Daily review 27/06/2023

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, June 27th, 2023 - 91 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

91 comments on “Daily review 27/06/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. The Chairman 1
    27 June 2023 at 5:38 pm

    Update on the Women's Rights Party NZ.

    It seems they have been cancelled by the mainstream, yet to attain any MSM coverage.

    And yet to attain 500 members.

    Good news though, they were on The Platform with Sean today.

    It was a good and interesting interview.

    For those that are interested, the interview can be found here:

    • Dennis Frank 1.1
      27 June 2023 at 5:56 pm

      According to Scoop, they've been active recently: https://info.scoop.co.nz/Women%27s_Rights_Party

      Plus they have a website & it presents them with competent design: https://womensrightsparty.nz/

      yes

      • The Chairman 1.1.1
        27 June 2023 at 6:27 pm

        Love Scoop.

        Scoop is wholly owned by the Scoop Foundation for Public Interest Journalism which is a Not-For-Profit charitable trust. Therefore, not exactly the mainstream I was referring too. And although they have published their press releases, I've yet to see any actual coverage regarding them.

        But good on them for publishing their press releases. And good on you for highlighting them. Moreover, thanks for posting up the link to their website.

        yes

    • observer 1.2
      27 June 2023 at 6:26 pm

      "Cancelled by the mainstream" is a gloriously Orwellian way to say "not many people bothered".

      A more reasonable conclusion would be that political parties need to win 5% or an electorate, and anyone with a grasp of electoral reality realizes there are more useful ways of campaigning for women's rights. Not letting Luxon become PM would be one of them.

      • The Chairman 1.2.1
        27 June 2023 at 6:35 pm

        Cancelled by the mainstream means they are not attaining any MSM coverage.

        They are a new party advocating for an important and widely interesting matter. Which is totally news worthy, yet no coverage. Orwellian indeed.

        • observer 1.2.1.1
          27 June 2023 at 6:41 pm

          Perhaps you missed Posie Parker's visit. It got coverage.

          Every 3 years there are potential parties, and they get coverage when they have gone from potential to registered. They put up candidates. Even fringe parties like Advance, the cannabis party and Tamaki's lot have done this.

          The media cannot invent members.

          • The Chairman 1.2.1.1.1
            27 June 2023 at 6:53 pm

            Perhaps you missed Posie Parker's visit. It got coverage.

            Indeed it did. It was a huge story.

            Therefore, even more reason why a political party that was born out of that visit is totally news worthy.

            Don't you worry. I'm sure they will get the numbers. Less than a hundred now required.

            And as for "not letting Luxon become PM…" did you actually view the interview?

            • observer 1.2.1.1.1.1
              27 June 2023 at 7:05 pm

              Of course not, Sean Plunket is a nasty misogynist who long since stopped doing journalism. He has lied about Ardern (and subsequently apologised) and his platform exists only because he is funded by a far right wealthy man.

              As for the new party, if they have sufficient members then they are fully entitled to stand at the election. Engaging in the democratic process is always good, though as I stated, I doubt that wasting votes is the most effective way to do it.

              These are the current registered parties. Several have had no MSM coverage. Happens every election (do you remember Heartland or TEA? Of course not).

              https://elections.nz/democracy-in-nz/political-parties-in-new-zealand/register-of-political-parties/

              • The Chairman …
                27 June 2023 at 7:27 pm

                Of course not…

                Didn't think so. Hence, you don't really know what it is you are commenting on re this interview.

                As for there being other parties not attaining coverage, clearly they are not in the same news worthy category as this one.

                • observer …
                  27 June 2023 at 7:29 pm

                  you don't really know what it is you are commenting on re this interview.

                  Which is why I haven't commented on the interview.

                  • The Chairman …
                    27 June 2023 at 8:36 pm

                    You did make a comment (re not letting Luxon become PM) based on an incorrect assumption which you would have picked up on if you had viewed the interview.

                    You seem to be incorrectly blaming these women for leaving Labour and standing up for their rights as the reason behind a potential Luxon win.

                    Labour can do no wrong is it?

                    • observer …
                      27 June 2023 at 9:13 pm

                      You seem to enjoy misrepresenting, so there's not much purpose debating further. Feel free to engage with what I actually say, not what you imagine and invent (like "Labour can do no wrong", something you plucked out of thin air). Otherwise please don’t waste my time.

                  • The Chairman …
                    27 June 2023 at 10:46 pm

                    I didn't misrepresent you. I asked you a question.

                    [Yes, you did misrepresent @ 7:27 pm and again @ 8:36 pm and your question was a leading one coming from nowhere other than the inside of your skull. Please stop it while you still can – Incognito]

        • Shanreagh 1.2.1.2
          28 June 2023 at 10:22 am

          Good points The Chairman.

          It will be interesting to see if the party gets mainstream coverage, bearing in mind the biased or missing coverage of PP visit.

          There is a new party PoW in the Uk that PP is setting up and is/was launching after the Coronation.

          Of course it is sad that the supporters don't feel they have a home or their voices heard in exisitng parties.

  2. weka 2
    27 June 2023 at 6:08 pm

    Can someone please explain the mechanics of the 1980s job losses? Was it primarily deregulation of imports/exports leading to many manufacturers shifting offshore or closing?

    • weka 2.1
      27 June 2023 at 6:09 pm

      and government 'restructuring'?

      • pat 2.1.1
        27 June 2023 at 6:34 pm

        I'd suggest the largest impact on employment was the downsizing of public employment…certainly initially but the impact of freer imports (the removal of import licensing?regulation) also resulted in a redistribution of employment opportunities which took time (in some instances considerable)

        • tWiggle 2.1.1.1
          27 June 2023 at 7:37 pm

          Here's a few ideas from me…

          I'd vote for deregulation of import tariffs, and lack of govt subsidies for middle-sized business. My mum was a machinist, and went from 30 h a week to piece work, to no job, as the firm downsized, contracted workers, then moved off-shore. The Warehouse and undercutting Chinese imports collapsed many small retailers, clothing manufacturers and small-tool manufacturers.

          Open international tendering of government contracts, eg, army uniforms, and closure of eg the railways workshops drpped off more, as middling businesses will need one or two large-scale contracts to stay afloat through the business year. There are economies of scale once your enterprise is a certain size. A single market with Oz probably also killed some of that middle-sized manufacturing.

          NZ government has also taken a minimal subsidy approach to our industry, to position us for free trade negotiations – few tariffs, few subsidies. The most obvious industry subsidies I can think of are for the film industry, Comalco, and petroleum processing (which was removed recently), but little else.

          Looks like Oz states still give tax concessions to local industries. The EU, of course, is chocca-full of subsidies, while China in rapid industrialisation essentially allowed manufacturers to write off thd cost in plant. Plus, of course third-world worker conditions in Asian factories.

          • pat 2.1.1.1.1
            27 June 2023 at 7:59 pm

            Yes clothing manufacturers were hard hit though if memory serves it took some time to really hit…LWR was just down the road from where I worked and it was some years before their numbers really took a hit.

            It took time for the new import regime to impact the existing structure but it was only ever going to be in a downward direction…as it proved to be.

      • Visubversa 2.1.2
        27 June 2023 at 8:52 pm

        And the '87 stock market crash. A bubble had built up, banking was partly deregulated – we had new Banks popping up (NZIBank etc). There was a strike of Trading Bank workers in late 1985 as their wages had not kept up with changes in the market, staff had left for the new Banks, there was constant restructuring. "Greed was Good" – remember "yuppies"? The bubble burst in October 1987.

    • Nic the NZer 2.2
      27 June 2023 at 7:23 pm

      The major public service restructuring started 1 April 1987, though it was known to be coming in advance of that date. Previously many parts of the public sector had acted as an employer of last resort, which may explain why unemployment had not gotten out of hand during Labour's first term in office. A lot of the deregulation and removal of tarriffs, etc… changes were implemented during the first term.

      The other significant event would be the 1987 share market crash. Certainly the following Ruthenasia budget extended the period of elevated unemployment which followed from 1987 (government budgets work in reverse to the countries budget, and so should usually be offsetting it). Ruthenasia was cutting at the same time as NZ was in recession.

      • pat 2.2.1
        27 June 2023 at 7:29 pm

        The public service downsizing began well before 87…especially amongst NZR and the power companies.

    • Sabine 2.3
      27 June 2023 at 8:07 pm

      In Germany is was outsourcing. My hometown lost several big companies, and most of my male relatives lost their jobs. It also resulted in a huge shortage of three year apprenticeships. The Reagan years. The funny thing is, it seems as if it was almost co-ordinated considering that it happened everywhere in the 'western' world.

      Government restructuring followed as there was sadly not enough tax income to pay for many burocrats. Unemployment was quite high and never went below the 10% as far as i can remember.

      • pat 2.3.1
        27 June 2023 at 8:53 pm

        "The funny thing is, it seems as if it was almost co-ordinated considering that it happened everywhere in the 'western' world."

        Not funny…but essentially it was.

    • joe90 2.4
      27 June 2023 at 8:49 pm

      In my burg it was the loss of more than 1000 government jobs, the assistance to farmers and the huge knock-on effects. Everything from the stock and station agencies, motor vehicle and equipment retailers, trade services, and main street outlets through to suburban retail, pie shops/lunch bars and >$$ dining establishments suffered.

      Big box outlets finished the job on local retail.

      By 2013 the region's overall population had declined to pre-1960s levels, the rural population nearly halved and some small towns all but disappeared, and today the urban population is similar to what it was 50 years ago.

      ( more lotto shops, beer shops and greasy takeaways than ever, though)

      • Phillip ure 2.4.1
        28 June 2023 at 2:37 pm

        It also pays to remember how in the face of neoliberal-incrementalism..the nz union leaders largely folded like wet bus tickets..

        Unlike in australia..where they were staunch..(for want of a better word..)…and told the neoliberal revolution to eff off…

        So then until the recent revival…the union movement in nz was pretty much emasculated…

        The union leaders in nz of the time just went and stood in a corner…and waited for their rewards…in the form of company directorships..and the like…

        It was a shameful display…

    • Tiger Mountain 2.5
      28 June 2023 at 3:30 pm

      It was a wrecking ball swung through the provinces by Roger Douglas and friends.
      Forestry, Fishing, Coastal Shipping, Ministry of Works, and in towns and cities, Manufacturing, all took a hit, and unprecedented sales of taxpayers assets, and the penetration of public infrastructure and services by private capital…what more do you need to know?

      Almost 40 years on now, Aotearoa NZ remains strangled by a neo liberal monetarist state. Time to move on surely, which is why the Greens GMI is a great idea.

      https://www.greens.org.nz/gmi_needed_to_cushion_impact_of_growing_underemployment

      The ruling class hates it!

      • weka 2.5.1
        28 June 2023 at 4:45 pm

        what more do you need to know?

        the mechanisms.

        • pat 2.5.1.1
          28 June 2023 at 6:10 pm

          a one word answer is globalisation….the free movement of capital and the removal of trade barriers promoted the (eventual and inevitable) decline of manufacturing in higher labour cost economies.

          Without the liberalisation of international banking much of what happened would not have been able to occur, but western govs essentially agreed to hand over control of the economy to the international banking sector.

          And now they find they have created a monster they cannot control.

        • Belladonna 2.5.1.2
          28 June 2023 at 6:41 pm

          Subject to correction by better economic historians than myself, I'd say the mechanisms were:

          • Devaluation of the NZ dollar (probably the least important – but happened first)
          • Deregulation of the financial sector – and removal of controls on foreign exchange.
          • Removal or heavy reduction of subsidies (very significantly in agriculture, but also in other sectors).
          • Removal or heavy reduction in protective tariffs.

          [These two had a huge impact on local production and manufacture – and drove a lot of the early job losses.]

          • Reduction in top income tax rate (66% down to 33%) – and imposition of GST to replace it.
          • Conversion of government departments (like the postal and forestry services) to State Owned Enterprises – and the consequent requirement to balance the books – resulting in massive job cuts.
        • Tiger Mountain 2.5.1.3
          29 June 2023 at 1:04 pm

          Mainly acts of the NZ Parliament…
          • Reserve Bank Act
          • State Sector Act
          • Floating the New Zealand dollar.
          • Introducing GST
          • Privatising state owned enterprises
          • Local Govt. amalgamation, “Tomorrow's Schools” and so on

          It basically allowed private capital, and business models, to be involved in previously public infrastructure and services.

          and…a number of more right wing unions went along with this–Engineers, Hotel Workers etc., and one of Roger Douglas’ moves was the the abolishment of the Joint council of Labour where the NZ Federation of Labour previously met with the Labour Caucus to duke it out over general wage orders etc.

    • Belladonna 2.6
      28 June 2023 at 3:50 pm

      Not exactly what you asked for – but an excellent documentary on the subject is "Someone else's country" by Alister Barry

      https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/someone-elses-country-1996

  3. tWiggle 3
    27 June 2023 at 7:48 pm

    For fans of the Russian 'coup' attempt.

    I found myself enormously informed on listening to Defense Politics Asia's Q+A on the topic. Listen between 30min to 1.30h -ish to learn DPA's in-depth analysis of the coup attempt, the Russian Federation's geopolitical repositioning with the Ukraine war, and other geopolitical shit you were completely ignorant of.

    Forget US and RT pundits, this is the place to go for political and military strategic analysis without propaganda. You may not agree with DPA, but your mind will be broadened.

    Listenable at double speed.

  4. Incognito 4
    27 June 2023 at 8:02 pm

    We found ethnic disparities in care and outcomes following stroke which were independent of traditional risk factors, suggesting they may be attributable to stroke service delivery rather than patient factors.

    Ethnic differences in stroke outcomes in Aotearoa New Zealand: A national linkage study

    https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930231164024 [First published online March 5, 2023]

    Ethnicity in this study was self-identified.

    This is yet another important piece of information that highlights the importance of ethnicity in improving health outcomes for minority populations that lag behind in health statistics.

  5. adam 5
    27 June 2023 at 8:05 pm

    Shit lite party. NZ labour

    This Honest Government Ad sums up nicely the problem NZ labour has. With the lack of not shit policies it has.

    Begs the question how many on here have been patting this government on the dick for their shit lite policies. I'd say too many.

    • Molly 5.1
      27 June 2023 at 9:20 pm

      Thanks Adam.

      I do enjoy these videos. We don't seem to have any established political satire of our own. (But that my be my view only, which is hampered by not watching TV)

  6. Muttonbird 6
    27 June 2023 at 8:28 pm

    Anyone with a subscription care to give us the gist of this article?

    National leader Christopher Luxon was backed up by most of his caucus with howls of derision directed at Carmel Sepuloni.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/audrey-young-luxon-takes-aim-at-sepuloni-in-question-time-over-the-economy/BJRQKRKNYNHIZID3VI3EHG7LW4/

    From the limited info I have, and reading between the lines, it seems Audrey Young is not happy with the misogynist National Party.

  7. Anker 7
    27 June 2023 at 8:30 pm

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/maori-and-pasifika-women-have-lower-survival-rates-for-breast-cancer?utm_source=Newsroom&utm_campaign=0012316572-Daily_Briefing+26.06.2023&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_71de5c4b35-0012316572-97938636&mc_cid=0012316572&mc_eid=e19e6c4f94

    This is a very interesting article about Maori rates of breast cancer.

    “Wāhine Māori and Pacific women were more likely to have higher-risk HER2-positive breast cancer than Pākehā women.”

    It seems that Maori have higher rates of HER2 positive cancer which is more aggressive and less easily treated that HER2 negative. So like Jewish women who have very high rates of Braca genes which gives them the most deadly of all cancers. It may well be down to genetic misfortune. Sad

    • Ad 7.1
      27 June 2023 at 8:34 pm

      Or something to do with how the genes are expressed. Like proportionally higher rates of smoking, drinking, low nutrition, deprivation, and I dunno about 150 years of the same. Still, never let any of that feature in a ranked care process.

      • Anker 7.1.1
        29 June 2023 at 4:04 pm

        I know the risk for breast cancer really well.

        There is genetic risk e.g HER 2 or triple negative associated with the braca gene mutation.

        And there is environment. Any consumption of alcohol, even a very moderate amount increases risk. Not exercising increases risk. Being over weight increases risk and lack of Vitamin D increases risk.

        Once cancer has metasticized outside of the breast, the prognosis is poor, and the" best "one to have is ER positive

        Sadly for the other two there is limited treatment

        • Incognito 7.1.1.1
          29 June 2023 at 9:58 pm

          Sadly for the other two there is limited treatment

          It depends on how you define ‘limited’ but I’d say that this is quite an inaccurate claim and thus quite misleading.

          • Anker 7.1.1.1.1
            30 June 2023 at 1:34 pm

            I suspect you get great pleasure from picking apart everything I say Incognito.

            I have first hand knowlege of BC. I have had it as has two of my siblings. If caught early then breast cancer is treatable.

            Once it metastisizes the treatment for triple negative and Her 2 positive is not very promisisng at all. There are newer drugs for ER positive that extend life, but they don't cure it.

            • Incognito 7.1.1.1.1.1
              30 June 2023 at 8:00 pm

              And you suspect wrong.

              I take cancer very seriously and it causes me great displeasure when somebody is making inaccurate misleading claims about it.

              I’ve already corrected you about BRCA genes, which you accepted, and I’ve challenged you on the alleged lack of treatment options for triple negative and HER2-positive breast cancer. However, your reply leaves much to desire and is not informative or helpful, i.e. you still haven’t answered what you consider ‘limited treatment’ nor have you detailed any of those ‘newer drugs for ER positive that extend life’.

              The prognosis is poor for all types of cancer at stage IV, i.e., when it has spread to other tissues. Metastatic breast cancer is incurable. As with most cancers, the earlier it is detected the better the chances for a cure or long-term survival.

              Here’s a fairly good overview of targeted therapies for HER2-positive breast cancer in NZ: https://www.breastcancerfoundation.org.nz/breast-cancer/treatment-options/targeted-therapy

    • Molly 7.2
      27 June 2023 at 8:51 pm

      That's interesting Anker.

      Really good article. Thanks yes

    • Incognito 7.3
      27 June 2023 at 9:02 pm

      All women (and men alike) have the BRCA genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, but only some have certain mutations that can turn normal healthy cells into cancer cells.

      https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/young_women/bringyourbrave/hereditary_breast_cancer/brca_gene_mutations.htm

      • Molly 7.3.1
        27 June 2023 at 9:12 pm

        The risk factor that mutation confers is quite high:

        https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/young_women/bringyourbrave/hereditary_breast_cancer/jewish_women_brca.htm#:~:text=One%20in%2040%20Ashkenazi%20Jewish,cancer%20at%20a%20young%20age.

        • About 50 out of 100 women with a BRCA gene mutation will get breast cancer by the time they turn 70 years old, compared to only 7 out of 100 women in the general U.S. population.
        • About 30 out of 100 women with a BRCA gene mutation will get ovarian cancer by the time they turn 70 years old, compared to fewer than 1 out of 100 women in the general U.S. population.
        • Incognito 7.3.1.1
          27 June 2023 at 9:31 pm

          FYI, the BRCA genes play crucial roles in the protection of DNA in a major repair pathway of DNA damage. When the genes, or rather the gene products aka the proteins, function as they should they protect cells from DNA damage occurring during DNA replication, which of course happens more in dividing cells such as epithelial cells. Epithelial cells that become cancerous can give rise to cancers known as carcinomas.

          In addition, cancer is also an age-related disease, i.e., age is an (independent) negative risk factor.

          • Molly 7.3.1.1.1
            27 June 2023 at 9:44 pm

            Why is this a "FYI"?

            I was not contradicting you, just providing extra information.

            As you have done.

            • Incognito 7.3.1.1.1.1
              27 June 2023 at 9:55 pm

              FYI = For Your Information; I was doing the same as you (although I’d already read the link, of course, and I was not arguing with or against you.

              Oops, I see I left the first sentence out of my comment @ 9:31 pm, my apologies. Here it is:

              Indeed, it is an important risk factor for women but male carriers of BRCA mutations are also more susceptible to certain types of cancer such as prostate cancer (and male breast cancer).

      • Anker 7.3.2
        29 June 2023 at 3:54 pm

        Oh yes you are correct Incognito. It is the braca mutation. I was tested to see if I have it and I don't. I therefore tell myself I don't have the Braca gene, but technically that is incorrect

    • Muttonbird 7.4
      27 June 2023 at 9:20 pm

      So the screening program is very important, more important than the surgical program. It's better to pour resource into screening and the education around that than the low percentage surgery outcomes which eventuate after a screening program fails.

      • Incognito 7.4.1
        27 June 2023 at 9:38 pm

        No, you got that wrong. Screening is aimed at early detection, so that early intervention, incl. surgery if needed, has better outcomes. In other words, you need both: screening and treatment (incl. surgery). In addition, screening doesn’t pick up all breast cancers.

        • Muttonbird 7.4.1.1
          27 June 2023 at 9:54 pm

          Did it get that wrong? This discussion formed a few days ago with some commenters putting the boot into Maori women again because of perceived favouritism. I read their idea is to not bother with early detection with weighting, rather pick up the pieces with far more surgeries at the bottom of the cliff.

          • Incognito 7.4.1.1.1
            27 June 2023 at 10:08 pm

            I have no idea what you’re referring to without links but I have a feeling you have misread one or two things here on TS.

            In any case, the whole furore was about including ethnicity in prioritising patients on waiting lists for elective surgery. These are not specific to women and even the singling out of Māori is a red herring because ethnicity can and probably will equally be used to prioritise other ethnic minority groups in other healthcare settings, as indicated by clinical data. Unless we get a NACT government …

      • Anker 7.4.2
        29 June 2023 at 4:06 pm

        Early detection is crucial for BC.

  8. pat 8
    27 June 2023 at 8:51 pm

    "However, GPs warn many people aren't even being counted."

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018896034/patients-waiting-months-for-specialist-appointments

    If you cant get the assessment (due to a lack of capacity) you dont even register in these statistics…as noted in the piece, there is an iceberg of unmet (and unmeasured) need.

    • Muttonbird 8.1
      27 June 2023 at 8:56 pm

      It's because you refuse to pay more tax. It's that simple.

      again, the root cause of our failing health system is a structurally low tax base. we pay low taxes and, as a result, wages for doctors are systemically low and laughably uncompetitive on the international market. pay doctors more? then pay more tax

      https://twitter.com/MorganGodfery/status/1673265248625889282

      • pat 8.1.1
        27 June 2023 at 9:15 pm

        or is it because you refuse to pay more tax?

        • Muttonbird 8.1.1.1
          27 June 2023 at 9:23 pm

          I'm happy to pay more tax, or at least happy to not indulge in paying less tax.

          I do this calculation in the polling booth every three years.

          • pat 8.1.1.1.1
            27 June 2023 at 9:26 pm

            and yet you assume you are the only one

            Which party was it that got one vote last election?

    • tWiggle 8.2
      27 June 2023 at 9:36 pm

      Pat, regular, free, breast cancer screening mammograms are organised directly with the screening facility, not through a GP. If you have an abnormal scan, there is an on-site specialist who performs the biopsy within days. After that, you funnel straight to the hospital breast cancer surgical/therapy team. So the diagnosis to treatment pipeline is well established for this particular cancer.

      • pat 8.2.1
        27 June 2023 at 10:03 pm

        That may or may not be the case for breast cancer screening….it certainly is not the case for many assessments which require a GP request (or accessing private services along with the associated expense)…that investigation is required to then submit a request for assessment for suitability to be placed on a surgical/treatment waiting list….which may or may not be accepted….only after that acceptance do you join the waiting list.

        Those services are so constrained that GPs tell their patients that they will submit such requests but warn that it is unlikely to be successful and if at all possible the private service is the only realistic option.

        • Molly 8.2.1.1
          28 June 2023 at 9:19 am

          This is true.

          With that in mind, GPs must have access to some kind of up-to-date scheduling system that allows them to estimate the time on the waiting list.

          Surely this must exist somewhere. And publication of it would allow everyone to monitor the health of our health system.

          Wouldn't that be interesting?

          • pat 8.2.1.1.1
            28 June 2023 at 1:09 pm

            Im not sure if they can access the waiting list however on RNZ yesterday a GP stated that the GPs have limited access to referrals for testing and much less than hospital registrars so they must have some access to that information somehow.

            It would be interesting but I suspect also quite disheartening if the lack of capacity was transparent to everyone.

  9. tWiggle 9
    27 June 2023 at 9:22 pm

    We were discussing lab-grown meat the other day. The tech is further along than I thought, with the FDA in the US just approving it for human consumption.

    RNZ interviews Opo-bio, who produce seed cells for cultured meat

    The interesting interview covers the meat making process.

    • Molly 10.1
      27 June 2023 at 10:24 pm

      Tell us something we don't know…wink

    • weka 10.2
      27 June 2023 at 11:26 pm

      Meanwhile, yet another court case in the UK finds that gender critical views are 'worthy of respect in a democratic society' (WORIADS)

      PRESS RELEASE: Gender critical beliefs are protected by law. Another victory for women and for common sense.

      …

      In a unanimous judgment of the Leeds Employment Tribunal Ms Fahmy succeeds in her case that she was subjected to harassment for her gender critical beliefs.

      …

      Denise instructed Elizabeth McGlone of didlaw alongside Anya Palmer. Elizabeth and Anya are delighted at this outcome which is another step forward in the protection of women’s rights in the workplace. The case highlights the hostility faced by women in the workplace when they seek to express gender critical views that are considered to be transphobic.

      We are aware that many women remain fearful to speak out and express their beliefs. This judgment is dedicated to those that do not feel able to speak freely for fear of reprisals in this space.

      …

      didlaw is a specialist discrimination practice. Elizabeth has a keen focus on women’s rights in the workplace and is a vocal and fearless advocate for the rights of women. This outcome is welcomed and moves us one step further ahead in shining a spotlight on this unnecessarily controversial and political issue where there is a need for rational and respectful debate.

      Argument in this space has been toxic to the point of abuse and hate speech. The right to freedom of speech has also been endangered. Perhaps this judgment will serve as a reminder of the need for reasoned debate around an unnecessarily toxic issue. As the judgment itself states “it has been made nearly impossible to have any kind of reasonable discussion to discover what those shared beliefs might be”.

      https://didlaw.com/denise-fahmy-v-arts-council-england

      Three important points here.

      There are whole swathes of work being done in the UK by gender critical feminists and other women that have nothing to do with KJK.

      It's a damning indictment of liberal politics that women have to go to court in 2023 in order to protect their beliefs about women's sex based rights.

      In this particular case, the meeting where Fahmy first disclosed her GC beliefs was an Arts Council meeting about funding that had been granted to Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Alliance and was then withdrawn. So not only do women have to use the courts to re-establish rights, lesbian, gay and bi people do too. Because gender ideology activists have convinced institutions like Arts Councils that homosexuality is transphobic.

      • Shanreagh 10.2.1
        28 June 2023 at 10:39 am

        Because gender ideology activists have convinced institutions like Arts Councils that homosexuality is transphobic.

        They have also convinced some in the public that supporting women's issues per se is transphobic. Hence my view that we are dealing with an off shoot of misogyny, pure and simple, seeking to force its views on others, rather than a group seeking a fair go.

        A group seeking a fair go would be aware of other marginalised groups and would not seek to ride roughshod over them. This has been done in sports where women have had to work really hard over the years to gain acceptance and prize money only to find that their sport now has to include men.

        • weka 10.2.1.1
          28 June 2023 at 11:06 am

          I think it's an inherently misogynistic movement too, but given how many liberals who otherwise support women's rights are involved in it, I don't think it's an overt intention to undermine women's rights. Unlike say someone like Matt Walsh, who clearly believes strongly in specific roles women, opposes abortion etc.

          This is what makes it so hard to address. There are at least three sides and one of the sides is in large denial of this (the liberals).

      • Muttonbird 10.2.2
        29 June 2023 at 10:58 am

        The Arts Council withdrew funding for a group which is trans-exclusive. That group represent a very small number of activists within the homosexual community and is not representative of the gay community as a whole.

        [please provide evidence that the LGBA excludes trans people. This means an explanation, quotes and links. It doesn’t mean someone on the internet saying they are trans exclusive, it means evidence that they are.

        I’d also like to see evidence that LGBA represent “a very small number of acvtivists within the homosexual community” Same standard with regards to evidence – weka]

        • weka 10.2.2.1
          29 June 2023 at 11:55 am

          mod note. please attend to this before posting on TS again.

        • Muttonbird 10.2.2.2
          1 July 2023 at 5:42 pm

          LGB specifically excludes transgender people from the LGBT initialism:

          The term LGBT is an adaptation of the initialism LGB, which began to replace the term gay (or gay and lesbian) in reference to the broader LGBT community beginning in the mid-to-late 1980s. When not inclusive of transgender people, the shorter term LGB is still used instead of LGBT.

          Even if you don't agree with transgender people's inclusion in the gay community in the first place, to remove them from decades of recognition in that community is exclusion.

          I looked up LGB only and found a very short Wiktionary entry which said:

          In recent years, LGB has come to be used to intentionally exclude trans people. Sometimes this is by people who intend to exclude trans people from the queer community in general (such as the LGB Alliance), and sometimes it simply indicates that trans people are not in the group being discussed (e.g. "transphobia among cis LGB people").

          There's quite a bit on the Wiki page for LGB Alliance:

          It has opposed a ban on conversion therapy for trans people in the UK, gender-affirming care including puberty blockers for children reporting gender dysphoria, and gender recognition reform.

          Here, LGB Alliance supports a ban on conversion therapy for cis genders, but not trans genders. The assumption is same sex attraction is a right but gender identity is something from which to be cured.

          They oppose gender affirming care and gender recognition reform. Both examples of removing, or excluding the rights of transgender people.

          Founder, Kate Harris, says this:

          The main difference is that lesbians, gays, and bisexuals have something in common because of our sexual orientation, that has nothing to do with being trans. We welcome the support of anyone — gay, straight or trans — as long as they support our commitment to freedom of speech and biological definitions of sex. So we are a very broad and accepting group. We will be called transphobic, but we're not.

          Appears they claim to support trans people but only if those people rescind any claim to have changed sex, and only if they are attracted to the same sex. Therefore a transgender woman is still a man and only acceptable if they are attracted to other men.

          They claim by Harris above that LGB Alliance is supportive of transgender people does not sit well with LGB Alliance policy which is to deny or obstruct transgender people from existing rights.

          Co-founder Bev Jackson said that lesbians are in danger of extinction due to disproportionate focus on transgender issues in schools: "At school, in university, it is so uncommon, it is the bottom of the heap. Becoming trans is now considered the brave option." She also voiced concern that "If you do not accept that everyone has a gender identity then you are automatically labelled transphobic which means you can no longer discuss women's lives and what's happening to lesbians. We are increasingly discovering that lesbians are no longer welcome in the LGBTQ+ world, which is astonishing."

          Bev Jackson claims lesbians are at risk of extinction and no longer welcome in the LGBTQ+ world but happily founds an organisation which excludes trans and queer people from their very name.

          From the LGB Alliance wikipedia page:

          According to journalist Gaby Hinsliff, "The Alliance is seen by many in the LGBT sector as a fringe organisation at best, and at worst a hate group." It has been described as a hate group by Pride in London, Pride in Surrey, the LGBT+ Liberal Democrats, the Labour Campaign for Trans Rights, the Independent Workers' Union of Great Britain, barrister Jolyon Maugham, Green Party of England and Wales co-leader Carla Denyer, journalist Owen Jones and Natacha Kennedy, co-chair of the Feminist Gender Equality Network. Broadcaster India Willoughby has described the group as "baddies masquerading as the good guys." The group has also been described as "anti-trans" by the Trades Union Congress and Hope not Hate. Paul Roberts OBE, CEO of LGBT Consortium said of LGB Alliance "they exist to oppose free, safe and empowered trans lives".

          This to whether LGB Alliance is a small number of activists within the gay community. Many gay pride organisations and their supporters are critical of the LGB Alliance mission, summed up by Paul Roberts at the end of the above quote. And further:

          A 2021 article in the International Journal of Sociology listed LGB Alliance among "UK lobby groups [that] are successfully pushing a radical agenda to deny the basic rights of trans people." Mike Homfray of the University of Liverpool has argued that "there is ample evidence that the LGB Alliance, far from respecting the existence of trans people, has as a central aim their isolation and separation from LGB people."

          There's a lot more material on that page but now I am stuck because Weka will not accept my quoting and analysis of what other people have said about LGB Alliance or even what they have said and done themselves.

          I fully expect to be permanently banned for this pathetic effort.

          • weka 10.2.2.2.1
            1 July 2023 at 6:38 pm

            ah, no, the problem I have is that you haven't provided links. Can you please do that now, for each things you have quoted. Other than that, I can see you have made an effort and I will respond to the points once the links are available.

            • Muttonbird 10.2.2.2.1.1
              2 July 2023 at 12:31 pm

              Wikipedia content has a lot of links embedded and when you quote a passage those links appear in the quote. I know that The Standard system doesn't like multiple links so I helpfully and carefully unlinked them all before posting in order not to trouble the moderators. Was on autopilot and removed the important links by mistake.

              Wikipedia page on LGBT here.

              Wiktionary page on LGB here.

              Wikipedia page on LGB Alliance here.

              • weka …
                2 July 2023 at 12:36 pm

                thanks. The baseline rule is you have to always link. Always.

                The way to manage that with wiki quotes is to split your comment into two or three different comments.

                I will have a look at the points later.

          • weka 10.2.2.2.2
            9 July 2023 at 10:52 am

            LGB specifically excludes transgender people from the LGBT initialism:

            The term LGBT is an adaptation of the initialism LGB, which began to replace the term gay (or gay and lesbian) in reference to the broader LGBT community beginning in the mid-to-late 1980s. When not inclusive of transgender people, the shorter term LGB is still used instead of LGBT.

            Even if you don't agree with transgender people's inclusion in the gay community in the first place, to remove them from decades of recognition in that community is exclusion.

            I've not seen LGBA say that LGBT+ shouldn't exist. Have you? They've set up their own thing, based around homosexuality and bisexuality. This has nothing to do with gender identity, and trans people who are homosexual are served by LGBA just like the rest of the constituency.

            If you reject all exclusion, then there should be no women's spaces or sports. No Māori seats or roll. No Grey Power or Disable People's Assembly. Everyone should be able to join everything. That's obviously silly, so what is the problem exactly with people wanting to organise around homo/bi sexuality?

            There's quite a bit on the Wiki page for LGB Alliance:

            It has opposed a ban on conversion therapy for trans people in the UK, gender-affirming care including puberty blockers for children reporting gender dysphoria, and gender recognition reform.

            Here, LGB Alliance supports a ban on conversion therapy for cis genders, but not trans genders. The assumption is same sex attraction is a right but gender identity is something from which to be cured.

            You should have been able to easily link to something from LGBA on their position on conversation therapy and their rationales. Instead you draw inaccurate conclusions base on your own prejudices. I encourage you to learn what the progressive argument against conversion therapy legislation was about and then you can make your arguments from an informed place.

            They oppose gender affirming care and gender recognition reform. Both examples of removing, or excluding the rights of transgender people.

            Citation need.

            Founder, Kate Harris, says this:

            The main difference is that lesbians, gays, and bisexuals have something in common because of our sexual orientation, that has nothing to do with being trans. We welcome the support of anyone — gay, straight or trans — as long as they support our commitment to freedom of speech and biological definitions of sex. So we are a very broad and accepting group. We will be called transphobic, but we're not.

            Appears they claim to support trans people but only if those people rescind any claim to have changed sex, and only if they are attracted to the same sex. Therefore a transgender woman is still a man and only acceptable if they are attracted to other men.

            They are using the definition of homosexuality that most people, including most homosexuals, use.

            You on the other hand appear to have the position that lesbians should have sex with trans women and NB men who are in fact biologically male. This is a horribly regressive position.

            They claim by Harris above that LGB Alliance is supportive of transgender people does not sit well with LGB Alliance policy which is to deny or obstruct transgender people from existing rights.

            Co-founder Bev Jackson said that lesbians are in danger of extinction due to disproportionate focus on transgender issues in schools: "At school, in university, it is so uncommon, it is the bottom of the heap. Becoming trans is now considered the brave option." She also voiced concern that "If you do not accept that everyone has a gender identity then you are automatically labelled transphobic which means you can no longer discuss women's lives and what's happening to lesbians. We are increasingly discovering that lesbians are no longer welcome in the LGBTQ+ world, which is astonishing."

            that quote doesn't support what you said about them.

            Can't be bothered with the rest. You are making arguments based on propaganda. This is evidence from the fact that you don't even understand what the argument is that you are against.

            In future, you have to provide links with each quote. If you don't I will dump the whole comment in the trash for wasting moderator and commenter's time. It doesn't matter what your rationale is for not providing links.

            I've explained below how to get around the spam filter.

            I'm also going to make a note in the back end about the problem here of using anti-LGBA positions as your only source when you patently don't understand the issues. There's nothing wrong with using references critical of gender critical positions, but they have to have some meaning and be grounded in reality, not just a rehash of anti memos being circulated on the internet. Dig a bit deeper into your references, follow up and make an actual argument.

            Just because someone says something on the internet doesn't make it true and this kind of argument here is tedious. If it seems too much work, just pick one issue and present that well.

    • Shanreagh 10.3
      28 June 2023 at 10:31 am

      @ MB
      And you are linking to Shaneel Lal.

      I know which person I believe has integrity and it is not the Fiji-born NZ resident. His actions in the stirring of the crowd at Albert Park were a dark day in NZ which resulted in the assault of an elderly woman.

    • Sabine 10.4
      28 June 2023 at 11:18 am

      Not really, she just can't make a buck on youtube. She will be doing fine on all other platforms.