Maybe a man in a frock should pop to the ladies when Cllr Dawson next goes for a wee! Maybe she needs to actually experience a man in a frock getting his tackle out infront of her!
"Each was supposed to have 3 minutes to ask their supplementary question. All were denied it. "
I also suggest they band together and sue her for abuse of powers. She cannot pre-emptively censor someone's discussion on a topic based on the opinions of a prior speaker. Clearly an abuse of power, an inappropriate subversion of democracy that needs to be corrected via litigation.
they've sent in their follow up q's and are peppering them to hell with foi's. met them all at a meeting in bristol earlier this year... all lovely people. worth keeping an eye on their work: https://protectteach.co.uk/
Amazing how the 'Equality Act' is only ever in agreement with government indoctrination and never in support of actual equality. Women's rights get trampled if men suddenly proclaim to have access to a thing that only exists in the fiction of law. Women's rights no longer exist and they now have no right to safety in bathrooms, all for "equality" of course.
Some animals more equal than others. 4 legs good, 2 legs bad.
I'm for gay rights, not insanity. And, in a democracy (if we keep pretending that's what it is), disagreement must be heard. The problem is that donors control the party, and donors want to create division, so there's no way this 'Chair' is going to be a representative of the People. The only way out of the bullshit and the wars, is a serious crash forcing rethink, especially the thought that politicians and donors are a minority less deserving of rights.
Those women are so far from reality, their thinking is completely skewed and need a shove out of their position.
Maybe a man in a frock should pop to the ladies when Cllr Dawson next goes for a wee! Maybe she needs to actually experience a man in a frock getting his tackle out infront of her!
all for a little reckoning.. she should be no where near office. god forbid any educational institution
"Each was supposed to have 3 minutes to ask their supplementary question. All were denied it. "
I also suggest they band together and sue her for abuse of powers. She cannot pre-emptively censor someone's discussion on a topic based on the opinions of a prior speaker. Clearly an abuse of power, an inappropriate subversion of democracy that needs to be corrected via litigation.
they've sent in their follow up q's and are peppering them to hell with foi's. met them all at a meeting in bristol earlier this year... all lovely people. worth keeping an eye on their work: https://protectteach.co.uk/
Amazing how the 'Equality Act' is only ever in agreement with government indoctrination and never in support of actual equality. Women's rights get trampled if men suddenly proclaim to have access to a thing that only exists in the fiction of law. Women's rights no longer exist and they now have no right to safety in bathrooms, all for "equality" of course.
Some animals more equal than others. 4 legs good, 2 legs bad.
I'm for gay rights, not insanity. And, in a democracy (if we keep pretending that's what it is), disagreement must be heard. The problem is that donors control the party, and donors want to create division, so there's no way this 'Chair' is going to be a representative of the People. The only way out of the bullshit and the wars, is a serious crash forcing rethink, especially the thought that politicians and donors are a minority less deserving of rights.