Until he wants a baby that is.People like him and OJ screech about how homophobic the LGB-A and GC people are. The only 'lesbians' they care about are the ones with dicks.
Until he wants a baby that is.People like him and OJ screech about how homophobic the LGB-A and GC people are. The only 'lesbians' they care about are the ones with dicks.
I hope they doIs it not about time a big company like Tunnocks just dug their heels in, stood their ground and told the trannies to get fucked?
I hope they do
Just saw this on Twitter. Unbelievable.
That was pretty much my reaction.Jesus Christ!
Nothing will stop me from buying my caramel wafers... Gonna get some in tomorrow to balance out all this fuckeryRe tunnocks. I have worked with them over the years through my workplace and can say they are a family run, very generous company who are happy to donate products and support the local community.
I know the person who would deal with donating products to events and can say hand on heart that she wouldn’t have the faintest idea about the LGB Alliance or any controversy donating some teacakes would have caused. It was not a political statement in any way whatsoever, this is a woman of a certain age like my mum. It is absolutely ludicrous that there’s backlash from the TRAs but hardly surprising. They are so self obsessed to think everything is about them.
I hope the wee wummin working at tunnocks isn’t getting any hate as she’ll not understand any of it. Hoping it pushes sales for tunnocks in general though, their products are fab and anyone in the Glasgow area will tell you how much they give back to the community.
the misogynistic hole in a really bad soap?The failed actor?
she knows exactly its about the 482 (or thereabouts) trans women who have been charged with rape with the gender of the accussed being put down as female. It has duck all to do with victims of crime......total clown of a woman.
I really really want a teacake now. Haven't had one in years!This whole Tunnocks business proves that the TRA movement has officially eaten itself. Boycotting a brand of chocolate teacakes? Such activism. I'm sure the leaders of the great radical traditions - Mandela, Malcolm X, Pankhurst, ect. - are applauding them from the afterlife!
Absolute jokers.
From what I can gather that photo was for vanity fair I think and was tying in with an interview he was doing with them to do with him appearing in To Wong Foo Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar. So talk about changing history to suit an agenda.For my sins I listened to Busy Philipps podcast last week (I dip in and out) and she was talking about men like Harry Styles being ‘gender fluid’ because of the fact they like to wear dresses etc sometimes.
She mentioned Patrick Swayze in the 90s being photographed very artistically in a little black dress and wearing make up and saying that there wasn’t the language for it back then but he was definitely gender fluid. Now this has riled me for several reasons. First off Patrick is no longer with us so I think speculating about how he would ‘identify ’ today is in very bad taste. But more so it’s that a man can wear a dress/ruffles/make up etc and still be a man!! It doesn’t mean he’s showing his ‘feminine’ side because gender is a construct and clothes are just clothes. Pieces of cloth. So I think that argument is bull and has annoyed me. Maybe it’s just showing another side to masculinity?
Sorry if I’m rambling here, just had to put this here as it’s been playing on my mind.
exactly, does this mean all of the men in scotland who wear/wore kilts are gender fluid too?For my sins I listened to Busy Philipps podcast last week (I dip in and out) and she was talking about men like Harry Styles being ‘gender fluid’ because of the fact they like to wear dresses etc sometimes.
She mentioned Patrick Swayze in the 90s being photographed very artistically in a little black dress and wearing make up and saying that there wasn’t the language for it back then but he was definitely gender fluid. Now this has riled me for several reasons. First off Patrick is no longer with us so I think speculating about how he would ‘identify ’ today is in very bad taste. But more so it’s that a man can wear a dress/ruffles/make up etc and still be a man!! It doesn’t mean he’s showing his ‘feminine’ side because gender is a construct and clothes are just clothes. Pieces of cloth. So I think that argument is bull and has annoyed me. Maybe it’s just showing another side to masculinity?
Sorry if I’m rambling here, just had to put this here as it’s been playing on my mind.
I'm not wearing nail varnish or high heelsAm I gender fluid because I'm wearing trousers today?
surely you don't just have the one description? I think you mean you are gender fluid/non binary today but that may change tomorrow, or in the next hour. Make sure you update us with your pronounsAm I gender fluid because I'm wearing trousers today?
but are you wearing badly applied makeup?I'm not wearing nail varnish or high heels