Baht Simpson

That's what she looked like before the surgery.

What the hell does that mean?

Can you name some of them? Let's have a look at them.

You're right. He just created another Twitter account where he pretended he was a Trans man. He then created a fake account pretending he was a lesbian. He threatened to kill trans activists, was banned by Twitter again. I actually feel sorry for him.

I had a look on the UK Gov. website which publishes figures on English Hate crime figures. Hate crime has existed in England & Wales since 2008. The latest stats they show are for recorded crime 2021-2022 and it's quite interesting. Of the 155,841 hate crimes recorded 97% were for public order offenses, violence, criminal damage and arson which are already crimes in law. It doesn't specify but let's assume the remaining 3% are for offenses of abuse. Now these are just recorded crimes, not criminal convictions. It doesn't specify how many people were convicted or just issued with warnings. It also doesn't detail offenses reported but not recorded. Make of these figures what you will but it does seem to be that the huge majority of hate crimes are existing crimes which are deemed to be aggravated by hate rather than a new type of crime. It seems that the Scottish system is more draconian and possibly unworkable. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2021-to-2022/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2021-to-2022#police-recorded-hate-crime

Quite so.

Linehan clearly has issues and is probably not the best spokeperson for female rights. He was supposedly posing as a woman on Mumsnet trying to drum up anti-trans support. So much for his advocacy for safe spaces for women, eh? He was banned from Twitter for hateful comments. More here: Poor man seems obsessed to the point of harming himself emotionally. He blames others for all his troubles. Needs someone to tell him to pull away from it all.

Strange that you think me stating how I perceive people is a smear. Particularly as I used the rather mild admonition "intransigent." The problem is that like Peterson she brings up some interesting issues but then lets herself down in practice. By saying you are sympathetic to transexuals then calling them "men in dresses" and "women with penises" you are inviting censure. I think that's the problem she's got. Peterson also betrays himself in his language by stating his support for the gay community then saying "Is it the freaks and the queers?" and stating that gays need help to integrate into society (sic). I will always listen to what these two have to say and I'm sure they raise some relevant points but I don't perceive their views as more important than anyone else's because of their prominence.

You're right. I'm not at all interested in Linehan's concerns because I don't see him as a serious commentator. And I'm not sure I want to talk about toilet provisions either because it's so tedious. 🙂 My point was a general one about how I perceive these people, not about any particular issue.

I'm not talking about specific issues. Those can be debated. I'm talking about Peterson's angry rants, Fox's pathetic sarcasm, Linehan's hateful comments and Rowling's intransigence.

I do have reservations on this new policy but mostly around workability and fair enforcement.

Yes. Remember when she liked a tweet that said trans women were just men in dresses and then got her agent to apologize by saying she accidentally liked the tweet when she "mishandled" the phone. Lol I have no problem with her or anyone voicing their opinion but like Jordan Peterson, Graham Linehan, Laurence Fox and others she's highly antagonistic and deliberately courts trouble in an attempt of vainglory.

I like the langour of a bath every few days and two quick showers a day, maybe more this time of year.

Christ would have kicked over his table.

Yeah, it's funny how these clowns abandon Christ's teachings when it suits them. Judge not, that you be not judged (Matthew 7:1). Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. (Luke 6:37)

Be careful with free travel insurance from credit card companies. Check the small print. Years ago I had a card that offered free travel insurance but only covered you when you were actually travelling, not when you were at your destination.

Guys, it's April 1st. 😀

Rather pedantic. By frozen I mean they stopped the Final Salary scheme, obviously with accruals. But you're right to pull me up on the 40 years. It was actually 32 thinking about it. 😀

Yes. At most do's I've been to there's been a toilet roll hanging from string or a wire.

Yes, and when they reduce our State Pensions we'll not only have been contributing to the pensions of those before us, we'll also be subsidizing those behind us. Who'd be a boomer eh? 😀 The only thing I would say is that eroding the State Pension is a cast-iron vote loser, so both parties will be mindful of that.

Absolutely true. We were urged to buy shares in the company to compensate for lower pension contributions. On top of that they moved from yearly salary increases to a bonus system that benefitted the higher earners and punished middle management.

I'm in the same position, as the tax due on my State Pension is deducted from my private pension. Tax is of course collected on earned income and State Pension is treated as such.

As I understand it you don't pay NI even if you go back to employment after 67. I stand to be corrected on this though. I worked in the private sector and it was much the same regarding final salary pensions, except that the final salary was calculated on an average pay over the last five years of employment. The pension formed part of your salary and for a better pension you got paid rather less. I can assure you that banks do not give away money for nothing. I think that an equivalent pay of 4 x salary in the public sector is a bit fanciful, but I can only speak for banking. The assumption that final salaries were gold-plated was exploded when they did away with them. Like, "banking is a job for life" which disappeared with the enormous redundancies in the late 80s. The contention that State Pensioners have had it too good for too long is just absurd. It just locks into the false narrative that they are getting something for nothing which is clearly untrue.

I'm not reading all that. I'm happy for you though or sorry that it happened.

I wonder how many on State Pension have 50T per annum in earned income. Probably very few. A lot more sitting on large equity in their homes and in shares. It's basically a wealth tax and I think you have to be very careful there, targeting those that are genuinely wealthy rather than those that are just comfortable or just surviving. I agree on the triple lock.