Examining Gender Identity ideology and its impact on Women's Sex based rights and Gay Rights. Exploring how this has taken such firm root in Western societies (Cognitive & Regulatory Capture).
The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children dates back well over a century. It was granted a Royal Charter, by Queen Victoria, in 1895. The NSPCC is the only UK charity which has been granted statutory powers under the Children Act 1989, allowing it to apply for care and supervision orders for children at risk. Childline, the charity founded by Esther Rantzen, became part of the NSPCC in 2006.
What does it mean to be Pansexual?
This episode features an interview with Gemma here to educate us about pansexuality.
As far as I can ascertain pansexual is a Woke version of bisexual designed to elide the “sex” in sexual and divorce it from sexual attraction. In the grand scheme of things this, I assume, makes no difference to bisexuals, who are attracted to both sexes. Where it becomes problematic is the idea that same sex orientation (a legallyprotected characteristic in the U.K.) is somehow outdated and insufficiently inclusive of anyone of the opposite sex. It seems designed to mandate inclusion of anyone who has a “GenderIdentity” at odds with their biological sex. Anyone paying attention will know that activists frequently describe exclusive same sex orientation as “transphobic”. See #CottonCeiling and, latterly #BoxerCeiling. The creeping invalidation of exclusion, on the grounds of sex, has a particular resonance for the Gay community who have only recently, 2010 in the UK, achieved their legally protected status.
The framing of the discussion is interesting. First of all Gemma explains what pansexuality means.👇 As you can see there are no exclusions from Genma’s dating pool. She includes everyone. Regardless of sex, or presentation.
The next sentence implies some moral superiority to Gemma’s stance with this glib statement. Gemma has an all-seeing ability to see beyond such superficial fripperies of biological sex to the essence of what a person is. Whatever that means! The implication is that people operating a dating pool based on sexual orientation are somehow basing this on surface level judgements. This is the subtle shaming at play.
This professed ability, expressed by a young woman, could merely be dismissed as the righteousness of naive youth. Unfortunately it has infected our body politic as demonstrated by Pansexual Layla, recent candidate for the Leadership of the Liberal Democrat’s and also a pansexual. Here’s Layla on her stance on access to single sex spaces. You can find this clip on Hansard (A written record of U.K parliamentary proceedings.)
Next up Poppy repeats another fallacy; which is propagated relentlessly in this “debate”. The idea that science has discovered some new facts that prove Humans are not sexually dimorphic is pure propaganda.
Nothing has changed Poppy! Except the emergence of an ideology predicated on convincing society the shape shifting idea of “Gender” has to take primacy over Biological Sex. Claire Ainsworth’s article is routinely quoted to argue that biological sex has been debunked, Here is what she had to say along with a similiar statement by Professor Curtis.
At the risk of repeating myself, here is the result of research into the prevalence of chromosomal abnormalities in referrals to Gender Identity clinics. They are not a statistically, significant feature and hence routine karyotype tests, to determine chromosomal abnormalities, were abandoned some years ago.
If anyone wants to know why “intersex” conditions or, Differences/Disorders of sexual development, figure so prominently in this discussion I cover it in this blog; based on the work of an autogynephilic (AGP) transsexual. The argument centres on a psychological need for AGP males to claim a biological basis for their condition, a sort of “intersex brain”. It drove the diagnostic criteria for Gender Dysphoria and is, in my view. key to understanding the landscape and the trans activists mind set.
This is why young activists make nonsensical claims such as these 👇.
If it was just a bunch of young people spouting this, and it wasn’t influencing laws /public policy, I could be sanguine about the folly of youth. I used to like the Bay City Rollers. Unfortunately this type of thinking is now widespread across our media and has a footing in every political party.
So where did Gemma come across the term pansexual asks Poppy. To no great surprise, here is her answer.
I will accept all and every criticism that I am being a bit ageist in my dismissal of Generation Gemma. I am. Gemma has a benevolent ageism of her own going on. After providing us with her understanding of the development of the nomenclature from bisexual to pansexual, Gemma offers a dispensation for anyone to choose which label suits them or to reject them all (How Generous!). Though you may need to use the term bisexual to explain it to parents and grandparents because “I think it’s easier for them to understandand grasp”. Gee, thanks for thinking of us! Is this what’s known as an unreaonable adjustment? Not patronising at all.
No interview on this topic would be complete without reference to living authentically, bullying, and the need to keep safe. If anyone has any statistics the pansexual murder rate, do let me know. Gemma also recommends joining your local LGBT group (I would avoid at all costs for any kid confused about their sexuality.). ChildLine are also recommended, as you would expect. If I have not convinced you to avoid like the plague, by now, one of us has failed.
Donate
If you want to support my work here is my paypal. Please only do so if you can afford. Any amount will help. tishnaught@me.com
One thought on “Queering the NSPCC? Part 6: Pansexual”