UK Politics Thread (Part 2)

[anon27364116]

Deeply disturbing

[Mascot]

@Derecho

@Mascot

I had a friend at Uni who was attacked by a man in a public toilet, and he wasn’t claiming he was a woman.

Are we allowed to use “I had a friend” as I’m pretty sure when @Klopptimist uses instances like that he’s told not to.

It was an aside for illustratration. I shouldn’t really have to illustratrate the obvious fallacy that sexual predators will politely wait until some legislation ‘allows’ them to enter a female toilet, we’re all intelligent people, but their you go.

[Derecho]

@Mascot

@Derecho

@Mascot

I had a friend at Uni who was attacked by a man in a public toilet, and he wasn’t claiming he was a woman.

Are we allowed to use “I had a friend” as I’m pretty sure when @Klopptimist uses instances like that he’s told not to.

It was an aside for illustratration. I shouldn’t really have to illustratrate the obvious fallacy that sexual predators will politely wait until some legislation ‘allows’ them to enter a female toilet, we’re all intelligent people, but their you go.

It’s a genuine question as there seems to be a lot of double standards in what’s allowed.
So it’s okay for everyone to use in future

[Mascot]

@Derecho

It’s a genuine question as there seems to be a lot of double standards in what’s allowed.
So it’s okay for everyone to use in future

It’s not about being ‘allowed’. It’s not school.

We all have experiences that occasionally we pull out to support a point. If you dismiss everything on the basis that ‘you have a mate…’ people might start taking the piss a bit.

[redalways]

To me, philosophically, there is a difference in how one uses it.

If you use it to illustrate an example of how something can work, or to counter an absolute statement, then it makes sense.

If you use it in the place of actual evidence, or to generalise from such a limited sample, then it doesn’t make sense.

[Bekloppt]

What about if @Klopptimist and @Mascot put each other on ignore, just for a month or so, wouldn’t that be a good idea?

Works really well for me with certain posters. Very good for blood pressure.

[Derecho]

Works for me as well.

Otherwise you’d see me calling you a Tory Wanker every day

[redalways]

@Bekloppt

What about if @Klopptimist and @Mascot put each other on ignore, just for a month or so, wouldn’t that be a good idea?

Or they could get a room…

[Rambler]

Nah… they are a superb double act…I only log in for the daily entertainment. My life would be the poorer without them.

[anon27364116]

Has anyone actually seen the two of them in a room together, at the same time?
Just saying, makes you think

[Bekloppt]

I just suspect that there might be more to a discussion of UK politics than squabbling about transgender toilet usage.

[Rambler]

@redalways

Or they could get a room…

With two bathrooms though

[Klopptimist]

@Mascot

But the fact remains, that your attitude towards transgender people (through the stuff you say here) is transphobic. You don’t understand it is, which is why you are upset. But it is.

In your opinion which is demonstrably skewed.

[Klopptimist]

@Mascot

You asked if I’m personally offended and, yes, I am a bit.

Lefty bingo number 24, being offended on somebody else’s behalf.

[Klopptimist]

@Mascot

Let me rephrase then, since I’ve upset you.

You couldn’t upset me if you tried. You’d either be wrong or right. It’s the ad hominem attacks that just show when you’ve lost the argument and resort to getting personal. Sad really.

[Klopptimist]

Not me who gets wound up……

I don’t see the point of putting people on ignore, just creates your own echo chamber.

[Bekloppt]

I’m sure we all ignore annoying people all the time in real life, so why not here?

[Klopptimist]

Fair enough.

[Dane]

@Derecho

It’s a genuine question as there seems to be a lot of double standards in what’s allowed.
So it’s okay for everyone to use in future

[Mascot]

@redalways

Or they could get a room…

@Klopptimist did come on to me once. I was flattered, but sadly I’m straight as a die