I note you're now being sued for this post. It's about time your abusive campaigning for men's rights was brought to the attention of a judge.

Now, now, child. No need for tantrums or assumptions.

Disinformation. There is nothing in the question about whether people are or are not transphobic. It asks whether people should be allowed to ignore the division of users of male and female toilets by their sex.

Eh? So no-one has mentioned the paedophile clergy? Give over!

It’s not called the Equalities Act, you know-nothing, fox-clubbing, woman-hating tax toff. You’ll find it more comfortable in your lane.

You’re so close.

Thank you, James. Very decent of you to say so.

Hola!

Nothing.

Nothing.

Buy that rationale, everything from surgery to blue paint to December to floorboards is a "viewpoint".

Football, royalty, church, Coronation Street, and the comedy of Michael McIntyre are not viewpoints. Genuinely not wanting to be facetious, they are a sport, a system of government, a TV programme, etc. etc. You could have viewpoints *about* them. But you could say that about literally anything.

You're using the words "culture" and "viewpoint" interchangably when they are not. Isn't Badenoch simply saying "we should allow people to express their viewpoints, good or bad" and "we should not pretend all cultures are *morally* equal". These are not mutually exclusive statements.

She didn't say or imply those immigrants "weren't allowed a viewpoint", did she? She implied their cultures were inferior. Two different things. Anyway, I don't want to be defending Badenoch – there's plenty to criticise her for – but if you want to accuse her of hypocrisy, this ain't it.

Saying "not all cultures are equally valid" is not the same as saying "people with different viewpoints are divisive". It's nothing like the same statement and she never said the latter. Can't we do better than this?

Try now!