Yes. If you say that it's impossible to change sex, you can get a ban, but being a convicted p&$do is fine.They are if you’re gender critical but paedophilia is apparently fine.
Yes. If you say that it's impossible to change sex, you can get a ban, but being a convicted p&$do is fine.They are if you’re gender critical but paedophilia is apparently fine.
I think it's a mix of all the above. I am sure she is absolutely desperate to get back on Twitter again - I used to marvel at how much she tweeted, all day, every day, and at night too, as if she had nothing else going on in her life. Which she obviously didn't, really, especially if Eric was in his office googling child rape with left hand while the right one was otherwise engaged. I imagine she sat there scoffing endless biscuits washed down with wine feeling rather sorry for herself but the sycophants on Twitter helped (a bit) to fill the void. I doubt there are any other suitors out there wanting to take her hand.This is what I don’t understand. If he has any regard for the people he Is retweeting then why do it. He isn’t doing them any favours...
do you think EJ and IK are sat at home laughing at everyone, is it pure denial or is she just so desperate to be loved by someone that she’s willing to go through with standing by him?
Similarly with today's news - Janice Turner, Sali Hughes, Caitlin Moran and that lot would have pointed out the injustice of the sentence if the sicko involved wasn't married to IK but no, not a bloody word. I did think Janice Turner had some integrity...the others, not so much.Literally this. It absolutely beggars belief and do you know the worse thing is that none of the other blue tickers are saying ffff all about it. They would be foaming at the mouth if this was someone outside of the luvvie circle:
Anyone remember India Knight appearing on Newsnight in June 2012 and admitting to using pornography regularly 'with her partner' [Joyce?] The clip is now nowhere to be found on the Internet – wonder why? The interview won't have aged well in the light of the child porn revelations.Just read the updated Daily Mail story, didn't realise he's admitted searching for child sex images. Also the Mail says "he had been engaged to India Knight since 2015" so that sounds like maybe they've broken up. I hope so, her daughter is only sixteen, how could anyone carry on living with someone like that.
I agree up to a point. But I think she’s a nasty piece of work. When Eric Joyce was convicted of common assault for attacking a 14 year old boy in a newsagent she tweeted that the teenager deserved it. Joyce was also convicted of assault after a fight with several MPs in a Commons bar. He has always been a violent man and she seems to have continually supported him and his actions despite his historyI think this is really unfair. We don't know what India knew, and she cannot be held in any way responsible for what her partner did.
There was speculation earlier on this thread about possible domestic abuse but whether that's the case or not, the question shouldn't ever be "Why doesn't she leave?"
I am not a fan of India Knight, but I don't think she should lose her job because of his actions.
Just wanted to add, from what I have seen on some subs on Reddit, a lot of lesbians are getting banned and pushed out of lesbian safe places because some trans women have been ridiculing them and being horrible them for not wanting to have sex with trans women that have penises.What do you mean by ‘trans rights’? Trans people already have all the same human rights that everybody does under the Human Rights Act. And their gender identity is also a protected characteristic under the Equality Act.
Don't agree with this conclusion at all. Myriad reasons someone might stay and we are not privy to the details of their relationship.If she stays with him, she's got the same twisted desires he has, there's no other reason.
God, I didn't realise she was one of those arseholes who thinks women should wear a uniform according to their age and social status. I have absolutely no time for that nonsense.I found a review of her book "In Your Prime" (which sounds utterly dreadful), this excerpt from the review stood out
"She is also ruthlessly rude about Pointlessly Long Hair on middle-aged women – the sort of lank, greying hank that makes the wearer resemble a knackered mermaid. Equally wrong is Pointlessly Short Hair which is supposed to be gamine, but which actually requires an unfeasibly sharp jawline if you’re not going to end up looking like the governor of a women’s prison."
Here's the review in full
In Your Prime: Older, Wiser, Happier by India Knight review – sharp, slanted and bracingly unbothered
All about me – yes, but these tips on ageing are also full of wit and style, writes Kathryn Hugheswww.theguardian.com