Of all the horror stories in Douglas Murray’s THE STRANGE DEATH OF EUROPE, this was the most horrifying:
A victim of sexual assault lied about the ethnicity of her attackers because she—get this—didn’t want citizens to view the men who attacked her “as the problem.”
🧵 1/
Imagine the poor self image of a woman who would lie to the police to protect the public image of three men who assaulted her.
But it gets worse. Much worse. 👇
2/
In a nightmarish manifestation of Stockholm Syndrome, the woman says in her open letter:
“You’re not the problem. You’re usually a wonderful human being”
Tip: wonderful human beings don’t force women to perform sex acts on them.
And there’s still more…
3/
They’re no better or worse—they’re only different
“They are alone and looking to banish their humiliation of flight with confirmation of their masculinity.”
The left has been force-feeding the world these lies for decades.
Don’t dare argue, lest they call you ‘racist.’
4/
Here’s a true thing:
Not all sexual assaults are committed by men of a certain ethnic group / nationality / religion.
Here’s another true thing:
When any crime is committed, the identify of the perpetrator should be reported.
INCLUDING ethnicity, religion, nationality.
5/
Our anti-racist friends (AKA We The Undersigned) are all for reporting the correct sex of a criminal, often citing the importance of accurate statistics.
Is there less of a need for accuracy with respect to other demographic data?
6/
If we don’t want crime statistics to make it appear that women commit more crimes of a certain nature than they actually do, wouldn’t we also be concerned about statistics that make it appear that a particular group doesn’t commit FEWER crimes of that nature?
7/
On top of the behaviour of victims who wish to protect their abusers in the name of ‘let’s all get along,’ we’re witnessing contradictory opinions with respect to accuracy in criminal records.
“Don’t feel safe”
“Afraid to travel”
“Trip was canceled”
“In passport purgatory”
🚨 Free advice 🚨
No matter how you dress or what you call yourself, you don’t get to mandate what official documents look like or what data they include.
🧵 1/
🛎️ There’s a common thread in all of the stories below. It’s one of persecution and ‘see what the government is doing to me?’
🛎️ But let’s look at it another way:
People who claim to be the opposite sex (or refuse to be saddled with the horrid binariness of sex) think that the world should adapt itself to suit them.
This is not how the world works. It isn’t how government documents work. Or how security clearances work.
Some things aren’t (and should not be) up to individuals to decide, hide from the public, lie about, alter, etc. Sex and age are two of those things.
No government-issued document should be changed on a whim, and unless we want to go down the rabbit hole of ‘how often and how soon and how many times can one request a new sex marker on a passport,’ allowing any such changes will be whimsical. If we do stipulate limits/restrictions there will always be someone who feels persecuted if the rules disallow a change.
🛎️ Who wins?
There are solid reasons (border security) for sticking with accuracy in passports.
Trans-identifying people claim there are solid reasons (personal security) for allowing passports to reflect their ‘chosen’ identity.
IF these are in conflict, then which comes out on top?
The safety of entire populations?
Or the feelings of a small number of people who have made life choices incompatible with reality? 🤷♀️
🍿 And now…on to stories of unbound cruelty…
2/
Transmasculine-nonbinary-identifying female (woman) applied for a passport update to show MALE sex in Jan. 2025. No details given, but State still has the passport.
“it’s basically like transgender folks have been put on an informal travel ban, unable to leave the country.”
Did the ‘Left’ shift position (i.e., move further left)?
Generally speaking, yes.
With respect to the more specific group of left-leaning GC feminists in the UK, I don’t think so. Rather, the Southport riots and Farage’s growing popularity seem to have served as timely catalysts that stimulated an already-left-leaning group to start speaking out against perceived ‘islamophobia.’
In other words, they would have spoken out before, but there wasn’t much reason to.
2/
Did Trump Derangement Syndrome migrate eastward?
I suspect it did. And it’s still TDS, it’s just Tommy Robinson Derangement Syndrome.
No, I’m not a hardcore Trump supporter (I am a Trump *administration* supporter). And I hadn’t heard of Tommy Robinson until late summer 2024 (strange thing, considering I’m one of those far-right people). But the behaviour patterns induced by TDS are strikingly similar:
Do not, under any circumstances, agree with a policy—no matter how sound—that is supported by [name of right wing person] lest you be associated with [name of right wing person]
What’s interesting is that the UK GC crowd failed to recognize this is EXACTLY why there are so few US-based critics of genderism within the Democrat community (Kara Dansky is the notable exception). Say something negative about TQIA+ ideology in the States? Poof—you’re a Trump supporter. Abracadabra—you’re far-right.
How far a leap is it to see that any criticism of Islam in the UK might be seen as tantamount to supporting Tommy Robinson?
If you aren’t familiar with this recent manifestation of self-hoisting-by-petard à la française, Lionel Shriver wrote a column about it shortly after the squatters—er, invited guests—took over.
“theatre Gaité Lyrique staged a free conference on ‘reinventing the refugee welcome in France’. The organisers literally invited their own downfall: 200 West African migrants who apparently felt very welcome indeed and refused to leave”
Hi to all my ‘anti-racist’ friends who value free speech when it comes to saying men can’t be women, but not so much when it comes to saying anything hurty about Islam.
I’ve two words for you:
ENJOY THEOCRACY
🧵 1/
From Sainsbury ads to posh Belgravia hair salons to Harrod’s menus—
Ramadan is—apparently—all around us.
2/
Diwali—not so much. 🤷♀️
In other words, let’s cater to 6% of the population, but not 2%.