Miss Pomme Green
LightNews LightNews
banner
misspommegreen.bsky.social
Miss Pomme Green
@misspommegreen.bsky.social
1K followers 2.5K following 290 posts
"There's not going to be no great again, you stupid slut"
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
angryblacklady.blacksky.app
hard to overstate how bad this is for discrimination against everyone but white people.

I'm saying we are undergoing a wholesale revision of equal protection and anti-discrimination law so that it only protects white people.

Let me explain:
victorerikray.bsky.social Victor Ray @victorerikray.bsky.social · 8h
This makes facially neutral policies--like poll taxes and literacy tests--that we know were adopted for discriminatory purposes legal. Organizations can now simply claim there was no discriminatory intent regardless of outcome. It's unconstrained institutionalized racism.
paleofuture.bsky.social Matt Novak @paleofuture.bsky.social · 8h
They're just taking an ax to the Civil Rights Act
December 9, 2025 at 6:09 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
cpsc.gov
Water your tree.
December 9, 2025 at 6:10 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
leftistlawyer.com
"How can you say you're never voting for Newsom? You're handing the election to the GOP!"

Because I don't vote for Republicans, ever. Newsom is a racist, transphobic, genocide supporting Republican. Ergo, I am not voting for him. Find me someone who isn't a Republican and I'll consider them.
December 9, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
padrepio.bsky.social
Ce n'est pas le discours d'un allié, ça. Ce n'est même pas le discours d'un pays hostile. C'est le discours d'un ennemi.
December 9, 2025 at 6:43 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
mimmymum.bsky.social
Remember when Helen Joyce was called out as "not an expert" by Australian courts - Now Maya Forstater has been told the same in the Peggie judgment! 👏👏👏

The judgement states outright that the evidence submitted by her & Sex Matters was “not skilled evidence.”

This is the Tribunal’s exact wording!
Highlighted paragraph: Evidence from Ms Forstater and Mx Valentine 1038. We turn to address the evidence from Ms Forstater and Mx Valentine, which the parties had described as “research evidence”. That is not, so far as we are aware, a term of law. Nothing was cited to support the use of that term. It is not skilled evidence as explained below, and the parties did not suggest that either witness was skilled or expert in that sense. It was not necessarily inadmissible, given the terms of Rule 41, and until read and considered the extent to which it might be relevant could not be assessed, but the weight to attach to it was a different consideration Highlighted sections: 1040. In many respects the evidence in the statements was more in the nature of material for the public debate on wider issues as to what the law should be, and on occasion it appeared to us to be polemic, rather than evidence relevant to the issues at an Employment Tribunal. 1041. Opinion evidence was addressed in Walker and Walker on Evidence, Fifth Edition (“Walker”), which explained the distinction between evidence of fact, and of belief or opinion. Opinion evidence may be led from what Walker describes as an ordinary witness (the classification of witnesses is between ordinary and skilled), and examples of that are given. Ms Forstater 1042. The statement from Ms Forstater was not presented as impartial evidence, but specifically as one given in support of the claimant. It had at paragraph 10 an argument as to facts, of which Ms Forstater said that she was certain. They are however we consider not facts, but expressions of her opinion. The assertion at 10 (b) for example was “Sex is in general readily perceptible and is salient to other people.” That we consider cannot be other than her opinion, for which no support from any document in the Supplementary Bundle appeared to be referred to in her written witness statement. It was contradicted by other evidence, and the terms of a Note issued by EJ Tinnion on 5 January 2025 in relation to the second respondent. It did not appear to be an assertion related to the second respondent in particular, but as a more general proposition. 1043. The assertion at (d) had a further series of propositions which were opinions although presented as facts. If the 1992 Regulations, then as discussed they are not within this Tribunal’s jurisdiction, and the comment appears to be an argument over the policy of the law, or how the law should be interpreted, neither of which are relevant evidence before us. 1044. The sub-paragraphs include, by way of example, (ii) “women are in general more fearful of men than men … Highlighted sections: That is again an expression of opinion without cross reference to any document in the Supplementary Bundle. Sub-paragraph (v) was “unless rules about single-sex spaces are clearly stated and enforced it leaves women open to risk of sexual harassment and assault, and makes these spaces feel unsafe.” That again is an expression of opinion. The witness statement purports to expand on the comments at paragraph 10 stating that the facts stated are true. In our view they are not reliable as evidence from a person not a skilled witness on the propositions that are advanced. 1045. Where there was reference to documentation it is in our view both partial and incomplete. Part of it is based on research undertaken by Sex Matters, an organisation of which she is the Chief Executive Officer. It is a campaigning organisation, as set out in paragraph 4. There is an obvious risk that that research is impacted by the nature of it, which is not suggested to be an independent academic study .... In our view it would not be dealing with a case fairly or justly to rely on expressions of opinion from a person campaigning on one side of the argument on such an issue. We did not consider that the case of Connor on which the claimant founded, cited above and which indicated that in some situations evidence which was not expert in nature could be sufficient, was applicable to such a matter. 1047. Our review of the literature referred to by Ms Forstater reveals that the broad generalisations she seeks to take from it are not sufficiently supported by the document or document founded on, both from the terms of the document and the other documents in relation to the same broad issue, to be treated as reliable evidence.
December 9, 2025 at 10:36 AM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
flyingrodent.bsky.social
Imagine, if a British political leader was to be showered with absurdly over-adulatory praise for skills and knowledge that he very plainly does not possess. Thank you, British politics commentators, for the bounty of your wisdom
Make a political hero of Zack Polanski if you want. Just don't forget to engage your brain Marina Hyde The Green party leader is riding high in the polls. But across the political spectrum, uncritical adulation leads nowhere fast
December 9, 2025 at 6:35 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
lgbtiqagreens.bsky.social
We were promised a draft bill on banning conversion practices by the end of 2025 and it's mid-December with no movement.

This government *must* commit to a trans-inclusive ban, especially following a report by the BBC into practices fifty years ago.
A pink background with two women holding hands. Photo by Anna Shvets. In the foreground you see the following title: "Labour must ban conversion practices", and a subtitle of: "A recent BBC documentary has aired that shows the scale and the horrors of conversion practises in the '60s and '70s.". In the bottom right corner you see the LGBTIQA+ Greens logo and in the bottom left corner is the imprint: Promoted by LGBTIQA+ Greens, c/o PO Box 78066, London SE16 9GQ On a white background with a pink cross in the middle you see a statement. The statement is as follows: Conversion practises are abuse. They must be banned. A recent BBC documentary has been released - "Shock Therapy", which documents the abuse by the NHS of LGBTIQA+ youth back in the '60s and '70s. The series reveals that shock "therapy" was used against LGBTIQA+ people in the 1960s and 1970s as a way to try and "cure" people of their sexual orientation or gender identity. At least 250 people were subject to this treatment in 1974 alone. It was reported at the time that those who are now survivors of conversion practises took part of their own accord, but survivors and historians are now questioning whether genuine consent was ever given. Many have said that the consent sought would not stand up to modern ethical standards surrounding medical consent and treatment. The government must issue a formal apology to those who experienced this awful treatment, while there are still survivors around to hear that apology. In 2025, people are still subjected to conversion practises. Some operate under the guise of religion or culture, while some still remain deeply ingrained within the NHS. The services replacing GIDS pathologize trans youth and impose barriers to care, which are conversion practises in all but name. For a decade, governments have promised to end conversion practises. In 2025 the Labour government promised a draft bill by the end of the year. It's yet to appear. A ban on conversion practises must now happen, and be trans-inclusive. It's clear now, 50 years later what harms these practises have had on its survivors. We must learn from history, and we must let it guide us on how we approach policy on LGBTIQA+ people. We must not let the current culture war stand in the way of doing something fundamentally good. We owe it to survivors to finish what was promised: ban conversion practises.
December 9, 2025 at 6:42 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
esqueer.net
It's incredible watching how all the gender critical accounts on Twitter were celebrating the Sandy Peggie decision yesterday based on the false reporting by the British press and now that they have dug in to the actual decision, they are flipping out over it.
December 9, 2025 at 6:46 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
shilderi.bsky.social
on empile les blousques

mais la c'est pour dire que du coup je vais live la découverte de vendetta

twitch.tv/shilderi tout ca
December 9, 2025 at 9:55 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
junlper.beer
mcdonalds deleted their ai ad, bullying works
December 9, 2025 at 7:03 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
fayzaa.bsky.social
Salopard.
December 9, 2025 at 7:09 PM
misspommegreen.bsky.social
Seeing british media cheering on this raciste would be very disturbing if one wasnt already attuned to the time.
scotnational.bsky.social The National @scotnational.bsky.social · 7h
Harassment, 'untruthful' evidence, and 'unusual' legal questions. Our reporter Xander Elliards looks at nine points from the Sandie Peggie ruling that the rest of the media has left out
December 9, 2025 at 11:06 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
scotnational.bsky.social
Harassment, 'untruthful' evidence, and 'unusual' legal questions. Our reporter Xander Elliards looks at nine points from the Sandie Peggie ruling that the rest of the media has left out
December 9, 2025 at 5:46 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
sheg7.bsky.social
Never forget the Hozier is a real one
Hozier on twitter quote-tweeting Graham Linehan (who had a pop at him for publicly sipporting trans people): "you wont drag me into your weird obsessive little culture war, mate. I wrote a message in solidarity with a group whose life expectancy ranges in the 30s solely due to murder and suicide. Is your back not aching from bending down to punch so fucking low?"
December 9, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
premthakker.bsky.social
Wow: Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention (named for Holocaust survivor Raphael Lemkin, who coined term "genocide") calls Clinton's remarks "genocide denial."

"Young people in the US are not stupid or gullible. They simply reject genocide – something the Secretary might consider doing as well."
Statement on Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Genocide Denial at the Israel Hayom Summit December 9, 2025 The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention and Human Security feels called to point out that former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s recent remarks at the Israel Hayom Summit on 2 December amount to outright genocide denial. During her remarks, the Secretary correctly noted that the recent deterioration of Israel’s standing among U.S. voters is not a “Republican versus Democrat kind of divide” but rather a generational one. Nevertheless, she incorrectly diagnosed the reasons for the shift as a matter purely of optics, stating that “Israel [has] the worst PR of any group” and accusing social media, particularly TikTok, of presenting “pure propaganda” that American youth are uncritically ingesting. Secretary Clinton’s framing is not at all an accurate reflection of why Americans are growing more critical of Israel. Young Americans of all political stripes have not fallen prey to propaganda, though that is always a legitimate concern. Rather, they have consumed two years of videos depicting Israel’s genocide against Palestinians that have been uploaded by Palestinian journalists, ordinary people trying to survive in Gaza, IDF soldiers, and ordinary Israelis themselves. There has been no convincing refutation of the sheer amount of raw evidence of genocide coming out of Palestine. Young people in the U.S. are not stupid or gullible. They simply reject genocide – something the Secretary might consider doing as well. Secretary Clinton appears not to be bothered by the reality of genocidal violence – in fact, she did not mention anything about it. Her concern is, rather, in her words, “the narrative” – the fact that these crimes are no longer hidden and are now being live-streamed and documented in real time, making it harder for her and others to control it. TikTok cannot be blamed for the fact that many members of Gen Z understand that Israel is … It is in fact highly ironic to blame TikTok for the dissemination of content laying bare the realities of Israel’s genocide in Palestine. Like many other social media conglomerates, TikTok has been accused of systematic censorship of pro-Palestinian content. In July of this year, TikTok appointed an ex-IDF instructor as its new manager of hate speech. This person can hardly be accused of pro-Palestinian views given her background and stated opinions. It appears that what Secretary Clinton really means to say is that TikTok is not being effective enough at censoring the truth. What truly seems to unsettle Secretary Clinton is not “misinformation,” but rather the fact that younger generations are no longer consuming a single, state-controlled narrative. They are accessing unfiltered images and testimonies that challenge decades of political messaging. This helps explain why TikTok has become a target, not because it is misleading students, but precisely because the content uploaded by its users allow them to see beyond official propaganda. When former Secretary Clinton calls this “a serious problem for democracy,” it sounds less like a defense of democratic values and more like concern for the weakening of a long-standing political and ideological agenda, one that, it must be stated, is highly undemocratic. Secretary Clinton did get one thing right, although quite inadvertently: When you do not have the truth on your side, all you left with is indeed optics and “the narrative.” But she is wrong to think that any amount of PR – even really great and expensive PR – is going to hide this genocide. Israel would be better served by advice to end the genocide, engage in a transformational process that brings the perpetrators to justice, and build a future with Palestinians. That is the only way to change its image. America’s young people are no longer fooled by genocide denial – whether it is being presented by Israel, the United States, Sudan, Myanmar, Russia, or Secre…
December 9, 2025 at 7:15 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
hovohyso.bsky.social
13 voix près.

Le PS comme les écolos savaient très bien ce qu'ils faisaient.
December 9, 2025 at 7:21 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
flyingrodent.bsky.social
The British upper class, barely even bothering to deny the allegations any more
SPECTATOR Nigel Jones The teenage Farage story misses the point All schoolboys were once obsessed with Hitler In short, Hitler and Himmler lived permanently rent-free in all our heads. In one of my schools a boy was caned by his housemaster after a copy of Mein Kampf was found in his locker. The teacher wielding the cane had spent the war debriefing prisoners from Rommel's Afrika Korps, so was slightly parti pris, and the fact that the guilty culprit had found Hitler's autobiography in the school library did not save him from six of the best. So even if the teenage Farage made the sort of remarks attributed to him - and he has denied doing so - he would be entirely typical of his class and generation.
December 9, 2025 at 9:40 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
niedermeyer.online
a billionaire who sees undermining political sovereignty as an alternative to paying a relatively minor fine is a problem that will have to be dealt with eventually
lorak.bsky.social Lora Kolodny @lorak.bsky.social · 3d
Elon Musk is against the European Union being the European Union —he posted this after X (fka Twitter) was fined for violations of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
“The EU should be abolished and sovereignty returned to individual countries, so that governments can better represent their people”
December 6, 2025 at 8:53 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
internethippo.bsky.social
Elon Musk is worse at hiding it but this is the problem with all billionaires: they are a threat to democratic governance. They have an insatiable need to own and control everything. If you want to be free you have to curb their power, and demand political leaders who understand that
lorak.bsky.social Lora Kolodny @lorak.bsky.social · 3d
Elon Musk is against the European Union being the European Union —he posted this after X (fka Twitter) was fined for violations of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
“The EU should be abolished and sovereignty returned to individual countries, so that governments can better represent their people”
December 6, 2025 at 9:07 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
mauvaisegraine.bsky.social
Ainsi, pour conquérir le "vote musulman", il faut être antisémite.
Ces propos méritent d'être sanctionnés par l'Arcom. C'est du pur racisme. C'est de l'islamophobie.
December 5, 2025 at 8:21 PM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
carolinepennock.bsky.social
I realise this isn’t the worst of it., but this article’s characterisation of anti-trans groups as ‘women’s rights campaigners’ makes me want to scream.
jessothomson.co.uk Jess O'Thomson @jessothomson.co.uk · 3d
Kishwer Falkner in The Times talking about the rights of "biological people". As compared to trans people, who are, of course, non-biological.
“They’re concerned their rights are being taken away. Their anger should be directed at those snake-oil salesmen who sold them the fiction they had rights that have been taken away, and not ever explained that rights are balanced. And that in some areas, such as discrimination law, the rights of biological people hold.”
December 6, 2025 at 11:28 AM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
polphilpod.bsky.social
falkner argues the bathroom ban will be self-enforcing

just like *checks notes* . . . traffic laws
December 6, 2025 at 11:19 AM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
james.claims
TIL: i have a box full of trans people
Holding out a box of Persil “Non Bio” 3 in a Capsules. Baroness Falkner referred to the rights of trans people having to be balanced with the rights of “biological people”, ergo trans people are “non-biological”
December 6, 2025 at 11:46 AM
Reposted by Miss Pomme Green
valoisdubins.bsky.social
As others have noted, the “snake-oil salesmen” include Kishwer Falkner’s own organisation before she was appointed to dismantle trans rights.

And also the Tory Party of Theresa May.

And the UN.
jessothomson.co.uk Jess O'Thomson @jessothomson.co.uk · 3d
Kishwer Falkner in The Times talking about the rights of "biological people". As compared to trans people, who are, of course, non-biological.
“They’re concerned their rights are being taken away. Their anger should be directed at those snake-oil salesmen who sold them the fiction they had rights that have been taken away, and not ever explained that rights are balanced. And that in some areas, such as discrimination law, the rights of biological people hold.”
December 6, 2025 at 11:54 AM