Ni de droite, ni de droite

[Tribune Populaire🌐 @TribunePop23]

🇫🇷💧FLASH INFO : Didier Jaffre mis en cause dans le scandale Nestlé Waters, a été promu directeur de cabinet de la ministre de la Santé, des Familles, de l’Autonomie et des personnes handicapées.

Alexandre Ouizille sénateur et président de la commission d’enquête sur Nestlé dénonce la protection de Didier Jaffre par Emmanuel Macron et ses gouvernements successifs.

Les macronistes dans leurs œuvres : les scandales et l’impunité…

[Lorentz mathias @LorentzMathias]

"J'ai appelé tous les lundis matin la gendarmerie" "l’affaire est en cour" "la dernière fois que j’ai appelé, ils m’ont dit que si je continue à les harceler ils vont porter plainte"…😳🤯

Je ne sais pas si on se rend compte de l’ampleur du scandale là….👇😳

#DarmaninDemission

[Nass Rubis @nbenmessikh0]

@VictorSinclair3 @bo_chart https://t.co/PHnFJLukdS
Quand ce n'est pas dans les forces de l'ordre 🤬🤬🤬🤬

[Nicolas Bouvier @NBouvierOff]

@VictorSinclair3 Malheureusement, ce n'est pas une nouveauté.
Mocky le disait déjà en 2006 : https://t.co/pu1HREldp1

[Déborah✨ @DeborahBecker92]

@VictorSinclair3 Comme le juge Bailly qui voulait offrir sa fille de 12 ans sur internet ... il ne faut pas hésiter à les afficher ! Surtout que la sanction a été très faible , les pédos étant bien plus nombreux que l'on croit dans la Justice! Ils se protègent entre eux !

[AuBonTouiteFrançais 🍾🍾🍾 @VictorSinclair3]

Ce gendarme l'explique :
On a retrouvé chez un magistrat 1 million de photos et vidéo pédopornographiques.
Le mec a été condamné à 1000€ d'amende.
Et c'est LOIN d'être un cas isolé.
Donc
1. ce sont souvent des malades sexuels qui rendent la justice.
2. Ils se couvrent entre eux.

[The Eagle flies free @Fa21519230]

🚨🚨 LA QUIMIOTERAPIA cuesta $111,000 al año para destruir el cuerpo...
LA IVERMECTINA cuesta unos pocos miles al año para ejercer 12 mecanismos anticáncer distintos y NO destruir el cuerpo...
Nicolas Hulscher Mph.
💊💊 12 Acciones Anticáncer Conocidas:
1. Inhibe la vía WNT/β-catenina: detiene la proliferación de células cancerosas.
2. Induce la apoptosis: desencadena la muerte programada de las células cancerosas.
3. Bloquea las proteínas transportadoras de importina α/β, lo que impide la replicación de células cancerosas.
4. Inhibe la enzima PAK1: reduce la inflamación y la progresión tumoral.
5. Antiangiogénico: detiene la formación de nuevos vasos sanguíneos en los tumores.
6. Modulador del sistema inmunológico: mejora el reconocimiento de las células cancerosas.
7. Disruptor de la autofagia: interfiere con las estrategias de supervivencia de las células cancerosas.
8. Se dirige a las células madre del glioblastoma: eficaz en cánceres cerebrales.
9. Inhibe la respiración mitocondrial: corta el suministro de energía a los tumores.
10. Interrumpe la señalización de mTOR, lo que ralentiza el crecimiento celular.
11. Supera la resistencia a la quimioterapia: hace que la quimioterapia sea más efectiva.
12. Propiedades antivirales: potencialmente útiles para cánceres relacionados con virus (como el VPH).

[Diana Alastair💚🤍💜 ⚢ ❌❌✡️ @sappholives83]

In the UK, 11 trans people have been murdered since 2000.

In the same country, from 2009 - 2021, 16 women were murdered by serving or retired police officers. Not killed by officers in the line of duty — flat out murdered.

In 2022 alone, 11 British women were killed by male strangers. 12 were murdered by their own sons; 150 British women have been murdered by their own sons since 2012.

On average, a woman is murdered by a man in the UK once every 72 hours.

Where is the Day of Remembrance for the women murdered by their own sons? By their husbands, their fathers, their brothers? By serving police officers?

In the last 25 years, there have been nearly twice as many trans-identifying murderers than there have been murder victims - 20 murderers, versus 11 victims — and yet we’re told to believe that this is a genocide, while our own dead go ignored and unnamed.

These people are, per capita, the safest demographic in the UK, with a homicide rate of 0.38 per 100k (for women, it’s 0.50 per 100k, and for normal men, it’s 1.23.) but we’re supposed to believe that they’re being physically exterminated? Or is genocide another one of those words that has deliberately been stripped of its meaning, like “woman” and “female”?

Who gains when people are conditioned to roll their eyes at the word “genocide”? When “woman” has no meaning in law or policy? What is the end game here?

[France-Soir @france_soir]

📽️Une Étude qui Dérange : documentaire choc de @delbigtree et @ICANdecide qui pose LA question que tout le monde évite : pourquoi refuse-t-on de comparer la santé globale des enfants vaccinés et non-vaccinés ?
Une étude enterrée comparant 18 500 enfants vaccinés vs non-vaccinés. Plus de cent millions de vues. Des auditions au Sénat US. Et une crise de confiance historique en France (60 % des Français pensent que les autorités ont caché des infos). Article en premier commentaire.
#UneEtudeQuiDerange #AnInconvenientStudy #Vaccins #TransparenceSanitaire

[Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher]

We found Pfizer COVID shot mRNA, SV40, and SPIKE PROTEIN in a man 3.5 YEARS after his last dose — following 200+ advanced lab tests.

Governments and Big Pharma claimed the “vaccine” would leave the body “in a few days” before injecting BILLIONS of people.

They blatantly LIED.

[Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher]

LYME DISEASE EMERGED JUST 10 MILES FROM A GOVERNMENT BIOWEAPONS LAB

The first recognized Lyme disease cluster in 1975 originiated in Old Lyme, Connecticut — just a few miles from the PLUM ISLAND biolab that was experimenting with weaponized ticks.

[LE COLLECTIF 🅻🅴 🅲🅾🅻🅻🅴🅲🆃🅸🅵 🇫🇷 @tatiann69922625]

Italie 🇮🇹 Un chercheur italien a analysé les données relatives à la surmortalité dans le centre et le sud de l'Italie, et ce qu'il a découvert dans ces chiffres remet directement en cause l'un des arguments centraux du discours sur la pandémie.

La surmortalité dans ces régions était plus élevée en 2022 qu'en 2021, et supérieure à celle de 2020, alors même que le nombre de décès liés au COVID était en baisse.

Lorsqu'on lui a demandé si les données confirmaient l'affirmation selon laquelle les « vaccins » contre la COVID avaient sauvé des millions de vies, sa réponse a été sans ambiguïté : cela ne peut pas être vrai. Les chiffres indiquent le contraire.

Mais la découverte la plus significative concerne la manière dont les décès ont été classés. En Italie, toute personne décédée dans les 14 jours suivant la réception d'un vaccin a été comptabilisée comme non vaccinée. (Comme partout ailleurs) Chaque décès survenu pendant cette période a été classé dans la mauvaise catégorie.

Selon le chercheur, c'est cette seule décision comptable qui a créé la base statistique du discours sur une « pandémie des non-vaccinés ».

À mesure que l'Italie déployait les vaccins par ordre de priorité pour des groupes d'âge spécifiques, les décès dans ces mêmes groupes d'âge augmentaient de manière spectaculaire parmi les personnes classées comme non vaccinées, en coïncidence directe avec le déploiement de la vaccination pour cette cohorte.

Le même schéma se répétait dans chaque groupe d'âge à mesure que la campagne de vaccination les atteignait.

Ces décès ne concernaient pas des personnes non vaccinées. Ils concernaient des personnes nouvellement vaccinées, et la règle de classification de 14 jours les classait dans la mauvaise catégorie.

[Cervixen of the Clitorians @cervixen]

You're the only person telling women being female reduces us to our ability to get pregnant.

No one is reducing men to their ejaculate by referring to them factually as male. Why would describing the facts about a female person be reductive? Is it reductive to call a child, a child? If I say humans have two legs, am I reducing all humans to a pair of legs?

WTF do you mean my sex "reduces" me? Explain yourself.

A woman is an adult human female. That does not mean she must be fertile, pregnant, heterosexual, feminine, able-bodied, young, or capable of childbirth.

Infertile women are women. Menopausal women are women. Women with hysterectomies are women. Women who never want children are women. Only female people can lack female fertility. Only female people can go through menopause. Only female people can have a hysterectomy.

Stating that women are female does not mean “women are wombs.” That is you expressing your misogyny. That is not what saying "women are female" means.

The point is that women are human bekngs and human beings are male and female. Female people have been oppressed as a sex class because of material realities around reproduction, embodiment, labour, and male violence.

Pretending sex does not matter is not feminism and pretending the presumably "feminine" gender identity of a man entitles him to the rights of human beings who happen to be female, is a male supremacist movement masquerading as feminism.

You telling me what I am or what I am not is not any kind of argument. It's just narcissism and patronizing sexism.

[Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher]

STUDY FINDS SUNSCREEN USE LINKED TO DRAMATICALLY HIGHER RISK OF MULTIPLE SKIN CANCERS

A UK Biobank analysis of 470,000+ people found sunscreen users faced significantly higher risk of:

- MELANOMA: +292%
- BASAL CELL CARCINOMA: +140%
- SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA: +126%

This is what happens when you slather rapidly absorbed hormone disrupting chemicals all over your body while blocking vitamin D — one of the body’s key defenses against cancer.

These dramatic cancer signals remained even after accounting for major skin cancer risk factors: age, sex, skin type, tanning ability, sunburn history, sunlamp use, and time spent outdoors.

[LE COLLECTIF 🅻🅴 🅲🅾🅻🅻🅴🅲🆃🅸🅵 🇫🇷 @tatiann69922625]

L’Oncologue internationalement reconnu Angus Dalgleish :

« Il existe au moins 12 mécanismes par lesquels l'ARNm peut s'insérer dans l'ADN et activer des oncogènes. »

« Cette technologie est incontrôlable. »

« Son utilisation pour les futurs vaccins devrait être interdite et les « vaccins » contre la Covid-19 devraient être immédiatement arrêtés. »

[Cervixen of the Clitorians @cervixen]

TERFs are made, not born.

The fully peaked radfem does not merely “grow out of” recognizing harm -- quite the opposite. Once the harms of genderism are spotted, they're impossible to unsee. Most Terven start as allies whose brain survived the propaganda tutorial and reached the actual game. TERF levels are achieved through skill and experience.

The proto-TERF begins in the harmless ally phase: “I educated myself.”
Then the unease sets in when men like Lia Thomas show up in women's sports, drag queens twerk for toddlers, and the pronoun Stasi shut down any reasonable questions or concerns with threats of death and rape.
Then comes the readings of the forgotten texts, the combing of the forebidden forums and the following of the foresaken ones and being perplexed at how they've been so misrepresented and deliberately misunderstood.
Then they see the bad evidence for all of it, and the sham network of NGOs, AGPs, greed, and motivated reasoning fuelling it all.
Then they see the same destructive pattern everywhere: rape shelters admitting rapists, women's prisons issuing condoms to protect against the bepenised, lesbians banned from legally assembling as lesbians, girls skipping the water fountain and holding it in to avoid the boys in their restrooms, and the obvious safeguarding concerns everyone keeps pretending not to notice.

At last, she climbs down from Mount Stupid, survives the Valley of Despair, and ascends the Slope of Enlightenment, emerging as one of the Terven: the final bosses of the gender Dunning-Kruger curve.

Most of us were once very good little allies. We did the slogans. We were fully onboard to support gender nonconformity, deconstruct sexism, and burn down the patriarchy.

Then we noticed the raw deal for women, children, lebians and gay men that was being imposed through indoctrination and aggressive activism, the reification and reinforcement of gender stereotypes, the rampant misogyny and homphobia, the AGP-driven male supremacism, the Lysenkoism and iatrogenic harm and the amoral banality underlying it all. And, we noticed that other noticers were being harrassed, threatened, silenced, sidelined and demonized for noticing. But, we kept on noticing anyway. When critical thinking about genderism starts to peak, there's no come down.

So yes, some of the younger naifs may still be wandering the foothills, mistaking media saturation amd institutional propaganda for public agreement. But give them time. Allow their pattern recognition to bloom with experience. Give them one incoherent “no one knows what a woman is, but you must affirm that men are women when they demand it or be punished” argument too many. Every strawman argument, use of circular reasoning and false equivalence is a push towards the peak.

As long as trans activists continue to defend their bullshit with gross misogyny, homophobia, increasing violence and aggression, bad epistemology, poor science and non-existent logic, there is always hope.

Today’s ally is tomorrow’s Terven, provided she has courage, principles, and a functioning brain.

[Cervixen of the Clitorians @cervixen]

The Gender-Critical or "TERF" Position is a materialist analysis of sex, gender, and women’s rights. It is not a theory of hatred toward trans-identified people. It is a claim about the importance of sex as a real, human, and materially significant category in law, language, medicine, safeguarding, sport, and feminism.

Trans activists often misrepresent the views of GC feminists, sex realists and TERFs becaue honesty would cause them to lose the argument.

The following is an attempt to represent my position as a gender critical, sex realist and radical feminist precisely so it is easier to see when that view is being intentionally misrepresented and/or understood by bad faith representatives of trans activism.

I know my own position better than anyone. Bad faith is presuming to tell me what my own position is in order to discredit me. That's worse than a strawman, and the main tactic of gender essentialist activism.

Here is my actual position: the only position I need to defend:

1. Sex is real and materially significant

Sex in human beings is not an identity, a feeling, a role, or a personality type. It is a reproductive and developmental category: male and female are the two human sex classes that are the means of human reproduction. Male is the sex class organized around the development of small, mobile gametes and female is the sex class organized around the development of large, immobile gametes.

This does not mean every person is fertile, typical, or currently capable of reproduction. Infertility, menopause, hysterectomy, castration, DSDs, injury, age, or illness do not erase sex. Sex is not a human performance and there is no standard for sex beyond teproductive role. Sex is a human condition and an innate, immutable attribute of the human body.

Gender-critical feminists reject the idea that sex is “assigned at birth” in the sense of being invented, guessed, or arbitrarily imposed by authority. In ordinary cases, sex is observed and recorded. Even in rare, extraordinary cases with ambiguous secondary sex characteristics, with modern instrumentation, the primary atrribute of sex is observable at the definitive level beyond the crude level of external genitalia at the cellular level.

2. Women are female human beings

In this framework, “woman” means an adult human female. “Girl” means a juvenile human female.

This definition does not depend on femininity, beauty, clothing, sexual behaviour, reproductive capacity, compliance, heterosexuality, or conformity to stereotypes. A woman can be masculine, feminine, lesbian, bisexual, heterosexual, celibate, infertile, disabled, old, young, gender-nonconforming, or medically atypical. She remains a woman because she is female.

The position is therefore not that women must look, act, dress, think, or feel a certain way. It is the opposite: women should be free from the sex-based stereotypes traditionally imposed on female people.

3. Gender is not sex

Radical feminism distinguishes sex from gender.
Sex refers to the embodied, biological male/female distinction.
Gender refers to the social roles, stereotypes, expectations, behaviours, and hierarchies imposed on people because of sex.
Gender-critical feminism does not seek to preserve gender roles. It seeks to abolish their coercive power.

A feminine male does not become female. A masculine female does not become male. No one should have to change sex category, medically alter their body, or adopt a new identity to be allowed to reject sexist expectations.

Continued...

[Cervixen of the Clitorians @cervixen]

4. Female oppression is sex-based

Women are oppressed as a sex class. Patriarchy is not aimed at an inner identity called “womanhood.” Women are not discriminated against on the basis of their pronouns or fashion. Discrimination against wome and girls is organized around female embodiment: reproduction, pregnancy, childbirth, menstruation, female socialization, physical vulnerability, economic dependency, sexual exploitation, and male violence.

This is why sex matters in feminism. If the word “woman” is detached from female human beings, feminism loses the ability to name the class of people historically and materially subordinated under a male supremacist system.

5. Single-sex spaces and services are sometimes necessary

Gender-critical feminists do not argue that every space must be segregated by sex. They argue that sex matters in specific contexts where privacy, dignity, safeguarding, trauma, bodily vulnerability, or fairness are at stake.

Examples include prisons, rape crisis services, domestic violence shelters, changing rooms, intimate care, hospital wards, and female sports.
The argument is not that every male person is dangerous. The argument is that male-pattern violence, male physical advantage, and the privacy needs of female people are real enough that female-only provisions must remain lawful, meaningful, and enforceable.

A right to single-sex provision is not a right to harass anyone. It is not a femininity test. Masculine women, butch lesbians, and gender-nonconforming female people belong in female spaces. The category is sex, not appearance.

6. Sexual orientation is sex-based

Gender-critical feminists argue that homosexuality is same-sex attraction, not same-gender-identity attraction.

Lesbians are female people attracted to female people. Gay men are male people attracted to male people. Bisexual people are attracted to both sexes.

No one is entitled to another person’s attraction, validation, language, or sexual boundaries. Recognizing sex-based attraction is not hatred. It is basic respect for sexual orientation and consent.

7. Trans people have rights, but not the right to override sex-based rights

Gender-critical feminism does not require cruelty toward trans-identified people. It does not require denying housing, employment, medical care, ordinary public participation, or protection from violence.

The disagreement is narrower and more specific: gender identity should not override sex where sex is materially relevant.

The core objection is to compelled belief, compelled language, sex-category replacement, and policies that remove female-only boundaries without honest democratic debate.

8. DSDs do not erase the sex binary

People with differences of sex development deserve dignity, privacy, and accurate medical care. They should not be used as rhetorical loopholes.

DSDs are variations or disorders of sex development. They may complicate classification in rare individual cases, but they do not create a third reproductive sex or make male and female meaningless.

Ambiguity at the margins does not destroy the categories. It presupposes the categories exist in the first place.

[Cervixen of the Clitorians @cervixen]

The Core Differences

The central conflict is this:

Gender-critical feminism treats sex as material reality and gender as a social hierarchy to be dismantled.

Gender-identity ideology treats internal identity as primary and asks law, language, institutions, and sometimes other people’s boundaries to reorganize around that identity.

Gender-critical feminists argue that a just society can protect trans-identified people from cruelty and discrimination without erasing sex, redefining women, weakening safeguarding, or compelling everyone else to pretend that sex is irrelevant.

The Core Similarities

Despite the conflict, both sides often begin from several shared moral concerns.

Both generally agree that people should not be punished, abused, or excluded from ordinary life because they are gender-nonconforming, trans-identified, homosexual, bisexual, masculine, feminine, or otherwise noncompliant with sex stereotypes.

Both generally oppose rigid sex stereotypes. Neither side, at its best, wants boys and girls forced into narrow roles of masculinity and femininity.

Both generally recognize that trans-identified people can face cruelty, harassment, family rejection, employment discrimination, social isolation, and violence, and that such treatment is wrong.

Both generally agree that people should be free to dress, speak, behave, and present themselves in ways that do not conform to traditional expectations of their sex.

Both generally claim to be defending dignity, autonomy, and safety.

The disagreement is not over whether people deserve humane treatment. They do.

The disagreement is over whether subjective gender identity should override objective sex in society, culture, language, governance, law, safeguarding, medicine, sport, data, and female-only spaces.

The Core Contradiction

Gender Critical sex realist treats sex as a material fact and gender stereotypes as irrelevant to whether someone is male or female. A masculine woman is still female. A feminine man is still male. Personality, clothing, behaviour, interests, body modification, and inner feelings do not determine sex.

Trans activists and genderists claim to reject sex stereotypes, but actively reintroduce and endorse them by treating a person’s relationship to masculinity, femininity, social recognition as male or female, body discomfort, or “inner sense of gender” as evidence that a person is "trans" and that they belong to the opposite sex category.

This is why gender-critical feminists argue their position is less sexist: no stereotype can make a man a woman or a woman a man, and no rejection of stereotypes can make a woman less female or a man less male.

The gender-critical position is that gender stereotypes tell us nothing about a person's sex or identity.

The gender-identity position is: stereotypes are not supposed to define sex, but somehow a tiny minority's internal relationship to those same gender stereotypes must become the basis for redefining sexed language for the overwhelming majority.

[sergio-dde🐭🐞 @sergiodde]

Court reportage sur l'alimentation moderne. Vous savez celle que les élites eugénistes veulent nous imposer à la place des viandes naturelles des cheptels que l'on élimine par la force publique pour des maladies pas dangereuses.

Mais, surtout, en attendant de nous achever, il faut se faire un maximum de fric sur notre santé, comme Big Pharma...