Define woke

[scientificred]

Lots of mention of this word
Don't quite understand it myself.
Please enlighten me as to your views and let everyone on this forum know what it means to you yourself.

[faridtoxteth]

I think woke is a term used to describe people who have arrived at their position on culture, politics and other social issues, based on media fixations of recent years. that's why I described myself as basically too old to be woke. I am an old dog. Doesn't mean i don't naturally agree with a lot of so called woke ideas, like human rights stuff, equal rights for queer people, and so on. But in my case these are not recent conversions to woke culture. I once stood on the kop and got in a pretty intense argument with another Liverpool fan who was giving John Barnes racial abuse.

[Daffydd]

Woke used to be a word for aware, for people who knew the score, who knew what was really going on.

But then it got sarcastically twisted and now seems to be the new word for 'politically correct'.

Without wanting to sound woke I believe every human being should be valued equally and allowed to express themselves appropriately. But any attempts to force that will meet with inevitable resistance from otherwise decent people.

[Insidious]

I'll bite.

So initially I viewed it as a slang term for those who are keen to address injustices in society, particularly stuff related to racism and sexism.

However as certain types of folks have gotten sillier about it, it's the silly sorts that I'd refer to as "woke" - a derogatory term essentially, for when people overdo it with the perceived injustices of the World.

Let's take a different medium to football. We'll go with acting and we'll go with racism in relation to that. Do I wish for equal opportunities for black actors? Absolutely. If you're good enough for the role, you're good enough for the role. Idris Elba is great. Denzel Washington is great. This to me is just "equal opportunity" stuff and it's only right that actors like this get major roles. I don't consider this "woke".

However, Amazon have made a Lord of the Rings series that features black actors playing elves, one of whom has a very "urban" haircut (I'm not good with names/fashion, but Theo Walcott and Aaron Lennon have both had similar hair) - now, the lore has always portrayed the elves as fair of skin, with long, blonde hair. This is source material. But those making the series have shoe-horned a black actor in because "diversity" (as if skin tone is the only type of diversity going, never mind diversity of thought or physical stature say....) as that is very much the in thing to do these days.

People will say "you have a gripe like that about a fantasy film?" like it's no big deal, but when stuff like that is so on the nose because the powers that be are afraid of cancel culture, it stands out. Just watch advertisements for insurance deals or whatever else and see how many bumbling middle-aged white guys get outsmarted by a woman or a black person - or both. It's fine in principle, but it's just so bleeding obvious what is going on.

To give another example with acting/characters we'll go with sexism. There's a real "strong woman" push these days and you'll see an action sequence with a 5'5 girl with no weigh to her beat up a heavily built fella "because women are strong" - as if physical prowess is the only kind of strength there is. Scarlett Johansson's "Black Widow" will collide with all of the things and land in a superhero stance (when she should be very dead) without a hair out of place. Or Star Wars - one of the recent ones - purple-hair lady (feminists have hair a lot) will put budget Hans Solo "in his place" because men are stupid, presumably. Kathleen Kennedy is a woman you could research - she has her grubby mitts all over Star Wars these days. That is "woke" stuff. The character of Rey kicking the ass of all around her with barely any training - that's some woke shit.

Whereas you'll get a Studio Ghibli film showcasing a different type of "strength" where a woman uses her courage, cunning, wits, determination to navigate her character arc without being a physical tank - that sort of stuff is to be commended and applauded.

I know loads of amazing women who have been through a Hell of a lot. They know they don't have to try and physically take down a fella to prove they are "equals" and it would be nice if some of the general media and particularly the medium of film could catch on to other types of "strength".

When Ghost in the Shell was made (based on a Japanese anime series) Scarlett Johansson was cast as the main character - PLENTY of Starbuck's-swilling white girls in the West were up in arms about "Whitewashing" and that the role should have been given to a Japanese actress. Hilariously, when interviewed, most Japanese folk (not a particularly "woke" nation) didn't give a solitary fuck - their attitude was "she's a good actress, can't wait to see the film".

Cancel culture - woke.
Shoe-horning actors or actresses of a particular ethnic group or gender just to be "diverse" when unrelated to the lore - woke.
"Women should get paid more because they have to wear make-up at work" - woke.
50% of Government members should be black irrespective of their qualifications for the job - woke.

Genuinely all for equal rights. Equal opportunity. I think sanitary products should be free as women have no say in their menstrual cycle for example - but I have been told that my thoughts about showing female characters as over-powered means I "hate women".

Hope that's helped fella. Admittedly a lot of that is "my opinion" rather than objective facts/evidence but it's the way I felt I could best answer the question at this particular time.

[Taksin]

It's a word borrowed from black culture in the US. It was originally used positively by people who saw themselves as being awake in comparison to those of us not yet awake. Now they've stopped using it so it is instead used as a slur by critics of the worldview.

The worldview is all over the universities, more so in the US and Anglospere, but is by now well established in all the important cultural institutions. It is a crazy, Marxist and post-modern deconstruction of the entire historical basis of knowledge and society that has built our civilisation. The view that a man can have children or your mother can be your father is the result of this insistence that nothing you believed to be true is in reality true.

The other side of it is the grievance study that pits different tribes against each other based on which tribe is the most oppressive - i.e. white men - and which the most oppressed.

The whole thing is pathologically resistant to criticism because anyone who has any criticism of the claims, no matter how well reasoned they may be, is open to cancellation and dismissed as sexist, racist, transphobic, colonising, patriarchal etc. so the thing just motors on, untouched by reality.

[Insidious]

The whole thing is pathologically resistant to criticism because anyone who has any criticism of the claims, no matter how well reasoned they may be, is open to cancellation and dismissed as sexist, racist, transphobic, colonising, patriarchal etc. so the thing just motors on, untouched by reality.

I liked your whole post, but this part in particular was such a succinct, concise bit of articulation.

Well played.

[faridtoxteth]

It's like..can a black actor play Hamlet (prince of denmark!) ok let's say yes. can a woman play Hamlet? I think Helen Mirren did and probably loads more. Denzel recently played Macbeth, historically a white scottish king. He was great in it (it's a great film btw). But tom hanks recently said in the media that if he was to play a queer man now, like he did in Philadelphia, then it would be wrong. White actors have played Othello, Lawrence Olivier even blacked up for it. People can't judge anymore what is ok and what's not, because of the oppression of social media.
So if I came out and said i identify myself as a woman and not as a male, then I would be supported by a large section of society. But if i came out and said I identify myself as black or disabled, when i am clearly not, there would be social outrage.
The point is, it's a complex issue, and not just a simple one like the media would like it to be.

[faridtoxteth]

By the way if the BBC are so woke about women's football, then how come the deep colonial mentality behind the 'commonwealth' games gets a pass..

[Daffydd]

By the way if the BBC are so woke about women's football, then how come the deep colonial mentality behind the 'commonwealth' games gets a pass..

Would you care to elaborate?

Obviously the so-called commonwealth came out of the British empire but do the games themselves reflect that?

For me the annoying thing about the BBC coverage of women's football is they mash it together with the mens (maybe fans of women's football are equally annoyed) and of course the usual hype because it's England.

[worldpanel]

Would you care to elaborate?

Obviously the so-called commonwealth came out of the British empire but do the games themselves reflect that?

For me the annoying thing about the BBC coverage of women's football is they mash it together with the mens (maybe fans of women's football are equally annoyed) and of course the usual hype because it's England.

Sidebar question: How long before the manager(ess) of the England team gets offered a job in the Prem?
God knows if they let one of the Neville's do it, surely she could manage a smaller side like one in the Salford area perhaps?

[Taksin]

By the way if the BBC are so woke about women's football, then how come the deep colonial mentality behind the 'commonwealth' games gets a pass..

Because being reasonable is not the aim. The aim is to pursue the agenda, which is ultimately the most complete revolution ever attempted.

That’s why you shouldn’t boo the national anthem, fellow reds. It’s seems like a healthy rebellion due to various injustices but it is actually the rejection of one of the remaining things that unifies us. Once destroyed, the only thing that can unify us is a crazy ideology forced upon us from above. That’s been tried, it doesn’t end well, and in the case of North Korea it may lead to a hell that goes on forever.

North Korea looks to me to represent the world that woke ideology leads to.

[faridtoxteth]

That is an interesting question.
I didn't watch many of the games.
Is she a really good manager? Didn't she always play the same first eleven and then later bring on the same subs? I didn't see much to make me think she was a game changing tactician.
But I wouldn't be against the idea. But some of these prem big ego players who are so up themselves, they might struggle with being managed by her. Also the men's game is not the same as the women's game, despite what everyone and his dog are telling us now. Look at the quality of the goal keeping for a start.

[Daffydd]

Sidebar question: How long before the manager(ess) of the England team gets offered a job in the Prem?
God knows if they let one of the Neville's do it, surely she could manage a smaller side like one in the Salford area perhaps?

A long time. I think we'll have an openly gay England (men's team) captain first.

[tim_ev]

Define woke?

Taking the knee!

[miller0863]

Don’t really want to get into this particular question as the whole subject annoys me intensely.
However, I will say that the line.. “ equal rights for queer people” will not be bettered if this debate goes on for a hundred pages.

It sums up the differences between the generations perfectly

[teesred]

Originally coined to highlight social injustice in the US, particularly black people.
Now hijacked by racist bigots like those who complain about booing the national anthem but are equally outraged at players taking the knee or gay people being allowed marraige.
The Tories are peddling it so its lapped up by the right wing press in the UK.

[justincredible]

It's what I do at 5am every weekday morning. Yeah, White privilege n all that!

[CCTV]

https://youtu.be/G45WthPTo24

Woke is putting BLM on #Nike Kit of LFC for 2 years,
Whereas a dude who flies WLM over a stadium is interviewed by Police, loses his job to mass reaction pressures, whilst his partner was forced to attend reeeeeducation training by her employer or lose her job over his actions.
It's that fusion of state and corporate.

It's likely losing your job in media for pointing out blacks were over represented in the men's side last summer, cause ya #racist.
And increasing your career chances for saying there are too many white women in the women's side this summer. Cause you sjw

It's looking up at men being the very top earners, and claiming discrimination. But never looking at who dominates the lower paid jobs, men. It's refusing to understand the distribution curves of intelligence, men have wider distributions of intelligence than women. This means you would excpet men to be overrepresented at both ends.

It's a police force exposed as having covered up a likely 100,000+ minor sex victims, gang raped, because the Police didn't want to be seen as racist.....
Because of the homogeneity of the diverse group doing the gang rapes.
But then these police, police social media posts that are problematic.. to check your thinking, as the are clearly social justice thought experts...
Empowered by new age blasphemy laws from the very party that covered up these rapes in the main

It's knowing which tragedies are good for the corporate and sponsors desires.
It's knowing standing up for grooming gang victims just isn't worth it.
It's knowing that condemning a player for kicking a cat has more social media capital than standing up for an 11 year old gang rape victim.
It's knowing your stop Asian hate should be silent on whose doing the Asian hate. Wokeists posit that Asians success in the west is because the are allied to white supremacy.

It's publishing demographic data and discussing dispossesing the native/right of a chance of holding power via a pro-immigration policy, how bames can see the gammon dispossessed of office forever.
Whilst declaring anti-immigration discussion as racist. Replacement theory a conspiracy theory.

It's publishing sections of main kampf in your academic journals, where jew/jewry is replaced with white and German with black, and not realising you've been trolled.

It's screaming about increased inequality, but failing to see how immigration of more and less successful groups than the natives naturally increases inequality within a society.

It's screaming diversity is our strength, without any indication of the downsides.
It's screaming about how racist your countries are then wondering why people in Africa think Klopp is a racist.

It's being thoroughly unfair, whilst believing yourself the fairest of them all.

It's creating a social capital around lgbtq issues to the point where your kids will ideally be trans to please their parent/s. To provide the known social capital and validate their parents desires

It's calling gays who won't have sex with 'the same sex as them but other genitals' far right homomsexuals. So you can bash a gay man as far right, because he won't have sex with a man with a vagina.
It's running hate campaigns against lesbians who felt they were forced to have sex with women with chest hair and a penis, by others in the community.
It's calling people bigots for denying their dad gave birth to them, or denying that they were a woman when they inserted semen into your mum.
It's telling people men can have periods and get pregnant, because women who say they are men have a baby in their womb. Again bigot if you disagree

It's giving a month to pride, and a day to mothers and fathers. It's recording a bumming which culminates in the baptismal font, because they are softer than the Muslims.
Maybe a victims of state sanctioned rape day might be required.

It's claiming trans people are more oppressed than blacks in the slave trade or Jews in concentration camps because their suicide rate are higher.

It's being very think skinned, so you can refuse discussion and play victim.
But being strong enough to dish it out, and be relentless.

It's supporting abortion as part of your social justice work, when abortion is a eugenics tool.
Getting rid of working class babies, in the USA a lot of black babies.
It's calling men who mass exterminate disableds out of existence, monsters.
Then calling women who eradicate babies with downs syndrome, stunning and brave.

You can go from condemning Hitler/Stalin whoever, for eradicating these people, to rationalising its for the persons best interests when mothers do it.

If an 11 year boy dances in a gay/trans club for men dressed as a girl, it's stunning and brave. If it's a cis girl dancing for men, it's different, because trans girls are really girls.

It's discussing the issues around consent in our modern age, like everyone is in a long married relationship.
It's pretending the society doesn't have an extremely different tone around sex.
It's saying porn is toxic masculinity. But you want your kids to be at a pride gay bdsm, even after they asked for no kids. It's saying you want porn for kids.

It's petitioning dictionaries to change definitions to win arguments.

It's disingenuous, hypocrisy, believing you are better than others not on the virtue of your deeds or actions, but because of your views. It's believing you would do more were you richer and had power.
It is a lazy narcissists wetdream.

[CCTV]

Oh and you can become the...

Blackface of white supremacy
Far right gays
Not the right type of diveristy etc

Where you don't vote left for social justice parties.

[vin]

I think it's too broad to define and actually a bit meaningless. Just look at some of the posts on here. Some very subjective definitions.

[CCTV]

I think it's too broad to define and actually a bit meaningless. Just look at some of the posts on here. Some very subjective definitions.

Once upon a time gay men called for tolerance to their desire to have sex with biological men.

Today such a view, is far right homosexuality.

Gaymen today are expected in the name of social justice to have sex with men who have breats and vaginas.

Just because an ideology is highly subjective, radically changes its position, doesn't mean its hard to define.

[vin]

Once upon a time gay men called for tolerance to their desire to have sex with biological men.

Today such a view, is far right homosexuality.

Gaymen today are expected in the name of social justice to have sex with men who have breats and vaginas.

Just because an ideology is highly subjective, radically changes its position, doesn't mean its hard to define.

Gaymen today are expected in the name of social justice to have sex with men who have breats and vaginas.

Really?

And that's woke?

[CCTV]

Gaymen today are expected in the name of social justice to have sex with men who have breats and vaginas.

Really?

And that's woke?

Of course.
It would be transphobic for a gayman to refuse to have sex with a man with a vagina, just because he had a vagina.
You are literally killing people with your identiny denying hate. It's transphobic !
Gaymen have become very problematic. Many are transphobic and they got a pass on a lot of misogyny when they were the favourites.

It's also been documented how and why, men who raped women with their own penis, were permitted to identify as women and live in female only prisons after being sentenced for rape, with rape occurring with her penis whilst in prison against women.

You see typically already cis-women enjoy a life of cis-heteronormal privilige, trans are so much more oppressed in our societies.
Whereas men who might have been born with cis-male-privilige (lots of privilege compared with women), who later tell you they are women are now the most oppressed women. Because they are trans women, and no different than cis women.
Transmen grade up from woman to man, but still loses out mostly through the Trans.

So when a cis-gay refuses a trans gay as a sex partner, its transphobia. Check your privilege
When a woman refuses a transwoman from being a woman, its transphobia.
If you're a dude flashing your cock in the nude at a women and girls only nude spa, asking chicks without dicks if they're lesbians, and a black cis-scum mother complains on her and her child's behalf.
They're the problem. They're the bigots.
They're demanding the actual law be broken.
You have your right as a woman to flash your penis in nude women only areas.

I'm better than you,
Mr Woke.

[CCTV]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CgvWrtHDO0U/

[CCTV]

Originally coined to highlight social injustice in the US, particularly black people.
Now hijacked by racist bigots like those who complain about booing the national anthem but are equally outraged at players taking the knee or gay people being allowed marraige.
The Tories are peddling it so its lapped up by the right wing press in the UK.

Chris Rock stopped playing University gigs a good while back because of woke people.
It wasn't worth the hassle of reading the rules around what he could joke about.
Because it had to be social justice approved art. Because that's what comedy is.....

Dave Chapelle had another theatre cancel a gig on him in this past week, because the woke go after him a lot.
Ricky Gervais is another who they hate. Along with JK Rowling.

[CCTV]

Pretty funny 4 to have been targeted by Woke people in the name of social justice and equality.

[CCTV]

I believe each are left wing personas

[CCTV]

https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/ricky-gervais-speaks-out-about-brexit-it-s-like-going-back-to-the-victorian-times-a3317411.html

[CCTV]

So does anyone want to state, whether or not, you support the rights of rapists with a penis to live as women in female only prisons?

[redebreck]

woke

Heterosexual white males (and females) are (possibly, at the moment) representative of the majority of the population of the UK. NUMERICALLY.
However, this "group" have the least right to have their opinions, and voice their opinions.

For me, this is typically "woke"

[vin]

Of course.
It would be transphobic for a gayman to refuse to have sex with a man with a vagina, just because he had a vagina.
You are literally killing people with your identiny denying hate. It's transphobic !
Gaymen have become very problematic. Many are transphobic and they got a pass on a lot of misogyny when they were the favourites.

It's also been documented how and why, men who raped women with their own penis, were permitted to identify as women and live in female only prisons after being sentenced for rape, with rape occurring with her penis whilst in prison against women.

You see typically already cis-women enjoy a life of cis-heteronormal privilige, trans are so much more oppressed in our societies.
Whereas men who might have been born with cis-male-privilige (lots of privilege compared with women), who later tell you they are women are now the most oppressed women. Because they are trans women, and no different than cis women.
Transmen grade up from woman to man, but still loses out mostly through the Trans.

So when a cis-gay refuses a trans gay as a sex partner, its transphobia. Check your privilege
When a woman refuses a transwoman from being a woman, its transphobia.
If you're a dude flashing your cock in the nude at a women and girls only nude spa, asking chicks without dicks if they're lesbians, and a black cis-scum mother complains on her and her child's behalf.
They're the problem. They're the bigots.
They're demanding the actual law be broken.
You have your right as a woman to flash your penis in nude women only areas.

I'm better than you,
Mr Woke.

This a really unexpected example. I have no basis of knowing if anything you've said there is actually true or even rooted in reality beyond possible a very small group of people.

[vin]

woke

Heterosexual white males (and females) are (possibly, at the moment) representative of the majority of the population of the UK. NUMERICALLY.
However, this "group" have the least right to have their opinions, and voice their opinions.

For me, this is typically "woke"

Hold on are you saying "woke" people believe this - "However, this "group" have the least right to have their opinions, and voice their opinions." or that woke people do not allow the that group to express or voice their opinions?

[redebreck]

Hold on are you saying "woke" people believe this - "However, this "group" have the least right to have their opinions, and voice their opinions." or that woke people do not allow the that group to express or voice their opinions?

woke people believe that this group have the least right to have and voice their opinions

(just my opinion)

[vin]

woke people believe that this group have the least right to have and voice their opinions

(just my opinion)

But do you think that this group of people don't have a voice?

[CCTV]

This a really unexpected example. I have no basis of knowing if anything you've said there is actually true or even rooted in reality beyond possible a very small group of people.

You're surely at least here, in terms of reality.

Title:
UK’s biggest cervical cancer charity shuts down disgustingly transphobic lie that ‘only females get cervical cancer’

Text:
Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust says “everyone with a cervix” should have access to support and information about cervical cancer and smear tests, including trans and non-binary people, after a disgusting Twitter campaign by transphobes.

The UK’s leading cervical cancer charity was responding to a hashtag that trended on Twitter over the weekend insisting that “only females get cervical cancer”.

“We’re aware a hashtag is trending that raises the issue of gender identity and cervical health,” Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust tweeted on July 12.

“At Jo’s we want to ensure everyone with a cervix has access to the information and support they need to attend*#CervicalScreening, regardless of their gender identity.”

The charity then added a link to its*support page.

As Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust emphasised, anyone with a cervix can get cervical cancer – so people with cervixes should attend regular screenings with their GP.

This includes trans men, trans masculine people, intersex people and non-binary people, as well as some trans women who have had gender confirmation surgery.

“This should only be about inclusive health care, raising awareness, and getting the right checks to the right people to save lives,” one woman wrote on Twitter after seeing the hashtag campaign over the weekend.

“It is not about erasing women or anyone else.”

Another person said: “So the TERFs got #OnlyFemalesGetCervicalCancer trending.

“Not to raise awareness about cancer, but to make trans men feel bad. THAT’S how sh**ty and awful they are.

“Anyone who has a cervix, from cis women to trans men, non-binary and intersex people, can get cervical cancer.”

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/07/13/jos-cervical-cancer-charity-trans-non-binary-smear-test-intersex-transphobia-gender-identity/

[redebreck]

But do you think that this group of people don't have a voice?

The group has a voice but it's restricted. By the media and the establishment.
Because media and the establishment prefer to push the views of the other smaller "groups".
For Publicity? To create conflict?

[CCTV]

Title:
Trans inmate who got two women pregnant is moved to men's prison

Introduction:
A trans prisoner has been moved to a different prison after getting two fellow inmates pregnant.(not a rape one, that's further back iirc)

Demi Minor, who was jailed for 30 years for stabbing her former foster father to death is now being held on a vulnerable unit at a men’s prison in New Jersey.

She was moved from the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility to the Garden State Youth Correctional Facility last month.

In a post on her Justice 4 Demi blog, Minor claimed that she was mocked and strip searched by officers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/trans-inmate-who-got-two-women-pregnant-is-moved-to-men-s-prison/ar-AAZHxi6

[CCTV]

https://youtu.be/6MYb0rBDYvs

[CCTV]

https://youtu.be/mMBzfUj5zsg

[CCTV]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/06/29/pride-month-kink-consent/

Title:
Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it.

Introduction
Children need to know that they can make their own ways in the world
...........

When our children grew tired of marching, we plopped onto a nearby curb. Just as we got settled, our elementary-schooler pointed in the direction of oncoming floats, raising an eyebrow at a bare-chested man in dark sunglasses whose black suspenders clipped into a leather thong. The man paused to be spanked playfully by a partner with a flog. “What are they doing?” my curious kid asked as our toddler cheered them on. The pair was the first of a few dozen kinksters who danced down the street, laughing together as they twirled their whips and batons, some leading companions by leashes. At the time, my children were too young to understand the nuance of the situation, but I told them the truth: That these folks were members of our community celebrating who they are and what they like to do.

[vin]

The group has a voice but it's restricted. By the media and the establishment.
Because media and the establishment prefer to push the views of the other smaller "groups".
For Publicity? To create conflict?

You really think that's true?

[vin]

You're surely at least here, in terms of reality.

Title:
UK’s biggest cervical cancer charity shuts down disgustingly transphobic lie that ‘only females get cervical cancer’

Text:
Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust says “everyone with a cervix” should have access to support and information about cervical cancer and smear tests, including trans and non-binary people, after a disgusting Twitter campaign by transphobes.

The UK’s leading cervical cancer charity was responding to a hashtag that trended on Twitter over the weekend insisting that “only females get cervical cancer”.

“We’re aware a hashtag is trending that raises the issue of gender identity and cervical health,” Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust tweeted on July 12.

“At Jo’s we want to ensure everyone with a cervix has access to the information and support they need to attend*#CervicalScreening, regardless of their gender identity.”

The charity then added a link to its*support page.

As Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust emphasised, anyone with a cervix can get cervical cancer – so people with cervixes should attend regular screenings with their GP.

This includes trans men, trans masculine people, intersex people and non-binary people, as well as some trans women who have had gender confirmation surgery.

“This should only be about inclusive health care, raising awareness, and getting the right checks to the right people to save lives,” one woman wrote on Twitter after seeing the hashtag campaign over the weekend.

“It is not about erasing women or anyone else.”

Another person said: “So the TERFs got #OnlyFemalesGetCervicalCancer trending.

“Not to raise awareness about cancer, but to make trans men feel bad. THAT’S how sh**ty and awful they are.

“Anyone who has a cervix, from cis women to trans men, non-binary and intersex people, can get cervical cancer.”

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/07/13/jos-cervical-cancer-charity-trans-non-binary-smear-test-intersex-transphobia-gender-identity/

I don't see this as woke. I don't know what this is.

[redebreck]

Title:
Trans inmate who got two women pregnant is moved to men's prison

Introduction:
A trans prisoner has been moved to a different prison after getting two fellow inmates pregnant.(not a rape one, that's further back iirc)

Demi Minor, who was jailed for 30 years for stabbing her former foster father to death is now being held on a vulnerable unit at a men’s prison in New Jersey.

She was moved from the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility to the Garden State Youth Correctional Facility last month.

In a post on her Justice 4 Demi blog, Minor claimed that she was mocked and strip searched by officers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/trans-inmate-who-got-two-women-pregnant-is-moved-to-men-s-prison/ar-AAZHxi6



https://youtu.be/6MYb0rBDYvs


https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/06/29/pride-month-kink-consent/

Title:
Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it.

Introduction
Children need to know that they can make their own ways in the world
...........

When our children grew tired of marching, we plopped onto a nearby curb. Just as we got settled, our elementary-schooler pointed in the direction of oncoming floats, raising an eyebrow at a bare-chested man in dark sunglasses whose black suspenders clipped into a leather thong. The man paused to be spanked playfully by a partner with a flog. “What are they doing?” my curious kid asked as our toddler cheered them on. The pair was the first of a few dozen kinksters who danced down the street, laughing together as they twirled their whips and batons, some leading companions by leashes. At the time, my children were too young to understand the nuance of the situation, but I told them the truth: That these folks were members of our community celebrating who they are and what they like to do.


You really think that's true?

Have you heard the saying "the lunatics have taken over the asylum"?
It's very old and possibly not politically correct.
BUT this is how the world is going, and it worries the shit out of me.

[CCTV]

I don't see this as woke. I don't know what this is.

Maybe you could be more forthcoming and honest.
What do you believe woke is ?

It's seems like only yesterday you were wondering what woke is, and now you seem to be informed enough to disagree with me on.

I remember Ash Sarkhar having this, What is woke anyway moment.
Then getting replied to with video, of her talking about her woke political activism.

It's a bit of possuming, funny how the Labour Party enthusiasts like SR, are unfamiliar with the term also.
It reminded me of Ash, what is woke anyway move.

[CCTV]

Title
The lesbians who feel pressured to have sex and relationships with trans women

Introduction:
Warning: Story contains strong language

"I've had someone saying they would rather kill me than Hitler," says 24-year-old Jennie*.

"They said they would strangle me with a belt if they were in a room with me and Hitler. That was so bizarrely violent, just because I won't have sex with trans women."

Jennie is a lesbian woman. She says she is only sexually attracted to women who are biologically female and have vaginas. She therefore only has sex and relationships with women who are biologically female.

Jennie doesn't think this should be controversial, but not everyone agrees. She has been described as transphobic, a genital fetishist, a pervert and a "terf" - a trans exclusionary radical feminist........

There's a common argument that they try and use that goes 'What if you met a woman in a bar and she's really beautiful and you got on really well and you went home and you discovered that she has a penis? Would you just not be interested?'" says Jennie, who lives in London and works in fashion.

"Yes, because even if someone seems attractive at first you can go off them. I just don't possess the capacity to be sexually attracted to people who are biologically male, regardless of how they identify."

I became aware of this particular issue after I wrote an article about*sex, lies and legal consent.

Several people got in touch with me to say there was a "huge problem" for lesbians, who were being pressured to "accept the idea that a penis can be a female sex organ".

(Iirc some guardian writer coined the terf term over decade ago)
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-57853385

[CCTV]

When asked to comment on this pattern of coercion and assault, Stonewall’s CEO compared same-sex attraction to racism. “Nobody should ever be pressured into dating, or pressured into dating people they aren’t attracted to,” Nancy Kelley told the BBC. “But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of color, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it’s worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.”

https://afterellen.com/backlash-against-lesbians-assaulted-by-transwomen/

I left out healthy at any size, which of course brings up another issue for woke cunts.
Is being obese, say 14 stone overweight only a health risk because of medical pressures ? :D

[vin]

Maybe you could be more forthcoming and honest.
What do you believe woke is ?

It's seems like only yesterday you were wondering what woke is, and now you seem to be informed enough to disagree with me on.

I remember Ash Sarkhar having this, What is woke anyway moment.
Then getting replied to with video, of her talking about her woke political activism.

It's a bit of possuming, funny how the Labour Party enthusiasts like SR, are unfamiliar with the term also.
It reminded me of Ash, what is woke anyway move.

I said "I think it's too broad to define and actually a bit meaningless. Just look at some of the posts on here. Some very subjective definitions."

You have a very clear definition in your mind which at the moment is all based on the LGBTQ community and some of the extreme (but possibly peripheral) views within that community. I would say that the term woke appears to have been usurped.

This is where it becomes tricky. Most definitions of woke would include the need to recognize/acknowledge (and seek representation for) marginalized and/or minority communities in society - at which point the door opens to any extreme view or lifestyle.

[vin]

When asked to comment on this pattern of coercion and assault, Stonewall’s CEO compared same-sex attraction to racism. “Nobody should ever be pressured into dating, or pressured into dating people they aren’t attracted to,” Nancy Kelley told the BBC. “But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of color, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it’s worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.”

https://afterellen.com/backlash-against-lesbians-assaulted-by-transwomen/

I left out healthy at any size, which of course brings up another issue for woke cunts.
Is being obese, say 14 stone overweight only a health risk because of medical pressures ? :D

Here's the thing. I know people who say they'll never, and I quote, "date a black girl" - that's their call. No one is forcing them to. Nothing to do with society or political correctness but what a random restriction to put on yourself.

[CCTV]

I said "I think it's too broad to define and actually a bit meaningless. Just look at some of the posts on here. Some very subjective definitions."

You have a very clear definition in your mind which at the moment is all based on the LGBTQ community and some of the extreme (but possibly peripheral) views within that community. I would say that the term woke appears to have been usurped.

This is where it becomes tricky. Most definitions of woke would include the need to recognize/acknowledge (and seek representation for) marginalized and/or minority communities in society - at which point the door opens to any extreme view or lifestyle.

I know, I replied to that with the scenario, where this ideology has gone from demanding gaymen be able to have sex legally, to forcing gays to have sex with other gays with different genitals. Which only bigots would call straight sex, terf scum.
I've claimed people in this woke cult, don't care about a sense of consistency. As with Ash Sarkhar, she feigned ignorance of what is woke, then had replies of her speaking about it explicitly in the past.

With SR our opening poster of this thread, in another thread he argued with me there was no such thing as white people or black people. Because nobody is really black or white by which these people would either reflect every bit of light or absorb every bit of light.
That Mane & Bojo were different shades of Tan. Then he heralded the introduction of black history month in Wales iirc, commonly meaning the history of black people he argued don't even exist, and certainly not one that includes bojo and white people as part of the same racial group. I asked him what's the curriculum and he didn't know.

1 black people don't exist
2 we are all some shade of tan
3 great news, the history of black people is going to be taught (presently inspired by BLM which certainly sees 2 races in their story)
4 no ability to relay any of the curriculum, sure who cares what's taught to people who don't exist, about their non existence and people from other races or shades of Tan.
I brought you stuff, and your reply, I'm not sure what that is...
As said hard to define, can be part of its definition. Though for me, I don't think it's that hard.

LGBTQ is just one part, that fit as a clear example. I posted more in the previous page.

Yeah, that's what people like to believe.
"They said they would strangle me with a belt if they were in a room with me and Hitler."

[scientificred]

Maybe you could be more forthcoming and honest.
What do you believe woke is ?

It's seems like only yesterday you were wondering what woke is, and now you seem to be informed enough to disagree with me on.

I remember Ash Sarkhar having this, What is woke anyway moment.
Then getting replied to with video, of her talking about her woke political activism.

It's a bit of possuming, funny how the Labour Party enthusiasts like SR, are unfamiliar with the term also.
It reminded me of Ash, what is woke anyway move.
Dear CCTV,
if by SR you are referring to me then for the record... I am not a labour party enthusiast

[CCTV]

"New pm
Never a Tory myself but for new Tory leader ? Someone who denounces Bojo."
Etc etc

[scientificred]

"New pm
Never a Tory myself but for new Tory leader ? Someone who denounces Bojo."
Etc etc
That does not mean I am labour.
Never have been!
Bojo is a buffoon! Clever but stupid!
You are muddled!

[CCTV]

You are a pathological liar.

[scientificred]

You are a pathological liar.
Strange comment and once again based on muddled thinking dear CCTV. I think you are hurting! Take a rest!

[Nineteenx]

I find the whole trans thing a bit out of keeping with how they treat other mental health conditions, or that they don't treat a man who believes he's a woman trapped in a woman's body or a woman who believes she's a man trapped in a woman's body as a mental disorder considering other ways of thinking they consider a disorder

Woke to me is people trying to rewrite history because they don't like how things were a few decades ago, getting programs from that period banned

Having set quotas of people from certain groups to appear in programming on soaps, dramas and films when doing so isn't in keeping with what was acceptable or real in a certain era and isn't realistic, places you've been and lived and it just isn't like that

Prattling on about calling it just football, not men's football and women's football, when there are some absolutely glaring differences between the 2 and prattling on about how much the men get paid when the get paid according to the revenue they generate and that money has also been pumped into the women's team of their club way in excess of any money they generate to give them the best possible chance to develop and evolve their game and succeed, a bit of gratitude wouldn't go amiss

[scientificred]

Thank you all for your comments! That was the reasoning for my post! It is not cut and dried.

[Daffydd]

Good point about mental health, NineteenX

[Daffydd]

Just heard about "Black Pound Day" and thought it was an anti woke joke but it's real. Spend your money in a black owned business, what could possibly go wrong?

Whatever happened to the term "Bame"? or was it considered too woke?

[CCTV]

Here's the thing. I know people who say they'll never, and I quote, "date a black girl" - that's their call. No one is forcing them to. Nothing to do with society or political correctness but what a random restriction to put on yourself.

This is one I'm working on,

It's not that strange. When we look at how the races rank beauty, on average each race rates its own most beautiful.
Where interracial sex is banned, people are restricted to their own race, on average the most beautiful race for them.
For far right black/asian/white, a ban on interracial sex is nothing to fret about. Opening up interracial sex economy has little interest for them. The interracial sex economy is a left wing thing.

When we rate the other races, we see the emergence of what might be called racial inequality in the sex game.
Here each race perceives the races from most beautiful to least, with what appears to be the races economic/ses status as perceived globally. The power of influence of money, as a primer, and not without reason.
The richer races being rated the most beautiful. The poorer races being rated least beautiful.

Beauty drives sexual interest. Where interracial sex is permitted, racial inequality enters the fray. By being racist, banning interracial sex, you can reduce racial inequality.

The biggest benefactors are white left wing men.

They are predisposed to be more likely interracial breeders/slutmakers than right wingers, who are more intraracial and essentially lose people from their race who they probably wouldn't align with politically. No major loss for the same race sex enthusiasts.

In the market place racial preferences between races, raises them/whites highest. Their beauty status will be highest.
Whereas the black will be paddy last on average for all the other races.
We see this claimed as racism by BLM types who document the lower wages of black sex workers as racism, just never stating the role of interracial sex preferences as the cause and facilitator.
The white whore/sexworker is found most beautiful by her own race on average, and second highest by all other races. The black whore/sexworker is found most beautiful by her own race, and least beautiful by all other races.
In a market where interracial sex is permitted, these racial preferences play their roles in income inequality. The sexworker supporter is more likely to pick a white over a black.

For the white left wing man, it's also better than it is for women. As women tend to seek status more than men. So we see the white man is rated most beautiful by other races, seemingly correlated with the ses/success of whites perceived globally. Then he has this same status advantage in attracting women.
Women having higher levels of disgust naturally, and starker pressures around reproduction, isn't as naturally inclined to enjoy banging a different bame/white every night. For younger men this excess pussy, and interracial advantage is much more easily availed of and enjoyed hedonsitically.
Interracial sex widens the marketplace for left wingers, reduces it for right wingers. For the white man whose left wing London is a paradise of desperate pussy, one where they perceive you most beautiful (likely due to racial status) and where you benefit from your racial status. It's a bame creampie recipe.

So when you see a person refusing to date a black girl, but not other races, it is likely because that in a world where interracial sex is permitted, you'd expect to see the blacks lose out.
Its why I believe the black prostitute gets paid about half of the white prostitute.
Because pro-interracial sex/love types, value the act of interracial breeding and these interracial preferences predict that poorer races lose out more than richer ones.

It's much like the moaning about inequality and being pro-immigration. When immigration will almost always increase inequality within a society.
You want interracial sex to be legal, you better accept the racial inequality, your racial equality brings with it.

If you banned interracial sex, you would reduce racial inequality in the sex/love game, and in the whore/sexworker game.
But you'd disadvantage those races perceived as most successful races. You'd have to ban a highly valued left wing act, interracial sex, to reduce racial inequality.

Doing this would bring a victory of sorts to the various peoples predisposed for intraracial preferences. Those who oppose interracial sex and offspring, a big no no in modern Western eugenics. Where the mixed race offspring sits atop.

It would be a crushing blow to left wing white men. Their market would be reduced drastically, they'd be restricted to the white market and lose all that racial prefferenicng/inequality.

[CCTV]

The only friends of yours that would surprise me saying that, would be if they were also blacks.

[vin]

The only friends of yours that would surprise me saying that, would be if they were also blacks.

It's been across the spectrum, to be honest. I've had a Nigerian friend say it because he finds them to be too much hard work.

[vin]

This is one I'm working on,

It's not that strange. When we look at how the races rank beauty, on average each race rates its own most beautiful.
Where interracial sex is banned, people are restricted to their own race, on average the most beautiful race for them.
For far right black/asian/white, a ban on interracial sex is nothing to fret about. Opening up interracial sex economy has little interest for them. The interracial sex economy is a left wing thing.

When we rate the other races, we see the emergence of what might be called racial inequality in the sex game.
Here each race perceives the races from most beautiful to least, with what appears to be the races economic/ses status as perceived globally. The power of influence of money, as a primer, and not without reason.
The richer races being rated the most beautiful. The poorer races being rated least beautiful.

Beauty drives sexual interest. Where interracial sex is permitted, racial inequality enters the fray. By being racist, banning interracial sex, you can reduce racial inequality.

The biggest benefactors are white left wing men.

They are predisposed to be more likely interracial breeders/slutmakers than right wingers, who are more intraracial and essentially lose people from their race who they probably wouldn't align with politically. No major loss for the same race sex enthusiasts.

In the market place racial preferences between races, raises them/whites highest. Their beauty status will be highest.
Whereas the black will be paddy last on average for all the other races.
We see this claimed as racism by BLM types who document the lower wages of black sex workers as racism, just never stating the role of interracial sex preferences as the cause and facilitator.
The white whore/sexworker is found most beautiful by her own race on average, and second highest by all other races. The black whore/sexworker is found most beautiful by her own race, and least beautiful by all other races.
In a market where interracial sex is permitted, these racial preferences play their roles in income inequality. The sexworker supporter is more likely to pick a white over a black.

For the white left wing man, it's also better than it is for women. As women tend to seek status more than men. So we see the white man is rated most beautiful by other races, seemingly correlated with the ses/success of whites perceived globally. Then he has this same status advantage in attracting women.
Women having higher levels of disgust naturally, and starker pressures around reproduction, isn't as naturally inclined to enjoy banging a different bame/white every night. For younger men this excess pussy, and interracial advantage is much more easily availed of and enjoyed hedonsitically.
Interracial sex widens the marketplace for left wingers, reduces it for right wingers. For the white man whose left wing London is a paradise of desperate pussy, one where they perceive you most beautiful (likely due to racial status) and where you benefit from your racial status. It's a bame creampie recipe.

So when you see a person refusing to date a black girl, but not other races, it is likely because that in a world where interracial sex is permitted, you'd expect to see the blacks lose out.
Its why I believe the black prostitute gets paid about half of the white prostitute.
Because pro-interracial sex/love types, value the act of interracial breeding and these interracial preferences predict that poorer races lose out more than richer ones.

It's much like the moaning about inequality and being pro-immigration. When immigration will almost always increase inequality within a society.
You want interracial sex to be legal, you better accept the racial inequality, your racial equality brings with it.

If you banned interracial sex, you would reduce racial inequality in the sex/love game, and in the whore/sexworker game.
But you'd disadvantage those races perceived as most successful races. You'd have to ban a highly valued left wing act, interracial sex, to reduce racial inequality.

Doing this would bring a victory of sorts to the various peoples predisposed for intraracial preferences. Those who oppose interracial sex and offspring, a big no no in modern Western eugenics. Where the mixed race offspring sits atop.

It would be a crushing blow to left wing white men. Their market would be reduced drastically, they'd be restricted to the white market and lose all that racial prefferenicng/inequality.

I think I need to read this slowly when I have time.

[southernboy]

The Sky Sports pundit Graeme Souness has received stinging criticism for calling football a “man’s game” following Chelsea’s 2-2 Premier League draw against Tottenham on Sunday.


https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/aug/15/graeme-souness-criticised-mans-game-premier-league-chelsea-tottenham?CMP=twt_gu#Echobox=1660565380

[CCTV]

The Sky Sports pundit Graeme Souness has received stinging criticism for calling football a “man’s game” following Chelsea’s 2-2 Premier League draw against Tottenham on Sunday.


https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/aug/15/graeme-souness-criticised-mans-game-premier-league-chelsea-tottenham?CMP=twt_gu#Echobox=1660565380

Well hopefully he apologises as a Woman.

[Daffydd]

The Sky Sports pundit Graeme Souness has received stinging criticism for calling football a “man’s game” following Chelsea’s 2-2 Premier League draw against Tottenham on Sunday.


https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/aug/15/graeme-souness-criticised-mans-game-premier-league-chelsea-tottenham?CMP=twt_gu#Echobox=1660565380

"It's a man's game all of a sudden again," said Souness. Well, he was commenting on a mens game.

Meanwhile the BBC called the Conte v Tuchel spat a case of "handbags", which is surely sexist?!

[scientificred]

"It's a man's game all of a sudden again," said Souness. Well, he was commenting on a mens game.

Meanwhile the BBC called the Conte v Tuchel spat a case of "handbags", which is surely sexist?!

Robbie Fowler made such a comment perhaps 10 years ago and the host presenter made him apologise live on air as I remember. Robbie bless him has never been much of a pundit since;
What exactly is freedom of speech!

[CCTV]

I think I need to read this slowly when I have time.

Well if you do Vin, there are 2 errors. One a grammatical error, isn't where their should be aren't.
The important one, saying the variable instead of a variable.

As said its a working theory looking at problems with facts about reality and accepting the stipulated complaints that led to the enquiry.
People said racism led to the pay gap between prostitutes.
In this instance a bit of a paradox in the old racism debate, where via interracial sex being permitted/desirable/enacted, Racism enters the sex economy.
As interracial sex preferences predict along the line of what seems to be a ses/economic perception of the races globally.
If you don't do interracial sex at all, you never bring this unconscious racism, racial prejudices shaping the perception of people as physically beautiful into effect. You may also be racist, but not impacting the economy at question.
Here racism makes the world a little less unequal racially.

In studies on trolley tests in the USA, ethical questions around would you save 5 people by pushing one in front of a train. We see different prejudices in results. This time we are thinking a bit more with our brain and less so with our arousal zones.
When racial cues were added there was a big gap in results. Right wingers were indeed more xenophobic, they'd save the white guy a little more predictably than a black say.

But the studies names were kill whitey and the reason is treason. Because left wingers were way more racist, or socially just racists. There results showed a much bigger effect, they'd sacrifice a white before a black more readily. The same was true of war crimes along the Allied/Nato crime versus Jihad/Muslim crime. The left were so xenophilic, they were much more prejudiced.
In this instance anti-racists are actually way more racist than racists. And anti-racists also stand for interracial sex, which I propose introduces racial inequality into the sex game.

This does not align with the BLM narrative too much though. Unlike the sex one which I believe does: Where put in a sacrifice to save life scenario, left wingers would more readily sacrifice a white over a black, than a right winger would a black over a white.
That was a surprising result for some. But not for me looking at the societies. There are many more points of interest. These studies were conducted in the USA.

To end immigration, keep the dirty foreigner out, you need to make the rest of the world pretty equal. Which is happening fast, but its a big gap to the poorest.
Last I checked the poorest people in the world largely sub saharan Africans, have a co2 output 40 times lesser than the wealthy whites of the world.
In the middle of the world, second world, mostly say 20 times higher than the poorest of the world. This world has advanced very well in a materialist sense.
If you said to the racist gammon, you get England back if we knock off a load of privileges, I think they'd take their country over wealth as ethnonationalists/littleenglanders.

It's the more materialistic Brits, lefties, that argue for the economic impacts/benefits of migrants openly. And due to outsourcing reproduction and declining birthrate trends, they need people to replace themselves.
The downside of diversity is felt in social and civic life. This is an area the left would usually value, but not when it comes to diversity, here they champion diversity as an economic benefit to the economy, and an increaser of inequality.
Whereas the general mantra of labour activists, would fit a people before profit/economy mold, and income inequality is very bad. However this can be seen in many left wing areas, increasing inequality. So far I've given 3.
http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/

In America BLM endorses vote blue no matter who.
This left side in America (90% of blacks) believe in the right to have had 9 million extra black babies aborted out of 60 million since Roe v Wade.
Instead of just sacrificing 7.8 million black babies for the greater good, 16.8 million blacks were aborted for the greater good since roe v wade.
They don't like to touch on this because, by conceding there is an issue of 9 million more black babies getting aborted over demographic representation, they'd have to say that in some sense that abortions can be bad, or racist. That is very difficult for people committed to abortion as healthcare, for them ideologically the blacks are just getting more health care cause they need it.

Abortion is a eugenic tool and you'll find working class over represented in abortion statistics routinely.
The benefit in theory, and shown in data, is that by aborting these undesirables, these unwanted babies, you can reduce the crime rate.
Of course data shows if these kids had dad's they'd do much better, sons would be far less likely to end up in jail, girls less likely to end up on the game, teenage pregnancies etc.
But BLM opposes the nuclear family as an institution, whereas MLK had a very favourable view of the nuclear family, iirc, calling it the fundamental educational agency of man, mother, father and child. Single parent families widen inequality.

The idea being that those who remove their offspring from the population, are doing society a favour. Reducing crime rates.
In America with 9 million extra black babies aborted, you'll find some right wingers around the world aghast at the idea that Christians would prevent blacks from removing so many extra blacks from the gene pool.
There is a majority of Lefties though who support abortion even where the blacks are overrepresented, or the working class, or even where eugenic outcomes materialise like the disappearance of down syndromes in progressive countries.
If women chose to eradicate disableds from society, it is good. Because the unborn child is property of the mother. As we know where human life is degraded to mere property, you remove the human claim to human rights.
Again, this saves people having to assist disableds where needed. It's an economic gift, it's why Hitler and Stalin did it.

Via abortion you can also keep women in the workplace and increase productivity. This idea, or effect of keeping women in work and ignoring a family, appears to be more prominent on the left.
Of course women who are naturally more predisposed to parent than men, often find they've chased a career and when they find out they can't have kids cause their womb has turned to sand it can be a very difficult time for them. More difficult than for men, who can experience this same regret, just less often and less intensely.

Realising you spent your career to be some bbc ghoul, or the county council manager, or even an MP or PM, and these achievements are supposed to substitute for a child you never had.
Taking the magic baby makers, who are evolutionarily adapted to carry children with a stronger spine, and naturally gifted with kids compared with men.
Who you can see children are naturally more fearful of, even where the man isn't doing anything wrong.
He's simply not as emotionally well tuned to deal with babies, and appears more terrifying than any woman.

It's a funny old world and when I listen to mainstream opinions, like tees, I do have to laugh.
The tories are apparently through their propaganda turning the little englanders against the gays. But in my experience these people rarely have any issue with the L&Gs. They have issues with the Ts the naturally born men who say they are women, unsurprisingly women who say they are men don't cause any where near the same issues, Political LGbTQism and a failing education system. Rises in anti-LGBTQism on the right is likely a result of the gay mafia being put front and centre of the project. There are a load of gays etc who do not like Political Gayness.
The tories were also hit with islamophobia and racism. But data I've seen suggests that where the Bame population is quite high you get a fair bit of homophobia.
London the bame capital of England has more homophobia that the Northern gammon lands. In studies on attitudes London does not fair well on these affairs, 13% of londoners would not support a gay child of their own. 1% for norf fc gammons.
Even some left wingers acknowledge that the mosque and the gay club are probably best kept in separate areas.
And we see this self segregation in effect where people move to more homogeneous zones.
Like when Ash Sarkhar was detailing the demographic displacement of white londoners, she referred to the increases in bames from reproduction and immigration, and the loss of whites who left the area.
We're winnning, as any colonisers would see the displacement of natives. This insidious group are behaving in much the same manner as colonists in Americas past. No interest in native values, believe their own are better than the backward and primitive natives. Fuck the redskins, and fuck the gammons pink/red faced brits.

Whilst left wingers look at Saudi Arabia with horror, they look at Iran a more natural ally for some in the Labour Party than Saudi Arabia a little kinder, then with Palestine LGBTQ is not even a priority. Then they look at Muslims in Britain as victims of islamophobia. Jts rather confused.
Whereas I see Muslims in Britain as two kinds, one Muslims, and 2 left wing activists. Majority are Muslims.
These two types are also a concern for Labour Party planners, a significant portion of the Labour vote after all. Labour being scared that if they are too islamophobic in the name of tackling homophobia the Muslims will form separate parties as they operate very similarly to the LGBTQists. You can find similar in the black community too.
These communities and origin countries are still living under a system, where they simply can't maintain a population or deal with declines in the same manner.

Outside of Western nations the refugee/migrant packages are nowhere near as lucrative. Countries can't compete so this Western lifestyle and planning is not really replicable. Its based on luxury. Let them eat cake kind of philosophy.
In these shithole countries like Rwanda they won't get an easy ride as they do in the UK.
This demographic colonisation of Europe is based on economics but it's also based on the revolutionary left in America.

The left has jumped so far left, that we have the far right gays.
Historically if you wanted to predict the outcomes of a tribe, or nation, you would find that those who had the highest positive and highest negative ethno-nationalist traits would do best.
This essentially means that societies that thrived were very good to their own, and very hostile to the outsiders.
Racism is evolutionarily adaptive in two senses, it prevents division forming within a society due to foreigners xenophobia/philia, and it keeps disease from spreading.
Outside of the Western world this is largely still the norm, and you can find quaint little places where if you rocked up on their shores in your boat, they'd butcher you onsite. Ah fuck you to would be colonisers.

Instead the Western world is now defined under a new paradigm of sorts.
Polarisation is rampant within societies. With such change you have a lot of chaos.
Positive relations within nations are party defined and even fractions within parties. Between parties, the relations couldn't be worse. Student doctor saying she wouldn't save or provide care to Bojo. Clearly not enough experience in the industry as even the worst cunts deserve medical attention. Army guys shooting at corbyn pictures. The constant smears, the wish of death on the other within your lands.
It's not a wise path.

The left has gone entirely xenophilic to the point where they are more racist than right wingers and better people because of their excess prejudice being socially just.
While little englanders raise union Jack's or St George crosses, their opponents no longer accept these national symbols. Instead they are on their pride LGBTQism as an international symbol of global power. You could see this with the coming to team England with #DiversityIsOurStrength. Even Starmer I believe has felt the Labour Party needs to be a little pro-british to win back the racist working class whites who voted Tory.
Yet so many excellent black athletes play for the white nations of Europe. But the reverse doesn't appear to occur due to the economic disparities.

It's funny in Ireland we had a British gymnast as he couldn't qualify for the UK. We have had Bundee Aki a beast of a man of Samoan heritage qualify for Ireland Rugby as he lived in Ireland for 3 years. The erosion of what it means to be Irish.
Meaning an Irish guy lost his Irish Jersey to a Samoan born in NZ because he played for Connaught for 2-3 years. The all blacks, England whoever largely all do it too.
This theme also runs through other employment areas. Where developing nations lose trained staff to bigger economies. The brain drain.

The division that arose over educational policy in the UK recently was an interesting phenomena.
Jess Philips attributed the division between Islam and Pride over religious teachings on sex, was in fact provoked by far right enthusiasts.
Love is love v let kids be kids.

Here we see the ideas of ethnonationalism in effect through religious ideology. Religious nationalism, or globalism more sensibly.
The LGBTQ v Islam.
Both are very positive to their own, and very negative to outsiders. This predicts success and these two groups are the ones in the main you have to worry about. They can be as venomous as any snake, and as soft and fragile when they get any heat.
Other strong groups, the Jews. And in America the right is much more assertive than in the UK.

The American right has seen how these groups operate and have decided to mirror these groups to be more successful like them.
If you defile the prophet, you run the risk of death. If you offend wokeys they come for your job and income.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease, the crying baby gets the milk. It's not something I particularly like but in such matters its not unexpected. People will adapt successful strategies to get their side more power.

Until such time as wokery is defeated, these conversations will not occur in the main. And without honest discussion good luck solving problems.

People who value themselves above others based on their belief systems, rarely want to discuss the reality of their beliefs, as reality testing destroys subjective feelings/beliefs.