The Liberal Democrats are to discuss a policy highlighting the impact of menstruation on trans and non-binary individuals, pushing for accessible period products and inclusive menstrual education. The Telegraph has the story.
Menstruation is “not just a women’s issue”, Liberal Democrat activists have said in a motion chosen to be debated at their party conference next month.
Sir Ed Davey’s party will vote on a policy proposal that insists period poverty is an issue that affects “some trans and non-binary people” in addition to biological women.
An agenda published by the Liberal Democrats for their annual gathering in Bournemouth includes a motion on period poverty which is to be debated on September 23rd.
The document states: “Conference notes that… menstruation is not just a women’s issue, and also affects some trans and non-binary people.
“Conference believes that period products are a human right, not a luxury; nobody should experience period poverty; England’s current free period product provision is not fit for purpose; [and] it is in everyone’s interests for stigma around periods to be addressed.”
The motion proceeds to call on the Government to introduce a right for people to access a choice of free period products, place a duty on councils and schools to make period products freely available and introduce “comprehensive education on periods… to ensure an appreciation for the lived experience of menstruation”. …
In a webpage on the Liberal Democrat website entitled ‘transphobia’, the party reiterates its support for people being able to self-identify as their preferred gender without a medical certificate.
“Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a variety of terms. Trans people are not required to have undergone any medical or social transition to be considered trans,” it says.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
All of the sceptics here were insisting the same from the day the ridiculous mask mandates were announced. It was/is obviously all just behavioural psychology.
My vote would be for a combination of safety behaviour by mysophobes and commercial interests. After all, the most common mask are nominally one-way, hence, one can sell a real lot of them when they’re mandated.
I’d be very nervous about taking medical advice from any professional who insisted on masking. If they’re ignorant enough to believe a flimsy bit of plastic tat can stop infection, what else are they wrong about?
I could not agree more CG.
As I have posted in the past there can be no greater badge of ignorance than being confronted by a so-called health care professional wearing a mask. In my opinion it undermines the industry, their “profession”, their colleagues, their understanding of medicine and science in general and it also suggests an inability to keep personal professional competence up-to-date and that is seriously worrying.
Science is for me a bit of a black hole. It bored me at school and the graphs and charts stuff presented by our former member SW left me dry – I just skipped them and waited for Kate to put them in to words. However, modern medicine is allegedly rooted in science, not that we would know it from visiting our GP surgeries and A & E clinics which these days tend to resemble a modern interpretation of voodoo churches.
“I’m a doctor me, look I’ve got a mask on. Where’s yours?”
I never, ever use them. DOCTOR!
With respect graphs and charts: it very much depends on how your mind works. For some people a graph is more informative than a 1000 words, for others they’re incomprehensible. Neither understanding more correct than the other, just different.
FL, I was not in any way criticising graphs and charts. I make it clear that when they were posted I skipped them and relied on others to provide the interpretation.
I am a lateral thinker so find the logical/ critical mode difficult. It is just the way my brain works.
Really recommend this weeks Dark Horse podcast, where they’re talking about whether we now live in a scientific Dark Age. One of the things they talk about is over-specialisation which may have made everyone stupid! Nobody is able to get an overview of any topic because everyone is so focused on their one particular specialism. May account for why we’ve seen supposed scientists support and repeat ridiculous covid nonsense and ignore the bigger picture…
Thanks CG. I will have s look.
Any chance of a link,?
This has always been the case in the scientific community. The higher your level of qualification, the narrower your field of specialisation. Taking in the bigger picture works against your climb up the greasy pole. As an individual with a low level BSc in General Science I have worked alongside so many PhD types who can hardly be trusted to buy a bag of sweets from the corner shop. Think of Ferguson as the perfect example of the species.
And I never said that you were criticising graphs and charts. Crossed wires I think.
Ok.
Actually, it very much depends on the graph itself. Just like a text, it can either be designed to be baffling and incomprehensible or simple and clear. The former is usually a sign of an (invalid) argument from authority in disguise (I understand this byzantine stuff and you don’t, therefore, you better listen to what I tell you!).
Modern medicine is rooted in Rockerfeller pharma profiteering….
I miss SW’s graphs – a bit of a geek like that 🙂
Interestingly I actually received a message from my GP yesterday that they continue to mandate Facemasks in their surgery.
Push back and ask them to provide the risk/benefit evidence – asked head nurse yesterday whilst at an appointment and it boiled down to there being no medical evidence for it only that the Trust their clinic rents space from insists on it…
Push back and ask them to provide the risk/benefit evidence
Please don’t. The nice thing about statistics is that everybody has one to prove that he’s right, regardless of what he claims to be right about. Just tell the members of the Breath is death! –faction that their paranoid delusions are pretty stale by now and ignore them. It’s up to them to avoid contact with other human beings if they’re afraid of it.
Just ignore.
The pressure to comply at these healthcare settings 😤
So many do not know there is no legal basis on which to insist on these measures – most are unaware how to push back.
The NHS Constitution allows that patients (and those supporting them e.g family member/visitor) be given information about tests and treatment options available and their risks and benefits – that includes medical interventions such as masking, testing and vaccination.
So far when asked at our appointments no information of the risks associated with testing, masking and vaccination has been provided – all hospitals, GP surgeries and dental practices have backed down and provided our treatment.
Inflation is through the roof.
The £100 tank of petrol is here, but it is entirely due to the regime pursuing ‘net zero’, lockdowns and sanctions on Russia that have backfired.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjlqKqRRpBE
*********
David Kurten
*******
**
Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30 -11.30am
make friends & keep sane
from the globalist covid & climate propaganda
*
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
*
Telegram astandintheparkbracknell
These cars that cost £100 to fill the tank must have bloomin’ big tanks. I have a medium sized saloon and it costs £50 to fill it (and gives a range of about 450 miles). All the small runarounds are not going to cost anywhere near £100 to fill. If, on the other hand, you’ve got a 4×4 gas guzzler, well I’ve no sympathy. I live near a primary school and every other vehicle is a Range Rover or Discovery – god forbid the kids should have to travel in a Fiesta or similar!
Your car must have a very small tank then. I’ve had fifty cars over the years including 3 Renault clios and a Honda civic. These had “small” 42 litre tanks which at today’s prices would cost £80 to fill. My medium sized saloons had 55 litre tanks so around £100 to fill.
The hospitals seem to be removing all the mask signage but everybody still assumes they are needed. On Monday, for some blood tests, I was the only one bare faced, not even a murmur from anybody. Yesterday I was asked twice by the receptionists if I had a mask, ‘exempt, thankyou’ was accepted with a smile and one even lowered her mask when it was clear I couldn’t hear her. I think they realise they are not now required but still going through the motions regardless.
Insofar Xisident Pres and his associated organizations, eg, the WHO, are concerned, The pandemic [that never was] is far from over !!!! Practically, this means as much pandemic signalling as is feasible must be retained in the hope of better times in future, eg BIG! COVID! WAVE! IN! ISRAEL!! (fer crissake, FOAD)
“This is to keep vulnerable people as safe as possible.”
Horses arses.
Vulnerable people?? Surely they were all removed two years ago?