Laura Perrins: Lena Dunham turns transgender thought cop

Is it just me or are things a bit tense? It seems like the minute you step out of your front door, someone claims they are “hurt” by basic reality. It is exhausting, keeping up with everyone’s feelings and emotions. These days regular life can seem like an onslaught because everything is political and even basic biological facts like what is male and female are up for grabs.

To make matters even worse this transgender agenda to remake reality has a distinctly totalitarian feel to it. Let me take three examples of the authoritarianism of the next step in the Cultural Revolution. The transgender activists and campaigners do not just want you to get on board with the new gender bending reality – they want you out of your job if you disagree with their lies.

First there was actress Lena Dunham (of Girls fame) in the US, who like a proper little communist decided to shop the working women of American Airlines to their employers for having a non-approved conversation about transgenderism. The employees, female attendants, were allegedly having a private conversation about the transgender phenomenon and they had not sought approval for their speech from Lena Dunham – aka Thought Cop. American Airlines have since said they could not substantiate the claims of such a dastardly conversation.

What was Dunham hoping to achieve by ‘snitching’ on these women? Perhaps she wanted these women (who probably have families) sent to re-education camp to get their views in line?

Or perhaps she wanted them to be publicly shamed? Or maybe, just maybe, she wanted them fired, thereby plunging them and their families into economic hardship? That’s pretty nasty bullying from the Left.

A similar kind of story hit the news then in UK, where Paul Embery, a senior Fire Brigades Union official, expressed via Twitter disquiet over Justine Greening’s attempts to remake reality by allowing people ‘choose’ their gender.

Unhappy that someone should disagree with this proposed Government policy, another transgender firefighter said the comments were ‘transphobic’ and “incited hate”.

Katie Cornhill, who was nominated for the service’s Woman of the Year award in 2016 (of course he was), told PinkNews that Embery’s remarks constituted “a hate incident that should be investigated by the police.”

What were these hateful remarks from Embery? Why they were along the following lines: He wrote: “Coming next: short people may identify as tall, fat people may identify as thin, and ugly people may pretend to be George Clooney.”

Embery also said that “forcing society to recognise someone as one gender when he/she maintains the anatomy of another is ludicrous,” later calling the concept “Orwellian”.

Little did Embery know that we are living in a real life Big Brother! Cornhill, makes no bones about it: he wants Embery out of his job. Embery “doesn’t deserve to be in the Fire and Rescue Service,” Cornhill said firmly. Did he indeed?

Here is someone who gets on board the outrage train and demands his fellow firefighter be fired. They are a nice bunch, the activists are they not?

Finally we have the National Trust who demanded their volunteers to wear what I believe is a political badge - the rainbow flag.

No one knows what this flag/badge stands for anymore – is it legal equality for gays and lesbians, or the remaking of  reality in the form of the transgender revolution? Sometimes Q and A are added onto the LGBT part, sometimes it is just LGBT+. The point is this ambiguity demonstrates it is a political symbol now and people should be no more forced to wear such a badge then they should be forced to wear a Vote Leave badge.

Employers should not have the right to force their employees, or indeed volunteers, to endorse a political ideology or indeed ‘flair’. Employers use their employee’s labour; they are not entitled to their minds and souls.

So, in sum: it is getting hot out there. I do not have much hope for the future if every disagreement is going to be turned into ‘a hate crime.’ We have enough of the real thing, thanks, than for employers to be bullying their employees or for employees to be seeking others to be sacked or censured over political disagreements. This is an abhorrent form of bullying. It is vile authoritarianism that will cause people to self-censor and withdraw.

I urge all readers not to do this. People are entitled to respect and to express themselves how they want. They are not entitled to bully and harass you out of a job, or off Facebook, or whatever forum you have to be on.

And no, don’t bother thinking you just want a quiet life, leave me alone. You might not be interested in these culture wars but believe me they are interested in you. As Lena Dunham states on her Twitter profile: ‘silence will not protect you.’ So speak out.

(Image: Ted Eyton)

Laura Perrins

  • John Birch

    Paedophilia is waiting its turn to be welcomed as another lifestyle choice.

    • Rtd Colonel

      Don’t forget Zoophilia for the PETA crowd, why should animals miss out?

    • Bik Byro

      No it isn’t. Take your medication and lie down.

      • Nothing would surprise me, in decades to come you don’t know what the next cultural Marxist war will be over next.

        • John Birch

          PIE have been pushing this agenda since the 70s.
          Ask Harriet harmen

      • John Birch

        It was close to its desire many years ago , Harriet Harman was busy advising PIE.
        They won’t give up.

    • Old Tommer

      That would never surprise me at all.

    • wisestreligion

      The transgender agenda is rapidly whittling away protection of children from sexuality. PM May has put 2 homosexual ministers in charge of Education, Greening & Gibb, each with a religious mission to spread Gay to our children.

      My best guess of the onward route march of cultural Marxism is first Polyamory, through Incest, then Paedophilia. The arguments advanced, and objections ignored, for Gay Marriage already prepare the ground in the progressive mindset for much of their future conquests.

  • Colkitto03

    “What was Dunham hoping to achieve by ‘snitching’ on these women?”

    She was trying to achieve self glorification on social media. Here actions are totally about herself and nothing to do with the ladies she complained about. Frankly she would not give a damn about them or the consequences to them of what she did.
    SJW’s are in it for only for the virtue signalling one-upmanship. There is no consideration for the damage done to those they attack. Its sociopathic.

    • Bik Byro

      Got it in one.

  • paul parmenter

    Yes, it is getting hot out there. So maybe it’s time to turn up the heat on those who have happily been burning others, so they can have a dose of their own medicine. It might be very interesting to see who is better at taking the heat. I rather think the snowflakes will be melting first.

  • Phil R

    To the Left (Unfortunately the CP is now firmly of the left – Tony Blair and New Labour won permanent change BTW) democracy and free speech is but a means to an end (and the end cannot contain either democracy or free speech)- a means as we increasingly see from our “elite” terribly susceptible to the distortion of false class consciousness. If the “law” will not produce the correct ends, then different means must be chosen. Leftism is an inherently aristocratic ideology where the aristocracy is self-identified. That means it is swamped by paternalistic contempt for the masses.

    “They must be lead, you know. By the whip if necessary. They’ll thank us in the end.”

  • Pretty Polly

    Rights without responsibility ‘democracy’ is destroying the West.

  • James Chilton

    The pressure to conform to the sexual novelties and social “norms” enforced by the thought police, must be resisted. More rebels are needed.

  • What I’ve noticed are that these people who claim to be upset or offended are rarely a member of the group that they are claiming might be offended.
    I’ve two gay acquaintances, they don’t want any special rights, they just want to live their own lives and be left alone. They claim that the campaigners for LBGT rights are making live more unpleasant for them, not better.
    I had a coloured colleague at work, he said that he was rarely upset by much of the so-called racism. He had no great objection the the “n-word”, he said that he’d been called far worse things. What he particularly objected to was white people claiming that something was racist on behalf of blacks. He insisted that they were being racist by assuming that blacks were not capable of complaining on their own behalf.
    I had a similar incident when I told an Irish joke at a meeting of a local society. Someone jumped up and claimed it was racist; I pointed out that there were no Irish present and that I’d been told the joke by an Irish friend. This was no excuse, apparently I was still racist!
    I’ve no objection if someone complains on their own behalf, what I can’t abide is people who claim presumed offence on behalf of others.

    • They would also need to prove that Irish was a race.

      • I think that has already been accepted by our courts. More interesting would be whether an Irishman could be accused of being racist against the Irish by telling such a joke; my Irish colleague at work used to collect them.

    • Bik Byro

      Absolutely true.

    • ZekeMastadon

      Depends I think where you live….I’m in Los Angeles and there are a ton of very aggressive people in their particular groups. Very VERY aggressive.

      • I was thinking more of the individual complaints like the one outlined in this article. I’m sure the groups here have people who are personally affected, but even there, I feel that the majority are hangers-on who enjoy making trouble. The result, as my gay acquaintances claim, is to do more harm than good for the cause in question.

      • Indeed. One hopes you find a way to escape soon.

    • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

      I can recall an old Benny Hill episode in which he was parodying Dave Allen, and telling an Irish Joke, and being met with heckling:
      Benny as Dave: “Two Irish walk into a pub…”
      Heckler (in Irish accent): “Why does it need to be the Irish?”
      Benny: “Two Jews walk into a pub…”
      Heckler (in Yiddish accent): “Nu, so why the Jews?”
      Benny: “Two Chinese walk into a pub…”
      Heckler: “(*gibberish sounding like Cantonese*)…”
      Benny: “Two FAIRIES walk into a pub…”
      Heckler (lisping): “Get YOU, duckie!”

    • Yep, and that National Trust story, if I remember, popped up because the volunteers were offended partially because the Trust outed the last owner of the place who was very quiet about his homose xuality. Especially despicable in my view to attempt to force people who care about something to donate there time to parrot you beliefs.

      • The National Trust is going down hill rapidly doing things which seem to be well outside their remit.

        • That’s my impression, but its simply that, with little to back it up.

          • It is trying to be green and politically correct. Its remit is something like preserving suitable old buildings and beautiful landscapes. Maybe some people regard a row of wind turbines as beautiful, but I certainly don’t. But that is typical of the way that they are upsetting people.

          • It’s done remarkable work in that field, but really should stick to its last. I daresay their nonsense will hurt the mission.

    • Phil R

      Welsh, Irish and Scottish are not races, neither are Moslems.

      I am Welsh and my ancestors have lived in Wales for many, many generations. We are tall, have blue eyes and blond hair.

      • I agree with you, but I seem to remember there was a court case where an Irishman claimed that fellow workers were being racist towards him and it was upheld.
        Like all laws these days, they are stretched to the limit and then beyond!

  • PierrePendre

    According to a Twitter exchange reproduced on another site, American Airlines’ first welcomed Dunham’s Pawel Morozow moment and promise to investigate it. Evidently it occurred to someone later that it was safer not to upset the cabin crew unions than to pander to Dunham and an allegation that it would be very hard to substantiate, even if true. A good lesson in the perils of Twitter and being stampeded by hysterical sex lobbies.

    • Great Briton

      Nor sure Dunham is famous, what has she done?

  • Bik Byro

    It later turned out that Lena Dunham was flying from terminal 4 whereas American Airlines operates out of terminal 8.

    But there’s an obvious lesson for the flight attendants and for the rest of us – if you’re going to talk about something contentious, don’t do it in a public place, wait until you’re in private among people you can trust.

    • Mary Robinson

      I’m afraid that’s the way it is these days.

    • pattif

      When I was growing up in the US in the 50s/60s, I can remember being told that the only way you could be certain of having a private conversation was to go to the beach and wade iut i to waste-deep water. Eastbourne is nice this time of year….

      • Keep the water running in the sink was another. Supposedly fouled up the microphones.

    • Little Black Censored

      Much like living in the old USSR then.

      • Bik Byro

        I don’t remember it being any different at any time in the UK.
        I don’t think it’s wrong for people to have their own opinions; it is however, rather stupid to say them in a loud enough voice in a public place whilst wearing a uniform that identifies you as a public representative of your employer.

    • From what I hear, there’s going to be another lesson. The charming Miss Dunham flies a good deal, and Flight Attendant stick together. She’s never going to get another break on an airplane. She’d best get rich an buy a Gulfstream cause its funny how long that second drink can take from an irritated FA – even in first class. America is funny like that.

      • Bik Byro

        And funny how that second drink tastes as well, hehe

        • That too can happen. I wouldn’t blame them. They tend to be good hard working people who shouldn’t have to deal with people like her.

    • I read somewhere else a fitting comment about this situation. They stated how when communism was finally overcome it was done through widely peaceful means; the majority finally realised they were the majority and overthrew it. The writer pointed out that the alternative Truth of this isn’t examined; this showed that the converse was also true, that the control given was also acquiesced. It’s true that when communism was dominant that people were persecuted who stood up to it, but this was further down the line after power hadn’t been given to these people by the silent majority.
      Your advice means they will win, only quicker.

      • Bik Byro

        If you want to wear a uniform which identifies you as a representative of your employer, whose salary pays for your food and home, and then stand in a public place of work where customers are passing by and talk loudly about contentious issues, that’s up to you, I’m not stopping you. Frankly, I think it would be a barmy thing to do.

        • So you agree with the destruction of people due to their discussing contentious issues. Full on totalitarian.

  • Mary Robinson

    Anyone visiting the Stasi Museum in Berlin will note that snitching and denouncing and two minutes of hate is in the DNA of Lefties. Doesn’t surprise me that this woman snitched on other women. They’ve been doing it since time immemorial.

    • English Advocate

      “It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.”
      (George Orwell, 1984)

      • Mary Robinson

        I can believe that.

      • WFC

        Orwell wouldn’t last 10 seconds in the modern “left”.

  • Ravenscar

    “Inciting hate”


    All they do in me, is piteous to report.

    What’s going to happen to these ever so precious poor little darlings when some real in your face hate enters their lives and try marching in pride down east, say Tower Hamlets, East Ham or Ilford and that will turn them all ever so more needy.

    • Well apparently they’re going to overcome the latter by planning enforcement.

  • ZekeMastadon

    They get the idea that their ideas are pure and correct from college. Every college I have been in (30,000+ students) has had liberal professors. If you even mention you have a different opinion you get derided, chided, and receive lower scores on papers. This is generally done in liberal arts classes and the forced “general education.” I’ve had more than one professor tell the whole class how to vote (even though they are supposed to not). Others have called those with religious beliefs idiotic, and I’ve seen classmates screaming angry for someone quietly singing Amazing Grace. This is the sick brainwashed world we live in. Many liberals want a totalitarian state where they can be Miley Cyrus “kiss who we want, screw who we want!” and anyone different than them is jailed or worse. My favorite irony is them supporting Islam. A part of me hopes it backfires on them.

    • Phil R

      Islam is still very much an alien presence in the West. As a liberal you realise that you can’t advance the ball in the culture war by attacking it. You have to attack the culture you are trying to displace. That would be the residual influence of Christianity in Law & Society. You win by keeping your focus on what is important. It’s not important to attack Islam. If you are Liberal, you will assume that Islam will be safely castrated by secularisation anyway. You assume that religion is weak and getting weaker. There is no reason to attack Islam. You assume you would neutralise it for free by secularising the country.

      Now, that’s not to say that Liberals aren’t afraid of Islam. However, there are sound strategic reasons for focusing on Christians only. The Christian faith is what they are trying to displace.

  • MorganCourtenay

    Back in the real world, nobody gives half a penny for Dunham’s pseudo-intellectual ramblings or her awful and unsurprisingly unfunny series.

    • You need to tell that to this conservative government. Just because the majority doesn’t agree with it doesn’t mean to say the minority won’t impose it with sever reprisals if they don’t get their way.

  • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    That photo in the header about the jumper had me thinking of the old joke about marriage being like a cuppa– “Sooner or later, you’ve got to think about getting rid of the old bag and starting fresh.”
    Lena Dunham: “Oh, horrors! He told a sexist joke! Report him!”
    Actually, I was referring to YOU, Ms. D– you’re the only bag under discussion right now…

    • Carbonari1848

      Or maybe
      “Did you just assume the gender of the person I was telling a joke about? Because obviously if I was telling a joke about a man that would be fine and not hateful, but if it was about a woman, then it was hate speech.”

  • Groan

    Well the Beeb wil be pushing its agenda next week. Getting the 7 year olds sorted in School. Lots of obsession about the need to share toilets and blot out any pink. Oh and as if there isn’t enough trouble getting boys to read lets chuck out the books they like! Soon there won’t be any thought crime, you know like the idea that men might be firemen because they have to lift heavy ladders. Obviously who needs reality when princesses rescue princes in fairy tales and we all share toilets.

  • Enemy Coast Ahead

    ‘I do not have much hope for the future if every disagreement is going to be turned into ‘a hate crime.’

    Unfortunately this was the danger from the very beginning where hate crime laws are concerned – they are increasingly being used as a tool for more and more censorship of opposing views which is leading us down the path towards tyranny – we are sleepwalking into totalitarianism.

    Laura, you are a sane voice in an increasingly insane world.

    Keep up the good work.

  • 3aple

    LGBT+ will not be permitted to survive. Its too easy for real people to keep abreast with. Adding letters makes it harder to keep up and their meaning ever harder to penetrate by real people. When they are, more letters must be added.

    Its like the difference between good manners and etiquette. Good manners is intended to make everyone feel at ease and included. Etiquette was meant to separate the aristocracy from the plebs. Whenever the plebs picked up the rules of etiquette, the aristocrats changed the rules, making them ever more arcane. Etiquette was intended to be exclusive and difficult, to show who was part of the ‘In’ group and who was part of the ‘Out’ group.

    The Red Guard needs to keep moving the goal posts so real people can be permanently in the wrong and kept as the ‘Out’ group, otherwise the Red Guard couldn’t justify being superior and outraged, the ‘In’ group. They’re the true xenophobes.