Callie-cat
@calliencd.bsky.social
Middle aged woman trying to work out where she stands in this ‘sane’ world.
🏳️⚧️🇪🇺🐈⬛🦀🏳️🌈
Am I ever wrong? Yes, just like everyone else.
Do I have doubts? Yes of course, I wouldn’t trust anyone who didn’t.
🏳️⚧️🇪🇺🐈⬛🦀🏳️🌈
Am I ever wrong? Yes, just like everyone else.
Do I have doubts? Yes of course, I wouldn’t trust anyone who didn’t.
Usual, right-wing sleight of hand. The estate, of which she is a recipient, is liable.
Maybe her parents did work hard, maybe they were deserving 🙄, but her parents aren’t being taxed - they are dead after all - it is the person who didn’t work hard for all that cash that is being taxed.
Maybe her parents did work hard, maybe they were deserving 🙄, but her parents aren’t being taxed - they are dead after all - it is the person who didn’t work hard for all that cash that is being taxed.
November 24, 2025 at 7:42 PM
Usual, right-wing sleight of hand. The estate, of which she is a recipient, is liable.
Maybe her parents did work hard, maybe they were deserving 🙄, but her parents aren’t being taxed - they are dead after all - it is the person who didn’t work hard for all that cash that is being taxed.
Maybe her parents did work hard, maybe they were deserving 🙄, but her parents aren’t being taxed - they are dead after all - it is the person who didn’t work hard for all that cash that is being taxed.
In the 1980's there were 'many' women who felt there was a conflict between lesbians and straight women when it came to access and participation - was it wrong to 'ignore' them?
Also what 'slander' has occurred?
Also what 'slander' has occurred?
November 24, 2025 at 6:46 PM
In the 1980's there were 'many' women who felt there was a conflict between lesbians and straight women when it came to access and participation - was it wrong to 'ignore' them?
Also what 'slander' has occurred?
Also what 'slander' has occurred?
Please define 'biological woman' without allowing for exceptions.
Please also define what rights of 'biological women' have been up for debate.
Please also define what rights of 'biological women' have been up for debate.
November 24, 2025 at 6:43 PM
Please define 'biological woman' without allowing for exceptions.
Please also define what rights of 'biological women' have been up for debate.
Please also define what rights of 'biological women' have been up for debate.
their bile. By being obscure they may start accusing her of not being vocally anti-trans enough, or even been ‘captured’ - see their approach to BP who hasn’t exactly been shy about her contempt for trans people, yet it isn’t good enough got them. . .
November 24, 2025 at 1:17 AM
their bile. By being obscure they may start accusing her of not being vocally anti-trans enough, or even been ‘captured’ - see their approach to BP who hasn’t exactly been shy about her contempt for trans people, yet it isn’t good enough got them. . .
Completely agree, but walking in the shadows will still mean she comes up against the legal contradictions of her cult’s views. Also, and I appreciate this is wishful thinking, but not being so noticeably unhinged may prove a detriment to her. One thing the GC media love is a loud voice proclaiming
November 24, 2025 at 1:17 AM
Completely agree, but walking in the shadows will still mean she comes up against the legal contradictions of her cult’s views. Also, and I appreciate this is wishful thinking, but not being so noticeably unhinged may prove a detriment to her. One thing the GC media love is a loud voice proclaiming
Completely agree, but just remember there is no actual ‘sensible’ GC argument so even if the front face is apparently calm, they’re still just as unhinged beneath the surface.
November 24, 2025 at 12:13 AM
Completely agree, but just remember there is no actual ‘sensible’ GC argument so even if the front face is apparently calm, they’re still just as unhinged beneath the surface.
That notwithstanding I’m just glad to see the back of her regardless.
November 24, 2025 at 12:11 AM
That notwithstanding I’m just glad to see the back of her regardless.
But the legal contradictions mean that any guidance, no matter how clever, that seeks to restrict trans people will have the same fatal flaw.
November 24, 2025 at 12:10 AM
But the legal contradictions mean that any guidance, no matter how clever, that seeks to restrict trans people will have the same fatal flaw.
the reality on the ground is the inherent legal contradiction that the SC ruling creates. I suspect this is why BP seems to be so reluctant to lay down the new guidance; even if she likes it, she knows that it is unworkable and mad.
November 24, 2025 at 12:10 AM
the reality on the ground is the inherent legal contradiction that the SC ruling creates. I suspect this is why BP seems to be so reluctant to lay down the new guidance; even if she likes it, she knows that it is unworkable and mad.
Falkner is an unhinged bigot so her response is to have a public temper tantrum on the radio or in the lords. I don’t get the impression that M-AS has the same temperament so won’t be trying to demand public policy by fiat but will no doubt be looking at back room methods to get her way, but . . .
November 24, 2025 at 12:10 AM
Falkner is an unhinged bigot so her response is to have a public temper tantrum on the radio or in the lords. I don’t get the impression that M-AS has the same temperament so won’t be trying to demand public policy by fiat but will no doubt be looking at back room methods to get her way, but . . .
Only time will tell if her subtle anti-trans approach ends up being worse or not, but both The Baroness and M-AS have the problem that their brand of hostility comes up against the HRA and GRA as well as multiple legal challenges in the courts.
November 24, 2025 at 12:10 AM
Only time will tell if her subtle anti-trans approach ends up being worse or not, but both The Baroness and M-AS have the problem that their brand of hostility comes up against the HRA and GRA as well as multiple legal challenges in the courts.
Also relying on the phrase that everyone is too scared to speak out to confirm her views has got to be one of the most immediate indicators that an argument has no foundation - perhaps we should call it ‘Hadley’s Law’.
November 23, 2025 at 10:17 AM
Also relying on the phrase that everyone is too scared to speak out to confirm her views has got to be one of the most immediate indicators that an argument has no foundation - perhaps we should call it ‘Hadley’s Law’.
Again since the likes of HF made up the term ‘gender ideology’ and the definition, she is accidentally right that too many grifters, ignorant and deluded buy into anti-trans views. As to the laughable notion that people are too scared to spout that particular bigotry - er the Government aren’t shy.
November 23, 2025 at 10:17 AM
Again since the likes of HF made up the term ‘gender ideology’ and the definition, she is accidentally right that too many grifters, ignorant and deluded buy into anti-trans views. As to the laughable notion that people are too scared to spout that particular bigotry - er the Government aren’t shy.
Remember choosing to ban PBs is not a neutral act. As things stand we know for sure that many trans children go through the trauma of cis puberty, yet, you’re not asking that we need to be sure a child is cis to allow cis puberty to occur.
November 23, 2025 at 9:58 AM
Remember choosing to ban PBs is not a neutral act. As things stand we know for sure that many trans children go through the trauma of cis puberty, yet, you’re not asking that we need to be sure a child is cis to allow cis puberty to occur.
a child time to be ‘sure’. Taking PBs themselves does not mean a child is trans, the point is they can stop and cis puberty recommences.
As to the data, I don’t know how much data there is, but I do know there is no army of detransitioners suing the NHS for the administrative of PBs.
As to the data, I don’t know how much data there is, but I do know there is no army of detransitioners suing the NHS for the administrative of PBs.
November 23, 2025 at 9:58 AM
a child time to be ‘sure’. Taking PBs themselves does not mean a child is trans, the point is they can stop and cis puberty recommences.
As to the data, I don’t know how much data there is, but I do know there is no army of detransitioners suing the NHS for the administrative of PBs.
As to the data, I don’t know how much data there is, but I do know there is no army of detransitioners suing the NHS for the administrative of PBs.
You’ve misunderstood the point of puberty blockers. If doctors are completely ‘sure’ that a child is trans then where is the ethical objection for them to have actual HRT or even surgery? Since most medical professionals do not think they can be sure, puberty blockers are the compromise that allow
November 23, 2025 at 9:58 AM
You’ve misunderstood the point of puberty blockers. If doctors are completely ‘sure’ that a child is trans then where is the ethical objection for them to have actual HRT or even surgery? Since most medical professionals do not think they can be sure, puberty blockers are the compromise that allow
they complete puberty anyway. So this (not really) minor bureaucratic hoop is just yet one more of many hoops. But no one in any kind of authority has called for a study of the harms of this delay or the excessive bureaucracy, which is odd as there is lots of evidence of this being the case.
November 23, 2025 at 12:20 AM
they complete puberty anyway. So this (not really) minor bureaucratic hoop is just yet one more of many hoops. But no one in any kind of authority has called for a study of the harms of this delay or the excessive bureaucracy, which is odd as there is lots of evidence of this being the case.
Despite popular opinion there have always been heavy restrictions and bureaucratic hoops on trans youth (and adults); it’s got to be one of the most regulated and restrictive healthcare types there is - and that is assuming anyone actually gets to the front of years long waiting lists before.
November 23, 2025 at 12:20 AM
Despite popular opinion there have always been heavy restrictions and bureaucratic hoops on trans youth (and adults); it’s got to be one of the most regulated and restrictive healthcare types there is - and that is assuming anyone actually gets to the front of years long waiting lists before.
from a groundswell of detransitioners, not is it coming from the majority of the medical profession, it is coming from politicians who have no expertise in this.
You say this ‘minor’ bureaucratic hoop is necessary to prevent harm and have a whole cohort of detransitioners, but based on what?
You say this ‘minor’ bureaucratic hoop is necessary to prevent harm and have a whole cohort of detransitioners, but based on what?
November 23, 2025 at 12:20 AM
from a groundswell of detransitioners, not is it coming from the majority of the medical profession, it is coming from politicians who have no expertise in this.
You say this ‘minor’ bureaucratic hoop is necessary to prevent harm and have a whole cohort of detransitioners, but based on what?
You say this ‘minor’ bureaucratic hoop is necessary to prevent harm and have a whole cohort of detransitioners, but based on what?
widespread legal claims from now-adult children who used PBs - if there was such a population many law firms and/or media organisations would be parading them publicly all day every day - yet there is nothing.
So where does the justification for the full ban come from? It isn’t as if it is coming
So where does the justification for the full ban come from? It isn’t as if it is coming
November 23, 2025 at 12:20 AM
widespread legal claims from now-adult children who used PBs - if there was such a population many law firms and/or media organisations would be parading them publicly all day every day - yet there is nothing.
So where does the justification for the full ban come from? It isn’t as if it is coming
So where does the justification for the full ban come from? It isn’t as if it is coming
I’m not sure if you are being disingenuous or obtuse. Since PBs for trans youth were prescribed over 20 years ago what evidence is there of widespread harm? It isn’t as if the ‘impartial’ Cass report documented any, nor given the extremely toxic environment for trans people in the UK has there been
November 23, 2025 at 12:20 AM
I’m not sure if you are being disingenuous or obtuse. Since PBs for trans youth were prescribed over 20 years ago what evidence is there of widespread harm? It isn’t as if the ‘impartial’ Cass report documented any, nor given the extremely toxic environment for trans people in the UK has there been
Their contention that SM has been 'brilliant' as she has made the argument a 'left-wing' one as apparently the rise in racism in this country is actually the fault of refugees is so repellent I can't believe that HH can actually look herself in the mirror.
November 21, 2025 at 4:56 PM
Their contention that SM has been 'brilliant' as she has made the argument a 'left-wing' one as apparently the rise in racism in this country is actually the fault of refugees is so repellent I can't believe that HH can actually look herself in the mirror.
I listened to this this morning, had to stop it repeatedly to regain composure at the staggering cynical hypocrisy from HH. In fact all three of them were gushing about how clever this plan was without a hint of a challenge to the narrative. Absolutely sickening.
November 21, 2025 at 4:54 PM
I listened to this this morning, had to stop it repeatedly to regain composure at the staggering cynical hypocrisy from HH. In fact all three of them were gushing about how clever this plan was without a hint of a challenge to the narrative. Absolutely sickening.