Fawcett and Felicia 's tweets get so little engagement from ordinary women outside of the Westminster-voluntary sector backslapping bubble that experiences women asking why Fawcett will not lift a finger for sex based rights as a pile on of abuse ...
I say this not to be mean to be Felicia
But because Fawcett is campaigning on online Harms
Fawcett is trained by Glitch..
Whose CEO subscribes to this view ..
Fawcett/ Glitch /Stonewall 's view of online harms will not protect women
Is a belief that biological sex is real, important, immutable and not to be conflated with gender
identity so beyond the pale that it is ‘not worthy of respect in a democratic society’?
Should anyone who holds such a belief be required in all circumstances to suppress its expression
for fear of causing offence and instead be ‘required’ to use the language of sex and gender in a way that is contrary to that belief, on pain of dismissal or discrimination at work ?
Make yourself a cup of tea and read the skeleton argument in my case