I wonder if maybe straight women have always been into seeing gay men have sex, like from antiquity, and that this is one of the things that patriarchy took from us because straight men hate the idea of women viewing men as objects. And maybe Heated Rivalry reminded us…?

Fascism is always respectful until it’s not.

Do we all need a lesson in the difference between content and marketing?

The UK government has announced plans to introduce a social media ban for under-16s by spring 2027. Professor @Sander_vdLinden shares his reaction to today's news, and measures it against the evidence we already have about social media restrictions. Learn more about his proposal for social media passports 👉 youtube.com/watch?v=Y4RUNJVF… Professor Sander van der Linden is the Director of the Cambridge Social Decision-Making Laboratory and a Professorial Fellow of @ChurchillCol. #SocialMediaBan #SocialMedia

traitez moi de complotistes mais comment tous les pays occidentaux font la même chose au même moment avec le même prétexte fallacieux et le même but de surveiller tout le monde et de contrôler internet partout ?

You guys didn’t trust the government with a vaccination but you trust this government with digital ID schemes okay lol

It's actually about tracking people so they can facilitate arresting them if they post content the government finds undesirable. Anti-Zionism content falls under that category, but so does anti-immigration content which is far more prevalent given recent events

This idea of “freedom” is very Stalinesque.

When you’re a sub but can only get off by pretending you’re a dom.

labour saw how unpopular digital id was and rebranded it to a child social media ban lmfao. i hate this god damn party so much!

I’m going to say what everyone already knows - The UK social media ban is about shielding the youth from anti-Zionist content.

The ban on social media for children under 16 is an idea that has merits. But the way it is being done is simply a way to force everyone, including adults, to identify themselves online, creating the most powerful surveillance and censorship architecture in human history.

Only dictators ban VPNs Starmer is a dictator

Dragged out of bed at 4:30am in a dawn raid and detained for 8 hours for sending "persistent emails"

My question for Mike Tapp is whether he thinks someone should be arrested, and charged with terrorism offences, for answering his question by saying "yes".

Fascism sounds like—

"You can't now say I support Palestine Action, thats an illegal offence. You can't now say I support Palestine Action with all my heart.. I'm saying its illegal to say I support Palestine Action.." @owenjonesjourno on #JeremyVine

RT @TaylorLorenz: “What’s really being done here is trying to eliminate online anonymity. If you cannot criticize the govt anonymously and…

Hi Ian, Your position is very immoral and essentially what you are doing here is downplaying the issue of arms trade with a country alleged to be engaging in atrocity and war crimes. Perhaps most despicable is your not so subtle attempt to promote the idea that we shouldn't criticise or condemn Israel for slaughtering Palestinians or its wholesale destruction of Gaza because some Israeli tech has allegedly saved the lives of British soldiers in Iraq & Afghanistan. Now let's break down your remarks; It is indeed true that UK direct exports of major conventional weapons and other military equipment to Israel have been minimal for decades (SIPRI data shows none of note since the 1970s). However, UK companies supply critical components, especially for the F-35 combat aircraft (UK manufactures ~15% by value of each F-35; Israel operates dozens and has used them extensively in Gaza operations). The UK has also provided direct real-time support to Israel through our airbase in Cyprus. Furthermore, indirect exports via “incorporation” licences (parts going to the US or elsewhere for F-35 assembly destined for Israel) add substantial value. CAAT data shows hundreds of millions in relevant licences over recent years. In late 2024, the UK approved £127.6 million in single individual export licences (SIELs) to Israel — more than the combined total for 2020–2023. Israeli customs data recorded record-high UK arms/munitions imports in 2025 (e.g., highest monthly values since records began, including bullets and other munitions). Some of this information has been obtained through colleagues and activists inside Israel itself. So, while the absolute volume is small relative to Israel’s overall imports and defence budget, it is definitely not “infinitesimal” in key high-tech areas (F-35 components) or when including indirect flows and recent increases. The UK’s own licensing data and Israeli import records contradict any claim of negligible impact. It is also the impact of the UK's contributions that are under scrutiny here not simple the monetary value of the arms exports. The mutualism you discuss in your post regarding Israeli technology saving the lives of British soldiers operating in Afghanistan and Iraq does not outweigh or erase the UK's complicity in Israel's crimes against the Palestinians. As for your claim about Israeli intelligence contributing to the prevention of terror attacks in the UK - this is difficult to verify publicly and likely you are overstating this as an example and its also very evident that Israeli intelligence sharing & cooperation is certainly not the sole or primary factor in preventing terror attacks in the UK. Basically, while cooperation certainly does exist and is mutually beneficial, your phrasing implies a more decisive, unilateral Israeli role than the evidence publicly supports. As for your claim regarding Israeli technology and RAF aircraft... this is absolute nonsense and very insulting to our brilliant RAF engineers. There is simply no credible evidence that Israeli technology is essential for RAF operational combat aircraft (Typhoon, F-35B, etc.) to fly or function. Israeli tech is not indispensable for UK-operated jets. So you are telling a bare faced lie right there matey. The legal case for restricting or halting arms exports rests on risk assessment and obligations under domestic and international law, not on whether the trade is “big” or “small.” Even limited transfers can trigger serious responsibilities if there is credible risk of misuse or complicity in war crimes. In other words, it doesn't matter if we sold only a single bullet to Israel, if that bullet is used to murder a Palestinian child then we are complicit. I don't really have the time or patience to further explain why the question of volume of trade is secondary (or irrelevant) to the legal question of our obligations as a state under international law. But do keep being an apologist.

Anne Read: "of course I do not class myself as a terrorist. I accept that I am classed as one by a govt that supports terrorist regimes" Trudi Warner: "One of the tricks that authoritarian govts play is to label opponents.. as terrorists" Both women were arrested yesterday.