St Richard's warn men dressing in women's clothes

[itsnotoutthere]

"A GROUP of men who dress in women's clothing to raise money claim they have been told their fundraising is potentially offensive by charity bosses.

Members and supporters of Upton Rugby Club have dressed in drag for the Leo Sayer All Dayer, and also held other fundraisers for 18 years, to raise more than £40,000 for St Richard's Hospice.

But the group claim they have been told their latest efforts cannot by promoted by the hospice because it might offend the LGBT community.

June Patel, St Richard's chief executive, said they appreciated the group's fundraising but were 'striving to be mindful of equality, diversity and inclusion."

https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/19657416.st-richards-warn-men-dressing-womens-clothes-fundraiser-offensive/

Sigh.

[newbloodmoon]

Everyone has the right to be offended and the rest of us have the right to not give a flying excrement.

[itsnotoutthere]

16 minutes ago, newbloodmoon said:

Everyone has the right to be offended and the rest of us have the right to not give a flying excrement.

Not anymore.

Question is, how come women weren't offended?

Basically, stop raising money this way because men dressed as women might be offensive to men dressed as women. Clown world.

Edited October 21, 2021 by itsnotoutthere

[Still Waters]

Quote

Rugby players and members from the club have been dressing in women's clothing to raise money for the hospice every August for 18 years.

Over the years they have raised more than £40,000 with the fundraiser they call the Leo Sayer All Dayer and other events.

https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/19660159.hospice-says-truly-sorry-got-decision-wrong-upton-rugby-club-drag-fundraiser/

So what's changed? 

Looking at the photos of them in women's clothes it's obvious they're just dressed for fun and mean no harm.  The charity has been thankful of the £40,000+ these men have raised for them over 18 years, and I can understand them having to look into the complaint they've received, but at the end of the day they need to get their priorities right. The complaint about the men's clothing is ridiculous, to me they just look funny. Is 'fun' not allowed in this world anymore?

[itsnotoutthere]

29 minutes ago, Still Waters said:

So what's changed? 

Looking at the photos of them in women's clothes it's obvious they're just dressed for fun and mean no harm.  The charity has been thankful of the £40,000+ these men have raised for them over 18 years, and I can understand them having to look into the complaint they've received, but at the end of the day they need to get their priorities right. The complaint about the men's clothing is ridiculous, to me they just look funny. Is 'fun' not allowed in this world anymore?

I suspect part of the problem is that people are being employed in organizations to police this sort of thing & they're so scared of making the wrong decision that they end up doing exactly that...making the wrong decision. Perhaps the guys should do it anyway & give the money to the RSPCA.

[Still Waters]

35 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Perhaps the guys should do it anyway & give the money to the RSPCA.

Or any charity who'll appreciate their efforts. There's plenty of them crying out for donations.

[lightly]

 Ya, people need to relax .     Hmm, does this make me look fat?

[quiXilver]

31 minutes ago, lightly said:

 Ya, people need to relax .     Hmm, does this make me look fat?

Nope, but the sausages might...

[quiXilver]

So much second guessing going on over what they imagine might happen.  Seems like this has been going on for some time and has done very good over the years.  I'd give more weight to the fact that it's not been a problem yet.  I know tv's and drag queens and who cares if some guys go drag to drum up money for a charity?  No one I know would bat an eyelash.

I know a house framing crew who used to work in southern california all switched up and wore sun dresses through the high summer.  One of them started it and he appreciated it so much, the rest tried it and it worked great.

Loose fitting dresses kept them cool and if anyone cared or fretted it, that was on them.

 

edit to add:  And they looked fabulous by the way!

 

 

Edited October 21, 2021 by quiXilver

[Silver]

For anyone seriously interested in this gender carry-on, Professor Kathleen Stock is worth a read. She is in the news because she is under attack by the trans lobby at present.

What she says, basically, is (I am over simplifying and doing her a disservice I know as I am not using her words): 

There are two biological genders, male and female.

The male is bigger and stronger, and hormonally different. The male can be a physical threat to the female because of this.

Any one can identify as any gender they want, (or even race, or even extra terrestial), if that makes them feel comfortable, and we should respect them for their beliefs.

But we can't pretend those differences don't exist, out of political correctness.

So if a man identifies as a female, he does not have the right, because of that, to use a female changing room in a shop, or compete in female sports, or be incarcerated in a female prison. Similarily a female shouldn't encroach on male activities, although that is likely not to be so problematic because of the different physical characteristics.

IMO, her views are so common-sense,that if they were accepted, we would not have this endless debate about genders.

Why self-identification should not legally make you a woman (theconversation.com)

Edited October 21, 2021 by The Silver Shroud

[itsnotoutthere]

13 hours ago, The Silver Shroud said:

For anyone seriously interested in this gender carry-on, Professor Kathleen Stock is worth a read. She is in the news because she is under attack by the trans lobby at present.

What she says, basically, is (I am over simplifying and doing her a disservice I know as I am not using her words): 

There are two biological genders, male and female.

The male is bigger and stronger, and hormonally different. The male can be a physical threat to the female because of this.

Any one can identify as any gender they want, (or even race, or even extra terrestial), if that makes them feel comfortable, and we should respect them for their beliefs.

But we can't pretend those differences don't exist, out of political correctness.

So if a man identifies as a female, he does not have the right, because of that, to use a female changing room in a shop, or compete in female sports, or be incarcerated in a female prison. Similarily a female shouldn't encroach on male activities, although that is likely not to be so problematic because of the different physical characteristics.

IMO, her views are so common-sense,that if they were accepted, we would not have this endless debate about genders.

Why self-identification should not legally make you a woman (theconversation.com)

Indeed. SLG & B are all the alphabet letters you need to cover all the bases. As you say merely 'thinking' you are female doesn't make it so.

Edited October 22, 2021 by itsnotoutthere

[godnodog]

Muslim world has to deal with taliban like and western world with snowflakes, what a mess humanity is

[itsnotoutthere]

Transgenderism has emerged as one of the most influential ideologies of our time. It is shaping people’s behaviour and thought in pursuit of a specific political objective – the erosion of the significance of biological sex. And it is undermining long-held cultural assumptions about what it means to be a man or a woman. Above all, it is an intolerant, coercive force – and it has been thoroughly embraced by political and cultural elites in both the UK and the US.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/10/22/the-trans-assault-on-freedom/

[godnodog]

22 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Transgenderism has emerged as one of the most influential ideologies of our time. It is shaping people’s behaviour and thought in pursuit of a specific political objective – the erosion of the significance of biological sex. And it is undermining long-held cultural assumptions about what it means to be a man or a woman. Above all, it is an intolerant, coercive force – and it has been thoroughly embraced by political and cultural elites in both the UK and the US.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/10/22/the-trans-assault-on-freedom/

Personally I have no problem with the "erosion of the significance of biological sex" (but I do understand and accept why it matters for a lot of people), but I sure have issues with the "intolerant, coercive force – and it has been thoroughly embraced by political and cultural elites in both the UK and the US." and how slowly is being exported to other western countries as well.

[newbloodmoon]

To all the blokes who dressed up in dresses for charity, Kilt Up!

[Wepwawet]

Henry Purcell, in his funeral compositions, used these words from the Book of Common Prayer, 1662.

Man that is born of a woman hath but a short time to live, and is full of misery. He cometh up, and is cut down like a flower; he fleeth as it were a shadow, and ne'er continueth in one stay.

To be fully onboard with the wonderful times that we live in, let's re-write this so that the words no longer cause offense to those who are offended by the term "woman", or indeed the term "man"

Non birthing person that is born of a birthing person hath but a short time to live, and is full of misery. They cometh up, and is cut down like a flower, they fleeth as it were a shadow, and ne'er continueth in one stay.

There is still a problem though as the style of language used in the Book of Common Prayer, and the KJB, is offensive to "Nu-peeps" as they are offended by anything from the "Before times", and cannot really even understand the words, but know that they are "patriarchal" and "imperialistic" and exclusive of other faiths, and certainly exclude non faith persons.

[Duke Wellington]

On 10/21/2021 at 10:29 PM, The Silver Shroud said:

For anyone seriously interested in this gender carry-on, Professor Kathleen Stock is worth a read. She is in the news because she is under attack by the trans lobby at present.

What she says, basically, is (I am over simplifying and doing her a disservice I know as I am not using her words): 

There are two biological genders, male and female.

The male is bigger and stronger, and hormonally different. The male can be a physical threat to the female because of this.

Any one can identify as any gender they want, (or even race, or even extra terrestial), if that makes them feel comfortable, and we should respect them for their beliefs.

But we can't pretend those differences don't exist, out of political correctness.

So if a man identifies as a female, he does not have the right, because of that, to use a female changing room in a shop, or compete in female sports, or be incarcerated in a female prison. Similarily a female shouldn't encroach on male activities, although that is likely not to be so problematic because of the different physical characteristics.

IMO, her views are so common-sense,that if they were accepted, we would not have this endless debate about genders.

Why self-identification should not legally make you a woman (theconversation.com)

Yes, but its the other way around.

Her views are and always have been accepted as the norm by the vast majority of people. A man is a man. He is still a man if he is wearing a dress and has had his bits cut off. He is then just a man in a dress with his bits removed.

All this nonsense is about men that want to be women, trying to force society to recognise them as women. And most people saying back thats ridiculous, you`re a man that wants to be a woman, not a woman. With a large dose of political correctness added on top where they cry offence unless people agree with them combined with politicians too weak to stand their ground against political correctness.

So, because of that, biology as a science finds itself under attack. Pressure being applied to overwrite scientific fact with fallacies so as not to cause offence to the LGBT community.

And the question remains, why do they need every one else to validate them?

[itsnotoutthere]

The anatomy of a media smear

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/10/22/the-anatomy-of-a-media-smear/