Rarely does a day go by without the BBC running one if its strange freak family stories. Take this one currently in the limelight.
The transgender family where the father gave birth. (He didn’t – “he” is a she despite the BBC running with the nonsense. DV)
Meet one of South America’s most high-profile transgender families. “We don’t have a name yet – or rather we do – we are just waiting to announce it,” Diane tells me, not looking up from tapping at her mobile phone with her perfectly manicured false nails. The choice will be controversial and she and her partner want to wait until everything has calmed down.
It’s Pride Week in Guayaquil, Ecuador’s largest city. I’m driving Diane Rodriguez, her partner Fernando and their six-week-old baby – known affectionately for now only as Caraote – which means “the snail”. Tomorrow is the big march and they are whizzing around town finalising paperwork for their float. Diane and Fernando are South America’s most high-profile transgender couple. For many, they are a symbol of growing tolerance in the region.”
Why does the BBC obsess over these poor mentally disturbed people? Why are they on mission to laud every form of family unit but one man and one woman? Why do they approve of a family when it is not a heterosexual one? I believe the BBC is marinated in anti nuclear-family rhetoric and so it embraces these “gender fluid” and Trans free shows.
A case of Auntie BBC having her knickers in a triste?
The BBC wants to end the family unit as we know it, except of course when it comes to their own families. Another example of the “do as we say, not as we do” attitude that permeates left-wing idealism.
Could we not start a ‘stop paying the license fee’ campaign? Hit them where it hurts in their ‘lefty’ pockets.
Yes, good idea.
I have been thinking about not paying it for a while,my sons don’t, they have a smart tv and watch Netflix, Amazon tv and other free channels, always plenty to watch,my wife wouldn’t like it so I am stuck with it for now.
The family is a key battleground if not the key battleground in the culture wars. By now we on the side of reality and freedom know this so can discount all the rubbish from the BBC.
I fully expect Trump to make his defence of the family a centrepiece of his campaign.
This will not endear him to the liberal media and the snowflake intelligentsia. But it will mean votes and the start of a real fightback against the elite’s distortion of reality and ultimately of humanity itself.
Reminder keep a close eye on Gert Wilder’s show trial. We need to understand that this is going to be a key moment in European history. Will the states of Europe end free speech and impose state tyranny or not?
They want to and they will need to if the elite is to retain control of it all.
The family is the bedrock of society .People ridicule this idea but its true .This is why its imperative for Cultural Marxists to destroy it.
Extended families support each other and their children meaning less reliance on the state. Strong communities are more likely to bind together and not put up with what the state is doing .The BBC happy to get stuck in on the grounds of “equality” .
Last week there was a report about the myth of the Victorian family unit……….. It didnt exist at all so we shouldn’t aspire to it……….. it really is relentless .
Child mental health and depression has exploded since the family came under attack. Coincidence ?
I’m convinced that the ruling elites within the BBC were/are/yearn to be members of the Jesuit Order!
You’ve heard the sayings of the Jesuits re: give us a child at such and such an age and we have captured/corrupted their tender minds for ever! Well,….
Family means tradition and custom, it means accepted values, roles and norms, all the notions that a true Leftist cannot say without sneering, barely hiding their hatred.
Knowing how greedy the BBC are for money, I guess it breaks their tender little hearts to think of a family of, say, eight or nine getting together in front of the television for a weekend or week. The children may have one different parent to the ‘father’ and ‘mother’ present at the time. There may be potentially, say, four different Licence Fee paying households represented but only one Licence Fee being paid.
Oh woe!
Grief.
And the pain!
I’ve always felt so sorry for children with single mothers at Christmas!
I always have this vision of everyone sat round the telly and a movie comes on about a normal family with dad and mam plus 2 children enjoying their lives doing all sorts of parent/children things, but when the feminists/lesbian single moms/gay dads see these movies being shown to their child/children they make a speedy dash for the remote to turn it off for fear their child may ask her/them/ nowadays – it: why do my friends have dads but I do not?
Clearly those single parents’ consciences must give them many sleepless nights – now, if the BBC could legally only broadcast movies/TV series and shows with a cast of only single moms then I’m certain that those self righteous elites at the BBC would do so in a flash! Every lesbian/feminist mom would be so delighted!
It’s the same with the CBC here in Canada. There is a dreary woman they have on every now and then on the equivalent to radio 4, to tell the world about how she is raising a gender neutral child (she won’t reveal its sex). I think its called Arrow or something – I’m convinced she must have a relative on the production team there as its of no interest to me and I imagine anyone else with a functioning brain, save for child services. Incidentally the last time I listened to CBC radio they had a woman on following a murder-suicide of several people in a remote first nations community. Her solution was to lead a drama workshop to such communities as a means of enlightening the population… I wish I was making that up but I mention it to assure you the left wing loons are not only confined to the BBC (although the CBC’s budget is microscopic in comparison).
I’ve lost count of the number of times people here say ‘I love the BBC!’ then reference some old show. I don’t think I’ve ever had a reaction when I say they get the equivalent of about C$7bn a year in funding – its remarkable really how public perceptions are so slow to face reality. Hopefully after Brexit the BBC will be gone (or at least subscription based) within 10 years. I guess I’ve answered my own question as to why the Tories are so slow to tackle it.
As for the ‘why’ see the recent revelations that George Soros has hosed millions at this campaign. The BBC is doing just what it always does, following Marxist leaders.
Soros, who is on record as having said he wants to destroy the West, has decided to target the nucleus of Western society. The BBC is simply obeying orders – a phrase Soros will recall only too well.
Isn’t he Jewish?
Soros is of Hungarian background and was born Jewish. However, the main characteristic of the man is that he is evil and his wickedness transcends and is not defined by or related to his ethnicity. He is opposed to the state of Israel and since 2001 has funded the following, explicitly anti-Israeli groups to the tune of nearly $10 million: Adalah, NIF, Women against Violence, I’lam, Media Center for Arab Palestinians in Israel, Mada al-Carmel, Kayan-Feminist Organization, Mossawa Center, Molad, The Galilee Society, Al-Tufula Center, Ma’an, Injaz, Sidreh, Lakiya, Baladna, Arab Association for Human Rights, National Committee of Heads of Arab Local Authorities in Israel, PILI Foundation.
I think the point of my last comment may have whizzed over a few heads. Yes, Soros is a Hungarian-American Jew.
He has, however, been accused of collaboration with the Nazis. Even his typically heavily sanitised Wiikipedia entry makes for interesting reading. Other sites, rather more so…
The reason why I asked: was he Jewish, was because over recent years when ever a financial problem is looming the BBC always flees to this guy? Why? could it be because he’s not religious (BBC being atheistic in values) and don’t they just love to run to anyone who mocks religious people.
I have a theory about all this ‘trans’ stuff. OK, a few cultural-marxists like it because it undermines the traditional concept of the family. But I think the bigger appeal is that it is an open-ended (no pun intended) controversy able to generate almost unlimited press content, because it can never be resolved.
For example, the end-game of the gay rights movement has pretty much been achieved, with legal parity. There’s nowhere else to go and no ‘homophobia’ left to fight by social justice warriors, unless they are prepared to really put themselves at risk somewhere like Russia or Zimbabwe.(And most of them aren’t except a few honourable exceptions like Peter Tatchell).
But ‘trans’ issues, especially ‘transphobia’ are the gifts that keep on giving for content-hungry journalists who constantly have to create new controversies, scandals and manufactured outrage to keep the public interested. There isn’t any resolution to it because the boundaries are constantly changing and nobody can agree on what it all means. It’s therefore an absolute wet dream for socially-concerned BBC journalists!
Transphobia for example can be used by social justice warriors in the same way that the police use ‘behaviour liable to cause a breach of the peace’ ie a catch all term that all can be found guilty of if required.
I am a mature bearded man and sometimes wonder what people would do if I started wearing an outrageous flowery dress and using the ladies toilets in pubs etc.,”but I’m a part time trans” would be my excuse.
I would be charged with inciting hatred or something.
Slightly off-track but something that was amusing to me and Mrs D a few weks ago. We were going to a Proms concert and had a sandwich in the park opposite and needed the toilet before crossing the road. There is a public one in the park, men on one side and women next door. I went first with my wife looking after our bags. After I went to wash my hands I saw the back of a tall person in a yellow dress, with long black hair leaving. I immediately thought that if it a transvestite or trans-sexual I would have thought he would have gone to the ladies.
I dried up and turned round as I heard some cubicle doors opening and out from them popped two more women. Apparently the ladies was out of order. It took some persuading to get my wife to go in the gents but she did. Funny seeing the reaction of men coming out.
It gave us a bit of a laugh, but it shows that if it had been a trans-person the confusion it causes others is immense.
Wild Bill – indeed you would be charged with something, but then some group or other would leap to your defence, and a twitter-storm would begin, with lots of R4 journalists hand-wringing over it all. Anything ‘trans’ seems to produce a frenzied media circus on a similar level to that child that got stuck in the cave in the film ‘Ace in the Hole’.
“For example, the end-game of the gay rights movement has pretty much been achieved, with legal parity. There’s nowhere else to go and no ‘homophobia’ left to fight by social justice warriors”
I couldn’t disagree with you more!
Haven’t you seen the latest homosexual devient demands re: polyanorous threesomes, who going against nature pervertedly us their own sisters to have their own threesome babies!?
I dread to think what these people do behind closed doors? Maybe soon they will demand they show us in their true colours?
Filth knows no limit with these kind of people:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/meet-three-men-polyamorous-relationship-6638612#comments-section
Vesnadog, the main issue in the article you cite is polygamy, not homosexuality. I think we are unlikely to see much about this thing in the media because it’s mainly practiced by heterosexual men with more than one wife, (usually from Muslim countries) and that’s not something the media cares to delve into much.
Also, the sort of case mentioned in the article, with photogenic westerners, is extremely rare and these relationships don’t tend to last long (a polyamorous third party who gets on equally well with the other two is known as a ‘unicorn’ for good reason). So there’s very little incentive to change laws etc because there isn’t sufficient stability in these set-ups to develop a groundswell about their ‘rights’.
Cranmer.
“Vesnadog, the main issue in the article you cite is polygamy, not homosexuality”.
Quote from same story:
“The trio share a king-size bed at their home”
Sounds like they are Homosexuals to me!
“is polygamy”
No! look closer into the story – its “polyamory”
I remember Guayaquil as a place where we were advised not to go anywhere on foot outside the hotel. Great place to bring up a child, especially one from a family that’s already dysfunctional.