The RANZCP actually supported the Bill, as expressed by Dr Kerryn Rubin on their own website: I’d take the NAPP criticisms with a hint of scepticism. His post on the NAPP site about managing gender dysphoria is also questionable, with many of the references focussing mostly on stories of people who have de-transitioned, and a number near the bottom straight from Reddit, Tumblr, and a YouTube video by an LGB “activist” (bit more on that below). With a bit of digging, NAPP’s current President, Philip Morris, appears to be quite religious, including a post on his blog in support of “religious freedom” legislation (the legislation put forward by the Coalition that would essentially give religious organisations the right to discriminate without repercussions). The two organisations she cites are the National Association of Practicing Psychiatrists (NAPP) and The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP). She says that “it’s little wonder that doctors and psychiatrists are deeply concerned” about the Bill passed in Victoria, which only had 9 votes against it (still a damningly high number, although Panahi later called the Liberal opposition “spineless” for backing down out of apparent fear). Without going into any detail, Panahi claims that these dangerous “gender ideology” policies are damaging, particularly to women and children – because Sky News cares so much about women and children, with all those male hosts defending rapists and abusers. With that in mind, yes, the word bigot certainly applies in many of the cases Panahi appears offended by its use.įor some Australian examples, she takes aim at the Safe Schools program the recent anti-conversation bill (Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Bill) in Victoria. With the addition of supporting or actively pursuing political outcomes to intentionally marginalise the group in question. “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudicesĮspecially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance” Mirriam Webster For the life of me I cannot remember where I saw it, but the definition of “bigot” I saw as most apt was the usual dictionary definition – They also label anyone who dissents as bigots. This effort to try and portray antifa as some kind of coordinated group instigating riots and pushing some kind of “Marxist ideology” is pure fabrication.īy using these “wholesome names”, Panahi argues, the “left” can sugar-coat whatever “divisive agenda” it might have to enforce their views and implement policies. Antifascist should be the default position, does not imply violence, and can include anyone to the “left” of, you can guess – fascism.
I also doubt anyone on Sky News realise what is meant by “defund the police”, or that the protests and civil unrest last year in the wake of George Floyd’s murder weren’t actually organised by the Black Lives Matter group.Īntifa, even if you choose to overlook the fact that it is not actually a group but a decentralised movement – anyone can be “antifa” – it literally just means antifascist. Recognising the systemic racism that exists in the US (and here in Australia), acknowledging the scourge of police violence that primarily targets black communities and individuals, and supporting efforts to improve these conditions is not “Marxist”. Nothing about the Black Lives Matter movement is inherently Marxist. “Groups such as Black Lives Matter and Antifa have names we all agree with, but their violent, divisive antics and Marxist ideology are a different matter entirely.”Īnother dash on the tally board for “conservative” commentator misunderstanding and misusing the term Marxist. Antifa, BLM, the Labor Victorian government – surely, she’ll consider all the facts on hand! Yesterday, she rambled (and on occasion stumbled) on about how the “radical left” can fool the “apathetic masses” by using ostensibly pure naming to “ through radical policies”. The more outrage and clicks it can generate, the better – facts and science be damned. Like all other Sky News’ hosts, Rita Panahi is a textbook example of how vacuous sycophants will reject and oppose anything so long as they get paid large enough sums to do so.
0 kommentar(er)
