blahflowers (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
blahflowers) wrote2008-10-14 07:13 pm
blahflowers) wrote2008-10-14 07:13 pm
Feeble.
Previously.
Well, Stonewall kept me waiting all day for their response to my second email. Would you like to see it?
Dear Loz,
Your comments on this matter have been noted and passed on.
Regards,
Stonewall
Again, refusing to discuss the issues, this really is pathetic. No wonder they had to wait for a broadly sympathetic Labour government to get in before we saw any change...
"Give us an equal age of consent!"
"No, fuck off you dirty poofters!"
"Oh well, you're probably right, we'll just go home now..."
I've immediately replied with
'Your comments on this matter have been noted and passed on.' Really? Is that the best reply you can muster?
At the moment I think Stonewall's refusal to engage and to actually discuss Bindel's inclusion is possibly annoying me more than Bindel's inclusion itself, the fact that they won't do me the courtesy of a non-stock reply is extremely offensive.
Well, Stonewall kept me waiting all day for their response to my second email. Would you like to see it?
Dear Loz,
Your comments on this matter have been noted and passed on.
Regards,
Stonewall
Again, refusing to discuss the issues, this really is pathetic. No wonder they had to wait for a broadly sympathetic Labour government to get in before we saw any change...
"Give us an equal age of consent!"
"No, fuck off you dirty poofters!"
"Oh well, you're probably right, we'll just go home now..."
I've immediately replied with
'Your comments on this matter have been noted and passed on.' Really? Is that the best reply you can muster?
At the moment I think Stonewall's refusal to engage and to actually discuss Bindel's inclusion is possibly annoying me more than Bindel's inclusion itself, the fact that they won't do me the courtesy of a non-stock reply is extremely offensive.