provide most of those services, under democratic control so everyone has a say in where the money (taxes not donations) goes? There's a reason those massive all-night telethons started in the mid-80s once Thatcherism really got going, you know? Obviously there's still a place for some charitable organisations but only in raising awareness/doing research, but not actually providing essentials. My gf works for a charity. Almost all donations come from the extremely wealthy (multi millionaires and billionaires). People who evade tax, but write their donations on a pledge card Infront of their mates at the annual dinner to look good or sponsor events with their name on. It's a status thing. Paying 1m in tax is less beneficial to these people than paying 1m in donations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted May 30 Paid Members Share Posted May 30 I worked for a conservation charity, where Henry Cavill was one our "ambassadors". One of the bats at the zoo had a baby, and the Marketing team thought that it would be a really fun and cute idea to name it "Ben" after Ben Affleck, as this was around the time that Batman vs. Superman came out. They put out a press release email that basically said "Henry chose to name the new bat after his new best friend Ben", and Ben Affleck's people were in touch within 24 hours with a ton of legal threats because of the implication that Ben Affleck officially endorsed the charity. It sounds like a dick move, but you have to put yourself in the position of the charities who are presumably spending a ton of money to get Ben Affleck on-board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 Tangential but when I worked for a housing association I received a cease and desist from Disney and absolutely shit my pants. Mouse nonces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted May 30 Paid Members Share Posted May 30 Having read that latest JK Rowling shite, I'll say only this: As a cis man, with my own views of masculinity, I say trans men are men, and I consider them brothers with all the recognition, respect, and care that comes with dignified and open-hearted brotherhood. I do not consider them a threat in any way to men or masculinity, and I will defend their rights to be who they are. That is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted May 30 Paid Members Share Posted May 30 Rowling and her terf army don't give a shit about trans men. They are almost never a part of the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidB6937 Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 Yeah they always seem to be claiming that men transitioning to women is where the danger is at. The danger? As if being a sex pest or a murderer or whatever else doesn't happen unless it's in the trans community. Right. It's a constant bullshit facade of trying to hide behind fighting for what's right and protecting people when really you're just a transphobic cunt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no user name Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 Jk Rowling made a comment about a trans referee a few weeks ago. Something like "there was a time when all referee's were white males. How times have changed"  You can't really argue that is anything to do with womens rights. It's clearly transphobic and very cruel. I don't think she was always this bad. I think years ago said she would use people preferred pronouns. Now she refuses to. What started of as a concern for women's right has just become an attack on trans women. I'm somebody who is pro trans rights and pro women's rights. She says she does care about trans rights but if she did she wouldn't act the way she does. You can be pro trans rights but still be concerned about trans men in women's sports and women's safe spaces etc. If she used people's prefered pronouns and didn't make cruel comments and just concentrated on issues like women's safe spaces etc, she would come across as someone who did care about trans rights but had concerns for women's rights. Its actually the way that she acts which is why a lot of people won't listen to her  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathrey Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 (edited) That also reads as a fairly racist comment. She is really lost in a pit of hate now, I'm sure the homophobic comments will follow. I guess she is probably on a bit of an echo chamber with her views and contempt breeds contempt Edited June 2 by deathrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 8 hours ago, no user name said: Something like "there was a time when all referee's were white males. How times have changed"  It's important to have the correct details, if only in fairness to all involved. She actually said “When I was young all the football managers were straight, white, middle-aged blokes, so it’s fantastic to see how much things have changed.” about Lucy Clark, who became Sutton United Women's manager. Lucy is the first trans woman to manage in Women's (and possibly men's) football in the top 5 tiers, after becoming the first trans referee in England prior to that. The focus should be on her, not that ghoul Rowling.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathrey Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 Well if that's what she said, that reads as actually quite positive, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted June 2 Paid Members Share Posted June 2 Given the context of Rowling and her previous comments, you have to assume she's being sarcastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 39 minutes ago, deathrey said: Well if that's what she said, that reads as actually quite positive, no? Yeah as Pat says, that's 100% being sarcastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no user name Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 3 hours ago, SuperBacon said: It's important to have the correct details, if only in fairness to all involved. She actually said “When I was young all the football managers were straight, white, middle-aged blokes, so it’s fantastic to see how much things have changed.” about Lucy Clark, who became Sutton United Women's manager. Lucy is the first trans woman to manage in Women's (and possibly men's) football in the top 5 tiers, after becoming the first trans referee in England prior to that. The focus should be on her, not that ghoul Rowling.  I probably should have got the correct details I do agree with that. I think the point is still the same. There's no way you could say that was a comment that was anything to do with womens rights. It was a clear transphobic comment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.