People of #Fediverse please include me in your thoughts & prayers I'm having a very rough time.. I'm at the very bottom at the moment. The pain is almost unbearable. Please lend me strength dear God.

J.K. Rowling on X: "The thing that never happens has happened again. #BeKind https://t.co/I1r54r5g4H" / X
https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1883846836114391367

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/01/17/the-moral-cowardice-of-the-compassionate-class/

In recent weeks, we’ve seen what happens when those with an instinct for self-preservation are left in charge. We’ve subsequently read the reaction of certain selfish types possessed with a similar instinct. I am referring to the revelations of the mass rapes that went largely unpunished across England over the past decades, and the equivocal responses to the scandal today.

By certain selfish types, I don’t mean the predictable caricatures beloved of those who are still stuck in 1983: the Tories, the capitalists and the ‘fascists’ who exist only in the minds of the Socialist Workers Party. I mean the types who proclaim to be the very opposite of selfish. Those ostentatiously compassionate, #BeKind ideologues, who for years have approached awkward and unfashionable problems in two ways: either by wishing they didn’t exist or by insulting and berating people who talk about them honestly.

These past 10 years, from the Charlie Hebdo massacre of 2015 to the rape-gangs furore in 2025, should remind us once again to always mistrust those who care deeply and care loudly. Back then, they deflected and made excuses for the terrorists. They mumbled about the supposed ‘Islamophobia’ of the Charlie cartoonists. They’re doing the same equivocating about the grooming gangs today, because they care foremost for themselves and how they look.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/01/15/against-karma/

Karma especially suits our times when, usually having identified as good and urged others to #BeKind, people are fine with being as vile online as they wish. They do it because it feels good, though they will invariably justify it by identifying their adversary as ‘evil’. There is an Aldous Huxley quote that seems to sum up these morally threadbare times more than any other:

‘The surest way to work up a crusade in favour of some good cause is to promise people that they will have a chance of maltreating someone. Men must be bribed to build up and do good by the offer of an opportunity to hurt and pull down. To be able to destroy with a good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behaviour “righteous indignation” – this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats.’

Of course, the idiots never think through their convenient love of selective celestial retribution. When something awful befalls them or their loved ones, do they still simper ‘karma’? No, then it’s always: ‘Why MEEE?’

I was waiting for the bottom feeders of X to get stuck in over my recent bit of trouble – I probably won’t walk again – and I wasn’t disappointed. Most were the same addlepates who only live to stick their tongues so far up Meghan Markle’s fundament that they can French kiss her at the same time. Someone posted recently on X:

https://thecritic.co.uk/lily-phillips-and-the-importance-of-feeling/

What worries me in the case of Phillips — and far more broadly, in some branches of feminism and leftist politics as a whole — is that this training has begun to be seen as a virtue. Closing off feelings of compassion has become a way of managing the disconnect between #BeKind, right-side-of-history sloganeering and the abject cruelties of “progressive” industries: the sex trade, commercial surrogacy, “gender-affirming” care. Can’t cope with the cognitive dissonance that comes from witnessing pain caused by your side’s definition of freedom? Then learn not to see it. Learn not to feel. Teach yourself to regard this very feeling as a mark of moral immaturity.

As I’ve been exploring in my book (Un)kind, there’s an area of “progressive” thought which prides itself on not feeling pity or compassion for any victim of sexual, medical or reproductive exploitation about whom it can be said “but it was a choice”. Even though this flies in the face of what feminists (and others) have long argued about the nature of power and coercion, there are certain choices — frequently ones relating to the bodies of women or children — which get placed in some magical, depoliticised zone. Thereafter anyone who might have a natural, human reaction to another person hurting themselves — at least for “liberatory” reasons — can be dismissed as the possessor of an unsophisticated, lower-order moral sensibility. To their “progressive” betters, feeling sad for the likes of Lily Phillips is all a bit knee-jerk, a bit vulgar, a bit “won’t somebody please think of the children” conservative.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/12/10/the-storming-of-the-capitol-bathrooms/

In a somewhat masculine territorial takeover, the activists filmed themselves dancing around the sinks and leaning out of cubicles, while others stood behind banners reading ‘Congress, stop pissing on our rights’ and ‘Flush bathroom bigotry’. The stunt was apparently planned to make the point that men ought to be allowed to use the women’s toilets if they feel like it. It seems, however, that Capitol police did not look favourably on the lavatory invaders and promptly arrested them.

Yet oddly, despite sharing her own traumatic experiences, Mace has not received so much as a sympathetic head-tilt from the #BeKind brigade. When confronted with a genuinely strong woman, a politician who refuses to be cowed, trans activists piss their frilly pants. Unused to being told ‘no’, they are left making spurious claims about why their lives are at risk if their identities aren’t validated.

Manning may fancy himself a dissident, but in truth, these trans-activist antics are nothing more than whinging at the fag-end of the dying Biden administration. Meanwhile, women like Nancy Mace are the real change-makers, refusing to let hard-won protections for women be flushed away.

where are they?

oh i forgot, "they" are just my imaginary friends. (hugs my cats instead)
Send/Drop sum Hugs/Love or anything is VERY MUCH APPRECIATED

(paypalme/nekoow77)

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/09/12/keir-starmer-a-bad-man-who-identifies-as-good/

The rise of identity politics has led to an interesting new category which has been little noted, compared with the usual oddities like men who ‘identify’ as women and snobs who ‘identify’ as socialists. We now have bad people who identify as good people. Think of those men who are all over the internet, threatening any women and Jews who stand up for their rights with rape and murder, while telling us to #BeKind. Or think of Keir Starmer, probably the most prominent of these weird creatures yet.

Steven Ling was granted parole in July, but Labour’s justice secretary has failed to use her powers to force the parole board to reconsider – no doubt with prison overcrowding in mind. Ling murdered a woman by stabbing her 60 times after raping her. He will now be able to continue his life as a free man still aged only 49. Sentencing him for the sadistic slaughter of 29-year-old Joanne Tulip on Christmas Day 1997, the judge told Ling that he would ‘never be released so long as it is thought you constitute a danger to women’ – or, perhaps, until his prison place might be needed for someone who posted something racist on Facebook.

https://thecritic.co.uk/the-mean-queens-of-the-book-world/

This has come as a welcome surprise for many women (and men) scarred by mistreatment and ostracism by gender identitarians in their professional life — especially the arts where connections and reputation are everything.

Simultaneously, it has come as a horrible shock for radical progressives and their #BeKind allies, who’ve never previously had to entertain the idea that they might face consequences for their political opinions bringing their workplace into disrepute.

Amongst gender ideology’s dissidents, there is some forgivable schadenfreude as well as disgust at the hypocrisy of those amongst Fitzgerald’s defenders, who have suddenly developed an interest in freedom of speech in publishing.

More than 500 authors and publishing employees have signed an open letter urging Waterstones to reinstate Fitzgerald. One of the more famous signatories is Chocolat author Joanne Harris, who, whilst head of the Society of Authors, was content to let crickets chirp whilst women in her industry were hounded, slandered and discriminated against.

https://x.com/transwidows/status/1792310790420132052

I don’t know if I’ve got the energy to fight the Spousal Exit Clause fight again. Are we at a point yet where you can all do it for us? It’s exhausting.

From the archives…

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/spousal-exit-clause/

Women are used to pacifying angry males and children. We spend a large proportion of our life doing it, and we become skilled at it. We might give a child a lollipop to help them feel better after some kind of deprivation or disappointment. However as any Trade Unionist will tell you, whilst this might be a useful ploy in personal relationships or in parenting, it should not be how one conducts a negotiation.

As feminists start to plan the way forward in this strange new world, there is something they should not lose sight of. Following an impassioned debate over the proposals for reform of the GRA, which was entirely about the importance of maintaining the existing rights of women, now is not the time to start bartering other women’s rights away in order to make us feel less bad about upsetting our opponents. In particular the rights of Trans Widows. We’d quite like feminists to #bekind to us, please.

It has already been suggested that the Spousal Exit Clause (sometimes misnamed the Spousal Veto) in the Gender Recognition Act is something that could be got rid of, as a concession, particularly given the plans for “No Fault” divorce to (possibly) be introduced in England and Wales.

This suggestion leaves the trans widows standing on tiptoes, trying to be seen as we wave from the other side of Chesterton’s fence and ask why some feminists have missed us off their list of priorities again.