Sure, but you have a Lib Dem MP saying publicly he read it the same way I did and calling it ill-judged and illiberal. I'll leave you two to work out who is right!
I'll take your word for it. I think fair to assume malice given the volume of malice that has been expressed and continues to be so against women who support single sex spaces (not necessarily by you or Plus). Thanks for clarifying though and have a nice evening 👍
If that's what you really think is going on, then sure. I've come to a different conclusion about why an LGBT group posted this the same day another LGBT group smashed up the venue.
Can you define fascism in a way that still allows for a centre right party to say that it opposes mass immigration? Re Goodwin's Law, you might find this an interesting challenge to your view: thecritic.co.uk/its-not-1933/
Not the same. Tagging is ostentatious and disrespectful. An attempt by middle class to be transgressive, but just patronises the working class who generally hate the rubbish tags blighting their urban environment.
Nice thread, thanks. For me, the Emin piece genuinely spoke to those (e.g. agnostics) who the Church may want to attract / provoke thought in. And is not ostentatiously disrespectful (some say tacky, I wouldn't). 2nd issue with the graffiti is it is a middle class idea of transgression. Patronising.
Maybe, maybe not. How much do we care that the guy with the ak47 face tattoo who threatened to kill a politician is going to jail? May not even be deported.
