justascroller.bsky.social
Labelled “intolerant” by the Moderator. But backed by the UK Supreme Court.
81 posts
10 followers
24 following
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
New episodes of Clarkson’s Farm drop today!
comment in response to
post
In this thread: people with more money than sense.
comment in response to
post
It will be devastating when they have to leave their guns at the border.
comment in response to
post
Crying for the “trans kid” on puberty blockers and a path to surgery?
comment in response to
post
The legend on the back of the lady’s top should surely read “I transed my kid”.
comment in response to
post
Ms Atwood turned out to be a Big Brother fan.
comment in response to
post
Trans women these days aren’t even trying.
comment in response to
post
Sooz not taking the news well.
comment in response to
post
He has received many congratulations as far as I can see. And of course he was right all along.
comment in response to
post
Meanwhile, when I scroll.
comment in response to
post
At least some of those tags apply to many of our state visitors. See Saudi Arabia.
comment in response to
post
In the UK the Supreme Court has ruled otherwise. Which presumably makes them intolerant as well.
comment in response to
post
Should people in the femaleness biological category be able to assemble without being disturbed by people in the maleness biological category?
comment in response to
post
Nothing to do with motherhood. It’s all about the societal implications.
comment in response to
post
But apparently that 1% contribute nearly all our tax revenue. So we mustn’t upset them.
comment in response to
post
The view from the real world:
comment in response to
post
I knew I could rely on BlueSky for barmy defences of Upton.
comment in response to
post
I’m getting the impression that you don’t like the platform previously known as Twitter.
comment in response to
post
But we are stuck with Starmer.
comment in response to
post
Blokes with their willy chopped off, you mean?
comment in response to
post
Made up statistics are best statistics.
comment in response to
post
Is this all about the fact that trans women are men?
comment in response to
post
Who sacrificed what?
comment in response to
post
She was reportedly only anti-gay. Is there something else?
comment in response to
post
Climb that greasy pole. Kick away any hangers on.
comment in response to
post
Do you have a source?
comment in response to
post
I hope somebody got the rover to draw a cock and balls.
comment in response to
post
Can he see you if you are directly in front?
comment in response to
post
Jars of pasta sauce have sugar (or possibly high fructose corn syrup) as the primary ingredient.
comment in response to
post
Didn’t that happen in 1967?
comment in response to
post
She just can’t manage sexiness, despite the leotards.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
This worked so well in Iraq. What could possibly go wrong?
comment in response to
post
4. You will enjoy being oot and aboot.
comment in response to
post
Tomorrow: “We declare the imposition of Shariah law. Women, please go home.”
comment in response to
post
Kenneth Williams has been reincarnated.
comment in response to
post
I think one or two water company CEOs being picked off will fix this.
comment in response to
post
But with a man it’s gay.
comment in response to
post
But it’s not gay there.
comment in response to
post
There is no escape!
comment in response to
post
Gouging, it’s the principal subject taught on MBA courses.
comment in response to
post
You forgot Madagascar Three. In 3D.
comment in response to
post
*that are not simply speech recognition software created. That software hears as bad as I do.
comment in response to
post
“Hold it, big guy, it’s my tea break!”
comment in response to
post
OF subscribers about to be disappointed.
comment in response to
post
Bum sex isn’t gay anymore? Alleluia!
comment in response to
post
Republicans don’t like black people? They are reintroducing segregation?