Where to draw the line

Subject: Where to draw a line.

The power of the trans-sexual lobby is oppressive and coordinated. People who voice opinions against 'gender equivalence' versus 'gender recognition', vis a vis biological proof, including a right for people to proclaim their gender irrespective of biological evidence has seen big ticket names pushed out of their jobs for fear of upsetting the ‘trans’ lobby.

The importance of the word 'coordinated' cannot be underestimated since as in many fields deep pockets are crucial be it the money to repeatedly present  a project to Councils and their Planning Departments to build on a greenfield site or to controversially oust an individual who has voiced opposition to a group, the individual is nearly always on shaky ground since  the group inevitably wins in the end. Like the bully in the playground the group draw in the weaker voices who are then coerced  to weigh in because the rules on free speech are just not applicable in many politically sensitive areas. Sensitivity usually trumps objectivity because the assumption is that sensitivity needs more protection.

The human rights act goes to great lengths to illustrate the pain of any sort of debasement of a human beings sense of their identity, their individuality, their consummate right to choose. As an individual I would support a persons right to describe themselves as they see themselves but when they gather to protest at other people who are not persuaded then anarchy raises its ugly head. Outing a visiting speaker on a debating platform or making life hell for a university lecturer who’s opinions clash with the group has become so prevalent that people outside the group wander in fear for their professional life.

There is no lower form of social assassination than rumour mongering, spreading false stories and innuendo, now made so much easier by modern communication platforms. The insinuation once laid in a tweet draws blood in the form of people who enjoy the name calling, especially when it comes without danger of retaliation. This modern equivalent of blood sports or the grotesque pillorying of deformed people at a peep show has been largely disqualified but has moved on to the abasement of people on social media platforms. Say anything you want, be it false or true and there is no referee or rule book to say when someone goes too far. In my own family there is a view not to trust the professional journalist or platforms such as the BBC, Sky, in fact any of the sources we traditionally went to to find our news of events across the world. This scepticism arises, as it does for our politicians because there is an undercurrent of distrust across the board. The disorder and the chaos we see plus the gulf which lies between cultures only redefines our feeling of insecurity and so we turn to a blog cast put out by a 'shock jock' personality such as Russel Brand with his manic, blokey appeal (he's one of us) and prefer to listen to his opinions which are as biased as Fox News. 

There are thousands of Russel Brands opinionating on everything from Covid to the cost of living and in many ways this is healthy but when people discard the professional for the chap in the pub we are in trouble.