Sex by Deception? Perjury?


Sex by deception: Legal Case.

I was not intending to blog this case. I  fear the bald facts lend themselves to a curiosity born out of prurience. I myself was intrigued so I am not in any position to judge.  It is hard not to question the circumstances, as laid out in the case. Transcript

The bare facts of the case are:2FE8543F-E335-4869-B3A3-16817D7267D1

On reflection, I decided to blog as it raises the issue of Sex By Deception, currently a criminal offence. There is talk about reviewing the law.   Stonewall are one of the organisations lobbying for this:👇

571C4250-82AD-40AE-89F6-2F8F04CF8517Whilst there could be a progressive case for reviewing  the law covering sex by deception (I am thinking of Spy cops) it’s also fraught with risk.  I am mainly thinking of  #CottonCeiling here.  The term #CottonCeiling was coined by a trans porn actor and activist, Drew DeVeux. It describes the “exclusionary” practices of Lesbians from a trans perspective.  Sex by deception laws,currently  offer some remedy if sexual activity is embarked upon without disclosing your sex / anatomical status.  Trans activists don’t think sex is a meaningful status, only gender, so they oppose this legislation. A taste of the rhetoric on this topic is below:


From a Lesbian perspective #CottonCeiling rhetoric  posits their same sex orientation as “bigotry” and trans exclusionary.  In fact it is male exclusionary and doesn’t necessarily exclude females who self-identify as Transmen.  Many lesbians have also pointed out that this is all too reminiscent of the “corrective rape”  practiced on Lesbians.  (Still happening now I hear from South African Lesbians) How dare they exclude males from their dating pool?

The term cotton ceiling is a twist on glass ceiling but here it is not about the barrier to women’s opportunities but the barrier (women’s knickers) to sex!

The person who led this workshop moved to the UK to work for Stonewall.  Its not just a few outliers on the internet.


The cases I am aware of, in the UK, have, however, all been “transmen”. In a practical sense testosterone does seem to do a lot more heavy lifting, than oestrogen, so a passing “transman” seems more common.  Outside of celebrity world a  passing “transwoman” is more rare. Transmen are maybe more likely to commit this, from an opportunity perspective, not from a propensity. Transactivist rhetoric, however, seems more focussed on females excluding males from their bedrooms I have not seen an equivalent movement around the #BoxersBarrier.   Psychologically de-programming male socialisation seems to be a much harder task, perhaps the prominence of sexual demands, made of women, by males, is to be expected.

This legal case pre-dated the Sexual Offences Act of 2003 so used a charge of perjury but it has implications for fraudulent claims to be of the opposite sex.  We need a discussion on  how that speaks to “consent”. The current law provides for 👇


This original case was tried on the basis of perjury from this legislation.


I don’t have the transcript of the original case (yet). The later cases relate to  a long legal battle for the trans-identifying female to have access to the children, born during the marriage, and financial support from the ex “spouse”.

The case struck me as rather sad, which it is. However, as I thought more about it I was struck more by the consequences, for the woman, caught up in this deception.


After I posted a brief reference, on twitter, the responses (mainly disbelief) made me dig a little deeper. Eventually I found a much earlier case, involving the same couple,  which provided a lot more background. 1996 case.  There will also be an earlier case relating to the perjury charges. I have not located a transcript for that case.

What is clear, from the earlier case,  is that the wife was not aware of her partners sex, certainly not at the  time of the marriage. Just when she was fully informed is not entirely clear. Certainly both parties had opposing interests when it came to establishing when the fraud was exposed.  The “husband” faced a possible seven year sentence for the deceit. The “wife” faced battles over the children (conceived by artificial insemination) and sharing financial assets. Should  the partner be able to claim rights to her property and financial assets? If it was determined a crime had been committed then the party to the deception likely had no legal claim on any financial assets accumulated during the “marriage”.

The FTM had undergone a bilateral mastectomy (In 1977)  but the surgery had not been straightforward so the patient opted not to undergo a phallioplasty.  Interestingly here is an audio recording detailing the complications from a recent recipient of a  phalloplasty This appears to be a dangerous, and poorly regulated, procedure over 40 years later. The decision to avoid it, from a health perspective, seems to have been a wise choice.


The skepticism about the wife’s ignorance of her “husbands” sex seems to be explained  by her youth and inexperience and the use of a prosthetic device. Elsewhere in the testimony it is clear that much effort was made to preserve bodily privacy, by the claimant. (The claimant in this case is the FTM as it concerns access and “ matrimonial assets”). The differing backgrounds of the claimant and “spouse” are detailed also 👇


Following the marriage it was not until some years later that the couple sought help to conceive. It is not known if they had been “trying” up to that point. If they had then this was a cruel deception.  No details are included as to whether the mother had been subject any other fertility tests or treatments. What seems clear is that the male had not been subject to any tests, not unusual for the time. Far easier to medicalise the “infertile”  wife than question a man’s masculinity. With the increasing clamour to be attracted to “gender” not sex this is one of the consequences of denying biological reality. F01DC990-BD98-4F15-B214-C0BD824F881D


The relationship began to breakdown in 1994. At this point the wife confided in a friend who was also a private investigator.  Below is an account of what led to the discovery and the shock it occasioned  to the mother. 45D96CDF-454E-43AA-B5A2-85499CC7C34F

There is a lot more speculation in the transcript. From my own reading it does seem as if there was, at the very least, some awareness of the physical irregularity in the FTM. A letter is referenced which appears to show some incident occurred which was a revelation, of some sort, to the wife.  From a legal point of view   It was the facts known at the time of the marriage that were the determining factor in any claim against “matrimonial” assets. There is a clear admission that the facts were not declared.


The basis on which the “husband” was tried and the defence case are briefly summarised below 👇


Point three in the defence minimises the offence as “not so serious” and go on to imply diminished responsibility, due to the nature of the “personality disorder”.  I presume this is no longer a legitimate defence since the condition of Gender  Dysphoria has been reclassified. It is no longer, officially,  a mental health issue. More on the politics of this classification shift here:    Diagnostic Status of Gender Dysphoria          Written by a Transexual Dr Ann Lawrence.

In any event the defence failed to convince the Judge. 627825BD-7816-4A75-AAC4-C6D61E644E06AA5A3EC7-C9AE-47FE-BB5A-7F72355ED5A70BA0B0C6-5EF2-4E83-A647-A8275DBB9AF1

The judge found that perjury had been committed. The deceit had been perpetrated because the claimant had known that the marriage would not take place if their sex was acknowledged.  The 2006 case hinges on any claims for ancillary relief.  In lay terms the claimant would not, legally, be allowed to benefit from a “criminal” enterprise.   A stealth existence and need to “pass” must place intolerable pressure in those with gender Dysphoria. The  judge references this, sympathetically, but this doesn’t equate to an absence of responsibility for the deception.


However should a real psychological need take precedence over someone else’s right to make informed choices? When this is about who has access to your body? The judge deemed it a profound betrayal of trust.

95476675-389E-4109-996A-87C3A91DD0E5Now the concept of an “innate gender identity”  is treated as a medical, but not a mental health, condition much of this defence would, presumably, be moot. A genuinely held belief that you are the opposite sex doesn’t change biological reality. If someone has a Gender Recognition Certificate there are privacy laws protecting that information. They are to be treated as if they are the opposite sex. Is there any protection, other than sex by deception,  for women, or men, deceived in this way? Extreme activists would say there is no deception. They would argue they literally are the sex they say they are. That there is a deeply held conviction I can accept, that I should have to share it is the sticking point.

All mainstream political parties have mainstreamed transgender rights. Labour explicitly say they wish to review the legislation in this area. I single out Labour only because I am a lifelong Labour voter and my fear is we are throwing an election over this. 👇  I am indebted to Mumsnet for the quote below.  [The link was included but this document is no longer available to view. Hopefully this is because they are reviewing the content. Hope springs eternal: Securing Trans Equality]

“Point 14: Review the law relating to legal issues of consent to rape and sexual offences to ‘sex by deception’ in order to remove potential discrimination and criminalisation of trans/gender variant people….”

Why are this community a special case?  This suggests we are going to be legally compelled to validate “gender identity” even in our most intimate relationships. Are gay men allowed to reject trans men? Lesbians Transwomen?  Will an offence have been committed if sexual contact takes place only to be confronted with a seven inch surprise? These are real ethical and legal issues.  I have zero faith that our political elite will make the right choice.




Gender Recognition Certificates


As activists in the trans community work to remove the “onerous” burdens placed on the community to legally “transition” I became curious about  the legal cases in this area.  Far from excessive gatekeeping the act is explicitly designed to be “permissive”.  Has this permissiveness gone too far? It seems there is a low bar to be, legally, redefined as a woman. If you are not convinced have a scroll through my blogs.  If you don’t want to take my word for it, fine, I would not believe me either! In every piece I  link to the legal records.  You can bypass my commentary and go straight to the Transcript

In brief no surgery, attempted rape convictions, being incarcerated for paedophilia are no bar to claiming “womanhood”! Remember that when someone tells you they “live as a woman”.   Interrogate that phrase. Its ubiquitous and meaningless.  Can I, a white woman, say I “live as a black woman”? Nope. So why is one form of appropriation Ok and the other is racist?


Reading through these cases the  co-morbidities of mental health conditions is striking, even as they are dismissed as “co-incidental”. This has implications for treatment pathways and women’s safety.   The recurrence of the same  “experts” also shows how  “gender identity specialists” are influencing the judiciary.  The case I cover in this blog  can be read, in full, here 👉: Ms Jay October 2018


Ms Jay versus the Secretary of State was instigated  after three, unsuccessful,  applications for a Gender Recognition Certificate. Presiding was a single judge, Lord Justice Baker. This case, as the Judge points out,  was the first under new rules governing appeals against a GRC refusal.  Below is some background about the complainant.


The clip below  includes details of the short marriages, a self-reported feeling of being in the wrong gender, from puberty, and a secret history of “cross-dressing”. {Neophytes should search “autogynephelia” at this stage}

56D0738B-6226-4098-97A3-4DA8F712AE4EIn addition to marrying three times, and fathering 7 children, the appellant has a criminal history. In 2011 they were sentenced to  eight years in prison. The judge makes it clear that the appeal is not concerned with the criminal offences. Also the papers detailing the offence were not included and, moreover, that this was not relevant to the “wider public debate”.  00181E95-A7DF-4290-81F7-027218981330For the terminally curious. Here is a brief allusion to the offence so you can judge for yourself whether it is “relevant”  96BB040F-6E1C-4A9D-AAB8-5DD575F533F6


Some of the reasons the panel resisted awarding a GRC were; inconsistencies in the information supplied, the reversion to male names during  “transition” and a Gender Identity specialist  casting doubt on the  diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria. Ms Jay appears to have had more than one name change during the process and questions were raised about multiple addresses. Questions were also asked about misleading information supplied about the marriages and why redacted documents were submitted to the panel. Here we are told the applicant has lived full-time as a woman since December 2008. Yet driving licence and passport were renewed, in the male name, in 2013.  This a year after making  a statutory declaration, to a judge of their “intention to live full-time as female until death”.  (whatever living as a female means). The appellant had a name change in 2013 , whilst imprisoned, a  surname change and then another first name change in 2018. I hope someone is keeping track of all those names!  I echo the panel statement which questioned whether the applicant had something to hide!


I sympathise with a panel presented with this applicant. A person whose Gender Dysphoria remitted enough to marry three times and father seven children. Someone who manages to  suppress their femininity sufficiently to amass explosives with intent to endanger life.  ( No! I hear your outrage. You are right. Women can also amass explosives with homicidal intent. Must learn to Lean In….Bad Feminist!)  Naturally, because of the name changes, I have found it impossible to trace the background to those offences. I can’t shed any light on the womanly way in which the crime was committed.  I am actually not clear whether tracing this history is even possible if a GRC holder does not reveal  past identities. It might even be an offence for me to try!

Warning!  Tone Switch..

Having justifiable concerns about the impact of these decisions, on women,  does not necessitate abandoning my humanity.  The clip below paints a sad picture of the claimant.  Nobody deserves to be vulnerable to sexual assault and I do wonder whether anyone is joining the dots between maladaptive coping mechanisms and prisoners undergoing transition.  However I would also love to hear from the trans-widows in this case. Those women are the really brave and stunning ones in all of these tales. They may tell a very different tale. 2F28F8FD-2106-45E7-97DB-507008963A49

The first application to the Gender Recognition panel appears to have commenced from within prison.  The medical evidence  submitted is from Dr James Barrett, a regular expert witness in these cases. He is generally very sympathetic to  Transgender Appellant’s.  His statement and comments are worth quoting in full. The history presented by the appellant is disputed and a concern focus on transition may be misdirected. A long history of psychiatric problems is noted. When even Dr Barrett thinks its a bad idea….its probably a bad idea!


The prisoner is released in March 2015 and finds a new doctor. Unfortunately the release didn’t last long and they were recalled to prison in less than 3 months, Here a new doctor appears on the scene.  Dr Helen Webberley. Interestingly the panel note that they had not previously heard of Dr Webberley, in this field, which shows how recently they d£cid£d to cash in…oops I mean support such a vulnerable community:

29E1B514-D911-46AF-A6AB-6A3C75B641BAThe relationship with Webberley doesnt seem to persist and another doctor appears.  The next Doctor issues a report which is submitted, in redacted form, the the Gender Recognition Panel. This doctor again refers to Ms Jay’s personality disorder and maladaptive coping mechanisms but does diagnose Gender Dysphoria. The diagnosis leads to the recommended treatment (gender reassignment) to resolve the psychiatric issues.  Nobody  asks whether craving Gender  Reassignment is  another maladaptive coping mechanism. That would be transphobic, just in case  any of you are thinking that now!  Gender Dysphoria has been rebranded as an “identity” not a mental health issue, it’s now a slur to suggest this. As an aside this expert also recommends consideration is given to moving the prisoner to the female prison estate. In March 2016 the application for a GRC was turned down.   The doctor disappears from the case.

The prisoner is once again released in May 2016. Within 3 months he has found another doctor who provides this evidence Pay attention to the dates and the extensive treatment the patient has, we are told,  undertaken in three short months. ( As an aside Dr Pasterski appears in other cases I cover & most notably opposed a Local Education Authority when it raised concerns about 3 unrelated “trans kids” in a foster family).


At this point the claimant becomes frustrated with the panel who have requested more clarification.  The claim “I have always been female” would seem to write three wives and 7 children out of history! 563B71A2-FCA2-4D20-841A-81EFDF8C68A7In August 2017 the Gender Recognition Panel again turned down the application. They expressed doubt about the credibility of the supporting evidence and , in particular that of Dr Pasteracki. They cast doubt on evidence supplied by the claimant.

Inconsistent, unclear, vague, evasive. Nothing to see here

Some awareness of the condition of Autogynephilia, in the Transexual Community  would help the Judge here. Those who fit the profile for autogynephilia have a condition rooted in shame. Sufferers  tend to be steeped in denial. Here is a quote from  a Gender Identity Specialist:

The Man Who Would Be Queen: Michael Bailey.

We have seen this in an earlier case I covered  GRC from Prison.  In that case a male claimed to be homosexual, his attempted rape was minimised on that basis. Yet, since leaving prison, they now self-identify as a lesbian.

Back to this case. In November 2017 the prisoner was again recalled to prison. The judge noted that the claimant was still in prison at the time of the hearing.

Thereafter yet another doctor enters the fray!  As the claimant is detained at her Majesty’s pleasure it is not clear how any assessments were carried out.  This one is in Sheffield.   Can’t change the opinion so change the Doctor!


Now we get to the aim of the court case. It turns out they there is provision for a GRC to be issued by this one judge who can bypass the Gender Recognition Panel. 31988799-F7C6-4427-9E0A-A5B5095187B1The advocate for the claimant also shares this interesting nugget about GRC applications. Less than  5% are refused its designed to be “permissive not restrictive”.  766AD49B-81F0-439C-BF8F-7BDFA2AADA35 You have to admire the fancy footwork of the Legal team.   Ms McCann that the prisoner met the legal standard and that this Judge had the authority to  award the Gender Recognition Certificate himself.   Is it possible that some Judges are a tad vain and like to set precedents?  Does the advocate absolutely know this fact about male vanity? [Strike that: Snarky opinion! My bad]

Ms McCann reminds of that many of these decisions emanate from the  European Court of Human Rights. (If we Brexit do we lose Sexit? Sobering thought for a remainer such as myself!)

The right to self-determination includes “gender identification”.  Laywoman opinion: Your right to self-determination is not absolute. If it denies me the personal autonomy to recognise and relate to someone as the sex they are!

3C37B854-994F-46EE-B1FF-2F6A73CA3835To demand that I accede to your self-identity which may contradict my sex recognition skills springs from a totalitarian impulse. Chances are I will see your sex and if you walk behind me, late at night, I will react accordingly.

Furthermore can a person be “master” of his “ethnicity” as per the extract below? If I am objectively black can I identify out of racism? As a woman can I identify out of sexism?



To cut a long story short the Judge was persuaded by these arguments.  He recognises that he is sitting alone, without assistance from a medical member of the panel but, in a Brave and Stunning decision, he decides to confer a Gender Recognition Certificate on Ms Jay, assuming that is still her name.   83E94CD1-4EA7-477D-B7AF-86ECC155A790

For those of you following this discussion just a reminder not to mention the elephant’s trunk in the room.  That would just be rude.

B8C6DD95-9648-494D-81E3-9FB1D3ACBEE3I will leave you with this question.   In making these determinations the Judge has to have regard to the individual’s Human Rights but also the wider rights of the Community.  Are we well served?


Legal Case: Marriage


This case is from 2003. It concerns a post-operative transsexual who had managed to go through a marriage ceremony, prior to  the legalisation of same sex marriages.  There were no issues of consent here. Both parties were aware of the sex of the “wife”.  The registrar, however, was not made aware.

There were earlier cases, involving this couple,  and this went to an appeal. Of all the cases I have read this one seems to have a better grip on the implications of the legal judgement.  It is a very comprehensive case and, based on my previous cases, this one has a much better understanding of the issues at stake.  You can read the original case here Bellinger 2001  Lords judgement is here : Bellinger

It’s worth noting that if same sex marriage had been legal this case may not have  been brought. I have,however, no insight into whether this was a trans-activist’s  test case, or just an ordinary person trying to regularise their relationship.  {A significant issue in the enactment of laws in this area. A lot has been achieved, by stealth.  Laws have been passed that turn out to  have much wider implications, particularly for women’s rights, than is apparent at the outset. Always bear this in mind when law makers tell us they wish to make an innocuous change to any law impacting women}. 

This case examines, in some detail, whether or not it is possible to literally change sex. Spoiler Alert: It is not.  In 2019 this statement is controversial.  Back in 2003  it had to be clearly established in the context of a country that did not have legal provision for same sex marriage. 3ED30511-C21B-49BF-BBE4-BE96321D656D

The parties to the marriage were, as far as the evidence presented, both aware of the sex of their prospective spouse. There is no suggestion of any fraud perpetrated on the husband.


The case makes it clear that Mrs Bellinger was a biological male. In every sense. There is no confusion even the XY karyotype test is evidenced. There is some evidence presented that relies on the notion of a mismatch between biological sex and “brain sex”. This is the often cited notion that a female brain may be, wrongly, present in a biological male. A highly speculative claim. 👇


As is made clear this assertion remains “speculative” and indeed it is a significant area of contention, relying on the regressive notion of #LadyBrain.  There are studies that show similarities in the brains of homosexual males and females.  One theory is that this is due to “neuro-plasticity” and that the brain responds to commonality of experiences, when navigating the world as a woman or a “feminine” gay male.  There is no definitive answer but any study that does not control for homosexuality, in transgender subjects, is flawed.  Certainly if it was settled science then, presumably,  an MRI would be the standard diagnostic criteria, for transsexuals,  not a psychiatric assessment. You can read more research here: Lady Brain

The striking thing about this case is the amount of time spent on establishing biological reality, without which the court could not invalidate the marriage.  In a pre-gay marriage era there may also have been an intention to make sure same sex marriage was not allowed in, by the back door. {This seemed  to be  a feature of the debates about the Gender Recognition Act in the U.K.  Here is a thread on the UK debate by @HairyLeggedHarpy   UK GRA Parliamentary Debate }.The gender identity arguments were subject to, relatively, rigorous scrutiny. Certainly the analysis, in this case, is more extensive than we have seen in  English Law, and policy, especially post the (2004) Gender Recognition Act.

Another prevalent feature of this case is the willingness to debunk the conflation of intersex with “trans” this excerpt makes it clear that a distinction must be made. 48BFCBA4-8C76-4307-9E94-C52B34D33599Key  intersex  advocates are keen to highlight that disorders of sexual development are not an “identity” and have no place in the Transgender “debate”. People who are intersex , sufferers of disorders of sexual development (DSDs),  do not have a transgender “identity”. They have a medical condition that, for some, can be quite distressing. This case makes a clear distinction; which activists have tried to blur for political reasons  You can read more about this here, by Claire Graham, who writes from her own experience.  There is no I in LGBT

The case also makes it clear that a literal sex change is an impossibility. All of these facts are now casually disregarded by many trans lobbyists.


The case also recognised that transvestites are distinct from transsexuals.  Transvestites are now included under Stonewall’s Transgender umbrella. My own council allows cross-dressers to, formally, register, with a gender identity, in respect of all council amenities.  (I did this myself, on-line, to register my part-time cross-dressing self: Patrick). Stonewall definition of Trans below 👇A909AC1C-DD59-49D5-8A3C-70D302DC0703

The sexual gratification that some men gain from cross-dressing is explicitly addressed here: CEC6ADB7-E78B-46D9-8522-0ED58DF78584

A cursory review of literature on paraphilias should have alerted our naïve political class that at least some, cross-dressing men, are fetishists.  Not only are they sexually aroused, by dressing in “female” clothes, this gratification can be heightened in female only spaces.  Breaching women’s boundaries can form part of the fetish and  our politicians have just validated the perpetrators as a “gender identity”.  Note that the aim is to validate “Gender Identity” in law.  This is the policy of all the major political parties in the UK.  These self same males are already being granted access to women’s spaces, which forces women to  be, unwilling, participants in a male paraphilia.   Yes they are distinct from many, maybe even most, covered by the trans umbrella, but women have zero way to determine which males will do us harm.  This is why single sex spaces exist.  Not because of “all men” but to strategically reduce the risk by giving women respite from “men” to exclude “those men”. 6F8EAE8D-9FB9-428F-8C9E-5F3248F87282

In an irony, not lost on me, older transsexuals, who have been quietly using women’s spaces, now feel driven out by the excessive demands of trans activists.  I don’t see how we can row back from this. In an exchange, with one of those transsexuals, replete with black humour, we reached common ground when we agreed we would both end up in the male toilets cos all the predatory males would end up in the women’s! I take no pleasure in the impact on the homosexual transsexuals with whom I interact.   That is the tragedy of the “woke” trans allies.  They have hurt, not only women, but the community they purport to serve.  I won’t be the only woman who never gave this a second thought until the Trans Activists/Male Rights Activists made me look, in more depth, at what lay under the Trans Umbrella.  I had idea of the many paraphilias that co-exist in the wider T community. Autogynephilia , menophiliacs, shemales, sissyporn, etc etc.  I no idea that post-op transsexuals may be heterosexual and fetishise women’s lives, bodies and spaces.  Once seen it can’t be unseen.  Woke Blokes made me look. I have lost my innocence.

Put simply, when transgressing women’s boundaries is a known male paraphilia there is a real risk in enshrining legal rights to access female only spaces.  Sexual paraphilias are pretty much 100% male. Our political class are wilfully blind,woefully naïve or complicit.

Sandy Draws Badly

Another aspect of this case which is worth mentioning is the compassion shown by the Judge to , on the face of it, a couple in difficult circumstances. The judge has obviously done due diligence on the nature of “gender dysphoria” and that, for some people, therapeutic resolution of an identity disorder can be  unsuccessful.D89D9331-B7D9-431A-9C26-C6F93273372AHe is right to show such compassion.  However kindness does not override the need to make legislation that is workable and, crucially,  doesn’t dismantle protections for another vulnerable group.  The judge does go on to raise the difficult judgements this would lead the law to make. Here he asks the burning question now dividing opinion in the UK. “Should self-perceived gender be recognised”. 


Would that our current law makers were as well informed as this judge. Already he notes the varying degrees of surgery in the Transsexual community and the spectre of a male bodied person being redefined as a “woman” ; as is now the case in U.K. and Irish Law.

701B7DA0-DDDB-4F14-B795-702CCD44B7D4I suspect this would have been dismissed as the “slippery slope” argument.  Well its not a slippery slope now. We are skiing down the slope like Eddie The Eagle without his glasses.  (I do hope I got the pronouns correct).  Yet here we are.  Male bodied people i.e. men, are identifying as women and housed in female prisons and, we now know, allowed to demand to be on female wards in our hospitals. NHS policy on Single Sex Wards

The above NHS policy, published September 2019,  contains this delicious nugget below 👇making it quite clear that sexual characteristics have absolutely no bearing on who ends up in which “single sex” ward.  This is where we have ended up by trying to accommodate a tiny percentage of the population.  It is a wholesale disregard of female people. We are so utterly dismissed by the society we live in as if we have no embodied reality.  Well this Uturus-Haver has had enough!


As the above shows a definition of what “sex” means has much wider ramifications than on the small minority who are “Transsexual” .  The legal case made it clear that such a significant change requires just the sort of societal debate we are now being denied in the U.K. The slogan used, by Trans advocates, #NoDebate was one of the earlier warnings that a debate was exactly what was needed.  The “widest possible public consultation and discussion” the judge called for has in fact been suppressed. I can think of no other reason for this silencing except that it is known that the wider public will NOT agree with this redefinition of what it means to be a woman.   1C9B5B6E-FD90-465E-BD22-4FF14C0824B9In the end the Lords  ruled against the appellant. Parliament were just about to legislate for Gender Recognition to be decided, in law. Sadly they seem now to have disregarded this  astute advice. “Self-definition is not acceptable. That would make nonsense of the underlying biological basis of the distinction”.  In practice the policy capture is so widespread that single sex spaces are not being protected because the law, which allows this, is not being invoked.  Remember this when you see organisations lying about the law. Women’s Legal Rights to Single Sex Spaces.

618CAE41-44C6-40D7-AA1F-94C0D921D435Whether or not sexual reassignment surgery will, eventually, be deemed the wrong “treatment” the fact remains that society has colluded in the development of a “transsexual” community. Society now needs to resolve how they are accommodated.  Gender Reassignment also needs a more critical evaluation. Is it a mechanism to sidestep the central issue: Why are so many men are in flight from masculinity? Why are males so threatened by feminine men? Why are we allowing men trapped in male bodies to redefine what it is to be a woman? These are big questions and few of our media are covering in any meaningful way.

There are a whole different set of questions for the females in flight from womanhood. It seems clear many are simply Lesbians. Others, now de-transitioned, say they had untreated eating disorders, a history of sexual abuse or were in flight from a society that hyper-sexualises women.  The Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist slur (Terf) is inaccurate. Trans men remain under the female umbrella, though many “Transmen” will , ideologically reject this. They are still deserving of our support. They still need protection from sexual discrimination and share the vulnerability to male violence common to our sex.

Trans identified males remain of the male sex. The answer, as I have said many, many, times is not to make transsexual males  a “woman problem”. Refugees from masculinity (to quote Miranda Yardley) exist.  They are a problem for males.  It is not women’s job to place ourselves at risk and run the refugee camps.  Once again the blame for this lies squarely  the door of the activists who have stretched women’s tolerance to breaking point.  Female socialisation conditions women to compassionate responses but we are not bound to place male people’s interests above those of our sex.




The Elephant in the room.


Another legal case.  (I should, perhaps, dedicate this to the man on my twitter who told me to actually READ up on the law. Bless. 😂).

This one is one of multiple  legal cases, brought by the same person,  to demand  the NHS fund what is referred to as “breast augmentation”.   Full case here: Breast Dysphoria

Naturally, or unnaturally, if you wish,  we start with the pronoun police. Even though the person has not applied for a Gender Recognition Certificate and is therefore NOT considered legally female.


This is not the first case that this individual has brought. 👇. Note, also, that the Equality & Human Rights Commission (EHRC) are involved. (If anyone can find me a case of the EHRC fighting for, post mastectomy, breast reconstruction, as a Human Rights Issue, do let me know.  If they have advocated for this I would like to include). 

AB1A277B-3C01-4FD6-916E-B4AA516F560DBefore we get into the complainants distress about lack of breast growth the NHS does offer genital reassignment surgery (GRS/SRS) for the condition of Gender Identity Disorder. This is because it has been accepted that Gender Dysphoria, in fe/males, presents as an extreme discomfort with reminders of your biological sex. The PCT make the treatment they will fund abundantly clear. The Complainant has not sought any genital surgery.

92157DE9-609D-4D14-A19B-C310A9E18693So let’s just take a moment here. This person has been diagnosed as “Transexual” since 1996. It’s now over a decade later and, despite Gender Dysphoria, the offer of genital reassignment surgery, has not been taken up.  One would have thought the most male thing about a man was his penis and yet, instead of pursuing this,  we have multiple court cases to get “breasts”! B8C6DD95-9648-494D-81E3-9FB1D3ACBEE3

Here is a reminder that , an estimated, 80% of males, who declare themselves women, retain their penis Here is a piece by Fairplay For women: Penis Retention in MTF 

Here is a piece by Gendered Intelligence that also estimates only 20% will, in future, seek any medical intervention: Gendered Intelligence

The general public have no idea of the phenomenon of #Shemales: Men who retain their penis but wish to be treated as “women”.   There are porn genres dedicated to this and prostituted  males who make a living with their “six inch surprise”.  Something the Guardian forgot to mention when campaigning for one such “sex worker” to be moved to the female prison estate.  Tara Hudson


Back to the case.  Once again Dr James Barrett is our expert witness he crops  up so often in these cases.  {As an aside One of the central problems with the development of policy and law making, in this field,  is that the “experts” are all ideologues treated as neutral experts.} .

Here we are told, at length about the distress caused by small breast growth.


The statements below talk of the limited evidence for “clinical effectiveness” of reassignment surgery.  Why are we even doing sexual reassignment surgery if this is what the literature is telling us? Why are we  advocating for earlier, and more extreme, interventions for Gender Dysphoric adolescents/young adults?C762CC0A-193A-4DE5-BACC-F6D6A86C1B0D936DA941-FEF1-4A26-9FE5-BE407E978298

Limited evidence that SRS is effective or cost-effective yet the NHS is mandated to provide it. Here is a list of all the procedures the NHS no longer cover that impact the female sex 👇577669FB-1E35-49A3-8088-93EB402A86F0

Back to the breasts.  The legal arguments then compare the case of a “natal” woman who was funded for breast augmentation surgery.  A case is made that her distress was at the extreme end of the spectrum, though the case alludes to dissenting voices about the decision. We then move on to the arguments in respect of legal comparators, essentially whether a transsexual can be compared to a “natal” woman. This is where it gets interesting.  Turns out the mantra ” Transwomen are women”  has its limits.

The case, advanced by the EHRC, hinges on whether a refusal of implants to a transsexual fails to take into account the suffering  of Gender Dysphoria.  A born woman would not suffer from this but a “transsexual” would. The logic of this argument is that the NHS would be required to provide surgery to a transsexual but  legitimately able to deny it to biological females.  One would be clinical and the other “cosmetic”.    A male, complete with a penis, would be entitled to surgery to provide them with breast implants but a woman could be denied. This is an argument advanced by Human Rights barristers!

Details of the argument are below.  Note that women are no longer  “natal women” we are now “non-transsexuals”.  Note also that Trans women are just like women unless differentiating leads to priority treatment.


Whilst I am reading this I am constantly waiting for someone to mention the elephant in the room.  If the Gender Dysphoria is so bad why is the penis retained? Wouldn’t a penis be the most dysphoria triggering aspect of your male body?  Nope.  Nobody is mentioning it. Maybe it will be in the follow up case.  Yep. There was another one. This case was dismissed but, undeterred, our plucky heroine returns once again into the fray. Here is the  Appeal

First we hear from the appellant in their own words:BD6EE931-BE8C-4DAA-9F37-902CCD8BC49D

Access to medicalisation which destroys sexual function is now a human rights issue?

The really interesting part of this case is the legal acrobatics required to redefine men as women and simultaneously argue that they should not be treated as women in the case of “cosmetic surgery“.  Essentially prioritising men’s rights to larger breasts over women’s rights to enhance their female anatomy.  (Remember that post-mastectomy breast construction is not routinely funded).


The latest case was dismissed by all three judges.  Despite this the EHRC still use this as an example  here 👉 Accessed 28th September Still arguing that a male is at a greater disadvantage in feeling  “less feminine” than a woman.  Health authorities have to justify failure to provide breast augmentation to a male which only may be justified.  Human rights organisations are now Men’s Rights Advocates.


I am principally concerned with the impact on women’s rights.  I do, however, think the medical profession, working in this field,  are ethically compromised.  I have no way of discerning if this claimant is being treated appropriately for any other competing mental health conditions.   There must be a duty of care for all of humanity, including males who wish they were not so. We will look back at this medicalisation of Gender Dysphoric males, on this scale, as an atrocity.  The impact on women’s rights to be recognised as a material reality, and retain sex based rights, is calamitous.  Single sex spaces are necessary for privacy, dignity and safety.  The general public have no idea that our naïve politicians have accepted #LadyPenis as a normal part of womanhood.

The re-definition of “woman” proceeds apace. The silence from pretty much all of our Feminist MPs is deafening.





As part of my trawl through legal cases I came across this one. Jersey: Suspended taxi licence.

The case was heard in Jersey and hinged on the case of a taxi driver whose licence was suspended following an altercation with a customer.  The driver took the taxi firm  to court  to claim the suspension should never have been imposed. One of the grounds, for the claim, was that that it was motivated by discrimination on the grounds of gender reassignment.

D78951D0-4A8C-43F3-8EBE-961463F50863This is the not the only  case involving this  appellant an earlier case  was also brought  because the driver felt the suspension was motivated by discrimination Earlier case.

The appellant seems to be a serial litigator.  Here is another case taken against the taxi firm where the claim was of employment discrimination, once again, on the grounds of their Gender Reassignment. Employment Tribunal.   (The taxi firm was a  not for profit collective where the owner seems to have assumed personal risk. As an aside, a model of taxi ownership I have often thought was the ideal model. Now gone out of business).

The  cases all centred on a suspension imposed in response to an incident involving a customer. This was the incident:

7F1F512E-D013-4E40-ACF3-EEB0D23E94CEThe complainant raised a few other issues related to how the other taxi drivers treated them. Also  mis-gendering was an offence that even occurred a bit closer to home: 491148DB-5529-4C9C-B696-5D933057B557The court took a dim view of the appellant, who abandoned the passengers late at night,  and made it clear the case succeeded on procedural grounds and not because their behaviour was acceptable.  It also makes clear this was followed by abusive emails and phone calls to the regulatory body.


Compelled Speech:

The judgement did go on, see below, to suggest  some re-education for colleagues. I would suggest that a better approach is to stop pretending that it is literally possible to change sex. People who head down this path need to have some reality based therapy.  Clearly there are individuals whose mental fragility is a factor in this diagnosis. Mis-gendering, as we can see,  is likely to trigger Narcissistic rage. However a systemic, legally compelled, or even morally mandated, truth denialism is a dangerous state of affairs.

{Not least for the trans community itself because sex matters for some diagnostic and treatment purposes. I would also like to see more long term tracking of health issues in the trans community looking at the long term impact of a lifetimes dependence on cross-sex hormones}. 

Here is the advice to the taxi firm:


It is the thought police which will eventually make this ideology founder.  Like many people I was formerly willing to extend the courtesy of desired “pronouns”. The political cost, however, is too high. I will not be legally compelled to do so. Maintaining a polite fiction is not the same as being coerced to deny reality.  The, increasingly, authoritarian demands to accommodate this ideology are unsustainable. It is not about kindness it is about power.  The power to compel women to deny the evidence of our own eyes.  Of course it is also imposed on men but women have a specific need to recognise males. We need  to be able to react and mitigate the risk males present to females. We can’t afford to let down our guard. And yes, I know….not all men…some of my best friends and all that…0BAA8CC0-B3D6-40D7-A901-05E446534177

Read this piece by a Mumsnetter… {The radicalisation portal that TRA’s love to hate}. It costs us way more than mere kindness : Pronouns are rohypnol.

Already a male teacher has lost his job because he refused to use mandated pronouns, for a female pupil who identified as male.  He steered a careful course and opted to accept the new name. This  was deemed insufficient adherence to the trans dogma. Only total capitulation is enough.  Ironically during the ensuing court case the man charged with sacking him also “mis-gendered” the pupil. 4A0BED2B-9B53-475F-AD2D-EA1C8127FB56

Couldn’t happen in the UK though could it?  Police called on Teacher


Our children are being indoctrinated in school to adhere to the preferred pronouns of their peers.  My own son admonished me for misgendering until I pointed out that I will NEVER accept the phrase “her penis” for a  male rapist.  Son has a dysphoric female in his school and uses preferred pronouns, as per school policy.  I asked him “Do you believe it?”. No, he agreed, “but I always call her “him” if she can hear me”.  The linguistic contortions alone are mind boggling.  This is what happens  when the authorities teach you that 2+2=5.  (On a more positive note he has come out full gender critical in recent weeks. With much thanks to Sam Smith and his non-binariness).

We are teaching our children to tell a blatant lie.  We are compelling women to accept female pronouns for rapists.  Our newspapers are using female pronouns for men who exhibit male violence.  Organisations are perpetrating biology denialism by purging the word woman to reduce us to biological functions/parts.  Check out “menstruator”, “cervix-haver”.  Then do the same exercise for men.  They are NOT being referred to as “prostate-havers”!

This is ideological totalism and it will destroy women’s rights without a significant fightback.   If you can’t see sex you can’t see sexism. If validating your identity means  invalidating my sex then…



Ministry of Justice: Updated Policy on caring for Transgender Prisoners.


This policy was revised and updated and published in August 2019. You can read the full policy 👉   Here  

This was revised after more than one high profile case of male rapists operating in the female estate.  There is no explicit reference to the cases, in the policy, though they do include  a warning about staff leaking information to the media.

A new policy is due to be published 31st October 2019 so I will revisit to note the amendments made.   I have also emailed the Ministry of Justice to ask if there is a specific policy on the care of female prisoners.  I have also asked  what protocols are in place for a female prisoner who is moved to the male estate, because they are deemed too dangerous for the women’s facilities.


The policy exposes how far  the, legally protected, characteristic of sex has been eroded, by allowing anyone, regardless of biology, to declare they are a woman. The prison system is illustrative of just how far Gender Identity ideology is  embedded within our legislature and enshrined in public policy.

Below is a quote 👇 from James Morton, of the Scottish Trans Alliance, which shows that Female prisoners are the subjects of a  dangerous laboratory experiment.  James is listed as an author of the Scottish Prisons Policy which deals with Transgender Prisoners. As James is a lobbyist for Trans Rights there is only one group at the forefront of the policy.  Spoiler.  Its not Women.

‘We strategized – we strategized – that by working intensively with the Scottish Prison Service to support them to include trans women as women on a self-declaration basis within very challenging circumstances, we would be able to ensure that all other public services should be able to do likewise’.

The above quote  is illustrative of a complete disregard for the female prison population;  one of the most vulnerable groups in our society.  Domestic violence refuges, rape crisis centres and female prisons do seem to figure prominently in the targeted locations. Captive females are being targeted  for this new branch of Men’s rights activism.

The new MOJ policy starts out well.  At least it recognises  the need for balance between the protected characteristic of “sex” and “Gender Reassignment”. Specifically they refer to women’s prisons not, you will notice, men’s prisons.  They know any conflict impacts women. 

2FBB9A9F-6848-4764-ABCF-1870288BFD13The important legal issue here is that someone who has a Gender Recognition Certificate, is deemed to be “legally” of the opposite sex. Thus a Male to Female Transexual (MTF) or a Female to Male (FTM) is  deemed to be legally a woman/man, respectively. (Note: This does NOT mean that only post-operative transsexuals are able to be legally declared as the opposite sex. Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) have already been issued to male-bodied people).

The policy also includes this quote: F6F6AEC5-DC2C-4FC0-A7B7-60CD3608C1C3Unbeknown to, I would guess, 99% of women, the UK legal system has endorsed the idea of #LadyPenis.  Not one single women I have told about this, in real life, had any idea the state has declared that a male, complete with penis, can be legally defined as a woman. Once I had overcome their disbelief, they were, to a woman,  horrified. This is not a grass roots movement, its top down, elite led, and mandated by a political class who have been lobbied into submission. Crucially those who enact the law, and draft the guidance, will not be on the front line. They will not be tasked with enforcing the policy, in real life, or on the receiving end when, inevitably, it places women and children at risk.

The  Prisons policy has to operate on the basis of the law. The interpretation of the law is such that  a person who holds a GRC is , legally, woman/man and to be housed according to their “legal gender”.  (A lot of the debate uses Gender & Sex interchangeably. This is no accident. It obfuscates. Whenever you are reassured by a policy. Stop. Ask how they are defining gender, sex and woman. )AE657A7F-14E8-4BA1-A8CE-C4FA512B58BF

*A CCB is a Complex Case Board.

Since there are less than 5000 GRCs granted (last time I checked) this, on the surface, restricts the numbers.  However later in the policy it appears this is not quite so clear cut:


This begs the question just what evidence is considered sufficient to define “gender” when legal sex cannot be easily determined?  Apparently staff can ask the prisoner’s permission to see a Gender Recognition Certificate or evidence that an application has been made.  However, the prisoner is not obliged to supply this information and can withhold it.  The policy also makes it clear that no search can be conducted to determine the sexual characteristics of the prisoner. This prisoner who does not produce  a GRC, or new birth certificate, will not have met the threshold for “full supporting confirmation” of their legal gender”.  The prison can, however, accept “strong supporting confirmation”. This turns out to be as follows:

86B34078-2767-4035-9B2C-F7EB1CD27C90The first and last categories are documents available to anyone on a “self-declared” basis.  Again how can one evidence “living as a woman”? Would we accept “living as a black man” or would we immediately see how offensive this is?  The middle one “appearance and mannerisms” postulates women as nothing more than mannequins. This  is grossly offensive to actual women but capitulates to wannabe women who think make-up maketh the woman.

Another interesting point made in the policy is the record keeping.  Any prisoner who is deemed to meet this very superficial set of criteria will be recorded as such.

BF37A69B-DE18-4946-8AE9-4B76E8CBFCB9Are crimes committed by men, who identify as women, recorded as male or female? If so how many self-identified women incarcerated are sex offenders? Do we have any way of tracking the risk these males present to the women inside, and outside, the prison?  I have more questions than answers. When we start to have a “puzzlng” increase in “female” sex offenders this will surely distort “evidence” based policy.  Risk assessments on the impact of male violence against women need accurate data. Individual women risk assess when in proximity to males. This is a survival strategy. Policy makers should ensure they have the data to do this on a macro scale.  Since we know there are significant sex based differentials in offence patterns eradicating records based on sex is a risky strategy.

I would also love to know why transgender status has any bearing on sentencing? See the excerpt below ⇓2F0677AE-E22E-45C5-A4A3-6FAF4018EEE0

Is Transgender status being treated as a mitigating factor?  I have seen articles where the judge has allowed an offender to walk free rather than subject them to  custodial sentence. Explicitly stating it was deemed to be  more onerous for a Trans prisoner. Here is one case in which the Judge does not impose a custodial sentence because the Sexual Offender Treatment Programmes are not geared to the Trans-community (which is true but letting the sex offender walk is no solution) : Transgender Sex Offender walks free

Writing such a policy would be challenging in the legal context even if undertaken by skeptical parties. Some of the framing is downright dishonest when contextualised to  female  offences against males and vice versa. Here we have exactly the same phraseology for the location of MTF and FTM.


It must require a suspension of disbelief to write the second paragraph knowing full well a female, regardless of identity, is much more likely to be at risk not presenting a risk to  male prisoners.

A significant feature of the trans community is the need to be validated in the sex you wish you were born in.  Where a MTF demands that validation it can impacts on women’s safety by an obsessive need to be included in female spaces.  The more intimate the more validating.  For a female, with a male identity, this same need places them at risk.  Yet the law dictates this:


I reported on another trans-identifying female earlier in this series who was sectioned in lieu of  being imprisoned. Inevitably they were the target of sexual “advances” when incarcerated, at their request, in the male estate.  FTM Legal Case

I also quote Frances Crook of the Howard League in the above case: 👇69F26840-7F7C-46AA-9A00-51C128807FF5

There are 80,000 male prisoners and 3000 female prisoners.  Men imprisoned for sexual offences are at 19% in the male estate.  Of the MTFs, held in the female estate,  41% are in for sexual offences. ↓


Either we have a higher pattern of sexual offences within the Trans umbrella or we have a problem of opportunistic men gaming the system. The outcome for the women is the same whichever the motivation.

The above is from an article in the Spectator. (*The 0.04% figure is open to question as 128 out of the total female population is actually 4%. It is not known if this is because there are males , legally counted as female, in these figures). 

Read more here:

MOJ confirm Fair Play for Women’s work on Transgender Prisoners

All of the above confirms, to me, that the Prison service should revert to the original policy of housing female prisoner’s separately, from males,  and set up special accommodation for trans prisoners where deemed unsafe in the prison of their birth sex.


I have omitted many aspects of this report. The self-reported “intersex” offenders does not stand up to any scrutiny.  Given the low incidence of Disorders of Sexual Development in the wider population it beggars belief that 7 out of 80 say they are “intersex. Once again it is deeply offensive to allow a medical condition to be claimed as an “identity”. Trans-activists have long co-opted this community to serve their own aims and Claire Graham covers this topic here :Intersex & LGBT

I also have not spent a huge amount of time on the how hamstrung the front line staff are. They can’t make a prisoner disclose their sex. They can’t conduct a search with the purpose of identifying the sex of their prisoner. They can’t use blood tests to determine if a prisoner is on a regime of hormones. They can’t tell female prisoners if they have a male incarcerated with them. For MTFs it is rare for non-celebrities to have  what is called “passing privilege”  so I imagine it is perfectly obvious to the women. Yet the prison officers commit a criminal offence if they share that information. The prisoner has the right to demand to be searched by someone of the same “”gender” so  female staff are also being disregarded.

Quite rightly the prison service is concerned that MTF Transgender people are at risk in the male estate.  What jars is that this risk is explicitly acknowledged and care taken to protect a “transwomen” in the male estate.  By contrast women in the female estate are not even allowed to know a male is housed within their estate.

Once again it is abundantly clear that the authorities have simply not consulted or listened to women.  We are here. We are raising our voices. This is NOT ok.



FTM Transgender: Legal Case


As part of my work looking at legal cases involving Transgender Individuals , with a particular focus on those incarcerated, I came across this case of a female.  The claimant is a Transgender Female who identifies as male. The case seems to have been brought because there was a belief that the clinicians were not proceeding to medicalise the Gender Identity at an appropriate speed.  Ruth Hunt {Then Stonewall CEO)  and Stephen Whittle {Transactivist key player in legislative change} gave statements. Full legal transcript of the case available here:

FTM Incarcerated 

The prisoner was convicted of the grievous bodily harm of a 12 year old boy and a further offence against a female partner.  They also have a plethora of complex mental health needs. As set out below:


The Claimant now identifies as a “Transman” and has a number of “male pattern” offences to her name.  All of these things alienate support from women, looking out for females, in the judicial system.  As a FTM help from radical feminists, who reject “gender identity” politics,  will likely be rejected. As I read this case it shows that, whether they know it or not, they need their sex based rights even if they reject them.

Following their conviction the claimant was sectioned under the Mental Health Act and, in 2010, was diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria.


Unusually the claimant has asked to be housed according to their “self-identified” gender.  Reading the case this seems to be prior to any treatment for the Gender Identity issues. I assumed that females would always prefer to be housed with other females, or at least not with men.  I think this is probably, largely the case, but , at least theoretically, not all FTMs.

Here are a few quotes from  a Reddit thread where females, who identify other than their sex, discuss whether they wish to be located in the male estate, in the event of incarceration. Here’s a sample of responses. Some replies are more reality based than others!


Clearly this person committed serious criminal offences and was remanded in a secure mental health placement in recognition of significant co-morbidities. The existence of competing psychological issues is a recurring theme in these legal cases.

Given the significant co-morbidities It does beg the question as to why, with significant mental health issues, the claimant’s request to be housed with male offenders was accepted.  Why were they deemed “competent” to make such a decision? Why were they not protected from themself?


Once housed in the male adult service, there was a predictable outcome: Male residents (plural) had made sexual advances to “him”.


I have searched in vain for a clear statement that *any* transman has been incarcerated in the male (prison) estate.  Here are a couple of  mumsnet discussions on this topic which seems to have reached the same conclusion: like me they have been unable to locate any.

Transmen and prison location

This is important because if you look at policies re Transgender prisoners they seem to have forgotten all we know about which sex commits sexual offences (Males: 98% of the time) and who form the larger part of their victims. (Women). I think the reason this is so difficult to articulate, in policy documents, is that there is a clear conflict between “sex” and “gender identity”. Any talk of women, as a sex class, immediately denies “gender identity” . Invariably the ones who are being centred here in this dialogue are not the females, however they identify,  but the men who want to be women.

Females housed with males are at risk. And make no mistake, we are not just talking about post-operative transsexuals here.  Gender Recognition certificates have been given to attempted rapists, with their penis intact, as far back as 2006. The GRC does not mean men are required to be  surgically disarmed before being allowed to be defined as “legally female” . With or without “transition” we are expected to accept males, as a risk free presence,  in women’s spaces.  {Though, to be clear, as far as I am concerned, the defining characteristic is “sex” and women should be housed with biological women only}. 

Frances Crook of the Howard League (campaigning organisation for Prison Reform) sets out what our politicians are refusing to acknowledge.  There is a difference between the sexes, in terms of risk.  Unlike our cowardly political elite she dares say out loud,  what they surely know:


For more on this topic its well worth reading Richard Garside. Consistently good on the issue of the protecting the rights of female prisoners: Transgender prisoners

So, to return to this case, we have already seen that their need to be affirmed in their  “gender identity” has triumphed over their own physical safety.  For someone in flight from their female sex I cannot think of anything more “gender dysphoria” triggering than to be sexually assaulted. This decision failed the claimant both as a woman and as a transgender male.

Differential diagnosis/Treatment Pathways.

It seems that the case became some sort of trans cause-celebre which hinged on the complexity of the competing diagnoses and some disagreement about how the Gender Identity issues should be treated.  Below is some of the “expert” testimony.


One clinician is clearly wanting to stabilise the claimant before commencing treatment for the gender dysphoria. I assume she is referring to testosterone which seems sensible with such a volatile patient. The violent outbursts did not cease one they were incarcerated:


Again I do wonder if there is enough research on the impact of Testosterone on, particularly already violent, females.  This research showed male pattern offending rates remained in transgender MTF (Male to Female) and that FTM approached Male rates of offending.  Long term follow up


The clinician also warned that any move to sexual reassignment surgery may trigger violence which seemed to suggest a cautious approach was wise. Seems there was general acceptance of the co-morbid conditions by a number of the clinicians involved in the claimant’s care.

It seems the legal case itself had arisen because of the conflict between the clinicians dealing with the patient, one might argue “holistically”, and the Gender Identity Specialists.  Here we have Dr James Barrett; who seems to be the go-to expert in many of these cases. . I do not share his confidence that the psychiatric illness is a mere co-incidence.  Yes there is likely a link between the Gender Dysphoria and the mental health, as he states,  but I suspect Dr Barrett does not see that link in quite the same way as I do.


Clearly there was a view that the claimant was being let down by not having expedited treatment for their “gender dysphoria”. One group of clinicians seem to be erring on the side of caution whilst other “experts” see the failure to commence treatment as the issue.

Others are clear that Gender Dysphoria, to them , is a simple health problem that needs treatment and not a mental health issue:


The judge in this case seems uncharacteristically resistant to the advocacy of some of the big players in the trans-political sphere.  Here she  opines on the contributions of some big names.  This had to hurt! Stephen Whittle and Ruth Hunt made statements the judge decided were of “no relevance”.


She was also very critical that the case had been brought at all and made specific reference to the considerable costs incurred.


Finally she concluded that she did not think the case was necessary.  Reading between the lines she understood this was to “highlight the importance of transgender issues” and likely this was intended to have wider application than in this individual case. C14767A4-C4A7-4EB3-AFFA-49F78D47C0A1

The judge rejected the case for a judicial review of a clinical judgement.

Here we have someone who seems to be a lesbian, from a fractured childhood and periods in state care.  All of these things are likely to generate “identity” issues.  Add in all the mental health issues and it seems beyond madness to see the “Gender Dysphoria” in isolation from the other conditions.

Female judge. Took someone from twitter (@KirstenYounger)  to point out I had used male pronouns, in the first draft, for the Judge. Mea culpa. The maximum kind.

I spent so much time agonising about pronouns for the FTM claimant, to avoid being kicked off WordPress,  I missed the important stuff, for women.

Worth reading this Pronouns Rohypnol

I hope whatever path this individual took it turned out well.  I fear it won’t /didn’t






Suicide in the Trans Community


Better a live daughter than a dead son! 

This blog is in response to the consistent use of versions of the above phrase.   Parents are being told a failure to comply with medicalisation, for their “gender confused” offspring, will result in a significant risk of  suicide. Lobbying organisations are using suicide rates of “trans” kids to influence public policy, advocate for legislative change and dictate clinical guidelines for kids/teens with Gender Dysphoria. Despite the headline grabbing claims the data does not stand up to scrutiny.

A selection of headlines:


A more recent one from September 2019 includes a direct demand that legal change is required to mitigate against these suicides:



These are not isolated examples. This theme is used consistently by lobby groups, in particular, Mermaids. Below is a link to a taped Mermaids representative in a training session. When an audience member notes that some academics have criticised the data, on trans suicides, the trainer warns that academics can still be transphobic!    Mermaids Training.

Full statement from Mermaids on World Suicide Day here.  Note the statistic of 45% is still in use. They also then quote the general suicide rate, in under 19s, to support their case. This is not disaggregated to show any link to Trans identity.  World Suicide Day

Here is a slide presentation, used by Mermaids,  during a presentation at a conference in front of an audience of lawyers, press, NHS representatives and government officials. This was on 18th November 2016 at the Trans Equality Legal Initiative.


Two key pieces of research are used to make claims of high suicide rates/attempts in the trans community. The first one is a study commissioned by PACE RaRe and the other was commissioned by Stonewall.  These studies may not have reached a wide audience but their message informed the ITV drama  “Butterfly” : which made liberal use of the suicide narrative.


Here is a detailed debunking of the suicide stats,  authored by Associate Professor Michael Biggs, prompted by the ITV drama “Butterfly” : Suicide data. 

Here are some key excerpts:

That’s FOUR  cases over a decade. Each one a tragedy for the individual, and their parents,  but in no way supporting the ,manufactured, public perception, of a suicide epidemic in Trans youth.  These figures have been published by leading MPs who seem to be uninformed about their unreliability.

Here is Susie Green (CEO of Mermaids) claiming she is aware of 4 trans-suicides in just one year. There is no evidence to support this statement.


The PACE RaRe study is available in full here: PACE/Rare LGBT suicide

Here is a full analysis of the data in the above study, in particular questioning the way these statistics have been used by Lobby groups. Suicide Myths

Below is a brief snapshot highlighting that the central figure is based on 13 trans young people who self-report attempted suicide.


Included in the above report is correspondence with one of the authors of the study expressing concern about how the data has been used. Below is one example:


The author of the study had this to say about the way organisations, with an agenda, are using their data:


The second study under analysis is one commissioned by Stonewall, with an introduction by, former CEO, Ruth Hunt.  The full report is here

Attempts made to obtain the methodology were not forthcoming.  In Academia it is absolutely expected  that any published research is open about their methodology. This is so it can be critically evaluated and it’s robustness tested.  No peer-reviewed journal would accept research without knowing that the data set was available to scrutiny. The Stonewall research was not subject to peer review  and no dataset was forthcoming. 👇


A detailed list of criticisms is here:

547201B2-C3BB-419F-814D-B7C63BBB055EIt is well demonstrated that Lesbian and Gay youth are more likely to be bullied and have suicidal tendencies.  Research needs to disaggregate the data to include sexual orientation however a research subject identifies. This is the only way to understand what is going on.  Hence point three, above, is important.

The report ends with a link to the Samaritans Guidelines on responsible reporting of suicide.  Samaritans: Media Guidelines

Remember that the Samaritans warn, repeatedly, that irresponsible reporting can foster suicide ideation in vulnerable groups. They warn it is dangerous to over-simplify narratives about suicide cases. In addition to focus on one of the deceased characteristics can harm those who share that trait.  (Please note that this in no way negates the real experience of individuals living through genuine distress either due to sexual orientation/ Gender Dysphoria or, as is often the case, both).

For parents with children/teens with Gender Dysphoria, the way the suicide narrative is presented can generate understandable anxiety. By way of reassurance I  repeat the guidance from the Gender Identity Services (GIDs) own FAQ page.


Here are also Polly Carmichael (Director of The Tavistock, Gender Identity Clinic)  on the suicide statistics and how they are used: 5F578DED-E5FC-4BD8-A5B0-1FE4660E7A7E

The aim of this blog is to inform enough people to  rebut this narrative when we hear it. Whether that is in real life, diversity training, or on social media.  Please do also let Samaritans know when you see this irresponsible coverage. I live  in hope they are moved to make a public statement, or at least, a private overture to those peddling this dangerous narrative.

Acknowledgement: Thanks to Professor Michael Biggs and Transgender Trend for all the work they do.


The Man Who Would Be Queen: Michael Bailey: {Part Three}


Part 3:  The Man Who Would Be Queen: Autogynephiles.


Having seen many references to this book I have finally got around to tackling it.  The full text is available free  here: The Man Who Would Be Queen

Bailey is clearly fascinated with the topic of transsexualism and immerses himself in their subculture to recruit “subjects” for his research. He is not, at least in this book, concerned with the legislative framework to protect transsexuals. He also doesn’t examine how any such laws interact with those enacted to protect the female sex.  His exposition of the underlying, erotic, motivations for transition does, however, reinforce the need for women’s, sex based, rights.

Bailey, uses prominent researcher Ray Blanchard’s  typology of transsexuals which differentiate between HSTS (homosexual transsexuals) and AGP transsexuals. The wider public, and many commentators, are either ignorant about this typology or reject it. Bailey believes transsexualism could illuminate some fundamental facts about human nature, if, and only if, the topic was treated honestly. It is not treated honestly. The strenuous efforts to shut down debate are, in my view, indicative of how damaging this knowledge is to the demands of transactivists.  People don’t know Blanchard’s typology because of, quite simply, deliberate concealment.  It is impossible to get someone to admit to something they  are unable to admit to themselves.

Maxine Peterson, a gender clinician, is also quoted and points out that “Most gender patients lie”. The tendency to skirt around the equivalent of  identity up-skirting has been noted by an early researcher in this field, Harry Benjamin. For transactivists extra effort will be taken to shroud the AGP motivation in secrecy, especially, when trying to get changes to legislation or public policy. 👇


Leading activists have been invited into the heart of government to speak on trans rights. This has exposed the sinister motivations of *some* who campaign for an end to sex segregated spaces.  Take the cases of Jess Bradley.   Here is a source from within the trans-community.  Naturally it makes liberal uses of the misogynist slur “terf” but covers the issue fairly comprehensively.   Jess Bradley. For the purposes of women’s rights we need only note that Jess Bradley is publicly thanked, by Baroness Barker, for helpful input to the Gender Identity Forum.

Jess Bradley House of Lords

Here is another activist invited to the House of Lords.  Sex Offender invited to the House of Lords . 

Karen/Mark Jones was invited to discuss how Transgender Prisoners could be better served within the criminal justice system, by Lord Patel. Reading the offences committed by this Transexual it would appear to be the prisoner in the court case I covered in an earlier blog.  Transgender prisoner moved to female estate

Note the way the attempted rape is dismissed.  Also, if this is the same person in penis news  they now appear to identify as a butch lesbian.

Trans offenders at the House of Lords

Any focus on the erotic motivation for transition would set off alarm bells at the demand women grant access to our, single sex, spaces.  The very condition of AGP makes the sufferers demand access. They simply cannot accept any demarcation between their, self-created,  female persona and biological women.  It is for this reason that I think the clash between the demands of Trans Rights Activists anwomen’s rights was inevitable.

The author is sympathetic to gay and trans rights,  but dismisses the idea of “Born in the Wrong Body”.  The most he will concede  is, for some men, they would “like to be in a female body”.   {The book doesn’t cover females who transition or theories of the origins of Lesbianism.  He does, briefly, touch on Androphilia (Women who identify as gay men)  in the interview which I included in part one}.

To understand the vitriolic attacks on the author , as detailed in part one, it is necessary to talk about the dark secret at the heart of Trans ideology.  Bailey exposes the erotic motivations for transition, via the taboo subject of Autogynephilia. AGP is a male paraphilia which is sexual attraction, to oneself, as a woman.  Bailey argues that any consideration of transexuals which ignores the erotic motivation is incomplete and dishonest. Transsexuality  simply cannot be seperated from sexuality.  For Homosexual transsexuals see  Part Two


Men who become the women they love are Autogynophiles (AGP). It is difficult to gauge the level of AGP within the trans-community but a brief look at #GirlsLikeUs and #SheMale (content warning. Lots of “Lady Penis”, even on twitter) exposes its prevalence.  Reddit threads show males, addicted to #SheMale porn and confessing to masturbating, into, or whilst wearing, female apparel. This is often followed up  with the plaintive cry of “Am I just Trans?” Most of the replies immediately affirm the trans-identity and rarely does anyone raise the issue of AGP.   The attempt to cleanse a fetish activity with the idea that you are actually a woman has taken root in this community.  It has also been supported by all our (UK) mainstream political parties.  What this actually means for women’s sex based rights has been totally overlooked, in a quest to appear “Woke” to sections of the electorate. When a private fetish is given primacy, over sex based rights,  and allowed to dicktate (sic) access to women’s rights, and single sex spaces, women have a right to know the truth.


Bailey illustrates his point embodied in two transsexuals of two different types, one homosexual and one autogynephile. The HSTS transsexual Terese is attracted to males and, more specifically, to straight males, who they can only attract as a “woman”.  Post sexual re-assignment surgery, Bailey notes, as an aside,  Terese’s mother, is pleased to have a feminine daughter rather than a feminine son. There is a streak of homophobia running through this movement which is ignored by, so called, LGBT organisations. More  on HSTS transsexuals is in part two.

“Terese” has sexual relationships with straight males to whom their transsexual status was not disclosed. (Note: Sex by deception is a criminal offence in the UK and Stonewall is campaigning to have this removed by the statute books. This is a discussion on the topic, although it does not reference the pressure on lesbians to engage in sexual relationship with the opposite sex, known as the #CottonCeiling.Disclosure}

“Cher” is an autogynophilic transsexual who was born “Chuck”.  He did not exhibit “feminine” tendencies as a boy. What he did do was dress in his mother’s lingerie and masturbate to climax.   His secret life, as a cross-dresser, persisted, though he was riddled with shame and frequently “purged” female apparel to try to rid himself of the habit.  Eventually, reconciling to his “secret life” Chuck became Cher and devoted himself to his fetish.  He collected pornography, featuring women, but his fantasy was that he was the women who was vaginally penetrated, by a man.  He constructed elaborate fantasies and began to wear prosthetics and make his own pornography.  Eventually “Cher” was referred to a gender clinic and diagnosed as transsexual.


Chuck is not a woman. He is a male, with a very male paraphilia, (paraphilia’s are not a feature of female sexuality)  which covers him in shame.  Being diagnosed as transsexual drapes his fetish in a cloak of respectability.  With new legislation this locates “Cher” as a legal woman and, as in the UK, any crimes committed or sentence to be served would be, legally, as a woman.

Next we meet a Heterosexual Transvestite. His name is Don but he dresses up, part-time, as Stephanie. His cross-dressing has an erotic component (masturbating whilst dressed in female apparel or into female apparel).  He has a successful career, as a man, and is married.  Like the transsexual we met earlier, Don has periods of shame and purges his female outfits. Each time he “regresses”.   A feature of the interaction with Don is that the shame about his compulsion also leads to denial about the sexual motivation. He claims it is not sexual anymore and Bailey does not believe him. Nor do I.

Under Leeds City Council’s policy Don would be allowed to register a female name and “female gender”  even as a part-time cross dresser. This is their criteria:


Let that sink in.  Masculine, males with a paraphilia, which fetishizes being a woman, are now legally allowed  to be recognised as “women” . Furthermore women are being compelled to accept them in our most intimate spaces.  What autogynophiles have in common is a desire to be seen as “women” and , for them, the ultimate expression of being a woman is being penetrated by a man.  This enactment of what it means to be a woman is deeply offensive to women.  This is a man-made fantasy projected onto women.


The fantasy is not restricted to our, perceived, place in sexual intimacy but also fetishizes more everyday activities which , in the autogynophile’s world are “womens” past-times.


This places the women, who are kindly including the harmless transsexual, in the position of props in a male fantasy.  AGP transsexuals will go to great lengths to conceal their interests from the women who include them. However it is nearly impossible for the conversation not to enter territory that betrays their misunderstanding of women’s boundaries and expose their fetishizing of the women in the group.  There are many ways to breach women’s boundaries and this is one of the most subtle, and insidiously offensive,  ways.

Autogynophiles typically come from hyper-masculine occupations. There are, as many have noted, a lot of ex-military “late transitioners”. There is also an over-representation from those in information technology as many have noted:0B795152-3BF1-4974-BA9F-54B559DAD3B9Many explain their “hyper-masculine” past as evidence they were in flight from their femininity.  This is doubtful. As Bailey argues it speaks to the fact that AGP males are not stereotypically feminine but study and work hard to fulfil a very male fantasy of what a woman is.  Dr Ann Lawrence’s description, as an AGP transsexual, rings true:


Bailey goes on to discuss nature/nuture and its role in AGP. There is clearly a discussion to be had on this issue but it is not, in my view, relevant for women working to protect same sex spaces.  More pertinent is his statement of the co-existence of other paraphilias , in particular sexual sadism, with cross-dressing of all types.


For those lobbying to change laws to accommodate their paraphilia they must, at all costs, disguise the true nature of their condition. 👇 Below is a quote from a prominent figure in this field.


Modern day Trans Activists, especially, it seems, the most prominent ones strive to make sure our politicians avert their gaze to the sexual motivations which underly transition. Yes, there will be shame, some will find it humiliating to admit to the dressing in women’s clothing as a sexual activity.  However the most dangerous aspect is the demonstrable fact that this is  not a private fetish. It requires female participation to validate the identity; whether we know we are an extra in a Trans Drama or not.  This is no longer a private activity but encroaching on women’s boundaries. Here an autogynephile explains: 👇


This is why they cannot bear women to have same sex spaces. Women are erecting a barrier between themselves and “the woman he loves”.  This is the reason why removal of the, already scandalously cavalier, safeguarding of women and girls cannot be allowed to succeed. Nor should the provision of Gender Recognition certificates be widened in favour of a self-declaration. This is reckless endangerment of women.  As we have seen a male, imprisoned for attempted rape, managed to get a GRC whilst serving a sentence for that crime! This was in 2006, only two years after the passage of the Gender Recognition Act.

There is no such thing as a man trapped in a woman’s body.  Hence why I reject the notion that transsexuals become “women” or that they belong in single sex spaces. Women are not an idea in a mans head, we are not fodder for a male fetish, and we have good reason to exclude males from sex specific spaces.

We don’t want males,with or without paraphilias, frock or no frock, parachuted in. They begin to look like an advanced guard for a male colonisation of women. 

The Man Who Would Be Queen: Michael Bailey: {Part Two}


Part 2:  The Man Who Would Be Queen: A reading.

Having seen many references to this book I have finally got around to tackling it.  The full text is available free on line here:  The Man Who Would Be Queen


The author is sympathetic to gay and trans rights,  a lot of his research has a focus on evolutionary theory and adaptive, or maladaptive, responses to the environment.  So expect some evolutionary biology & some interrogation of nature v nurture. There is plenty to challenge long cherished beliefs, both for TransActivists & radical feminists. Since it needs saying in 2019, I don’t agree with every single word!


My reading is motivated by a concern for women’s, sex based, rights and the premature medicalisation of Gay males. The book doesn’t cover females who transition or theories of the origins of Lesbianism.  He does, briefly, touch on Androphilia (Women who identify as gay men)  in the  interview linked in Part One of this series.Part One

In short there is plenty to provoke discussion. To kick off, I think the cover was needlessly tabloid and likely ensured many people rejected its thesis without opening the covers.  As we all know there is no more vociferous opponent of a book’s content than someone who hasn’t read it.  However it’s  an absolute must read and, bonus, I finally understand the acronym MWWBQ!  


What Bailey does is talk about erotic motivations for transition, why feminine gay males are in danger of being, wrongly, diagnosed as “trans”, and why gay males reject their feminine brothers.   All of these topics are deeply unpopular in some sections of the Trans community and with some gay males. Nearly 20 years one journalists, in the U.K., dare not broach the topics he covers.

Parents of gay males often are aware of their child’s, likely, future sexual orientation from a relatively early age.  Bailey looks at early manifestations of what he calls feminine behavioural traits and in particular a young subject called Danny; to whom he devotes an early chapter.  Danny is one of those “gender nonconforming boys” from an early age.  He also, it turns out, has a closeted gay uncle. Bailey presents a lot of research which explores various hypotheses on the origins of homosexuality.  He looks at heredity and explores the idea of a “gay gene”. He also explores the controversy generated by  these theories.  On the one hand it reinforces the notion that this is a naturally occurring phenomenon (Born This Way) whilst also presenting a danger of pre-natal diagnosis and selective abortion.  For the purposes of my reading I am concerned about these self-same gay males being de-stabilised by Gender Identity Ideology. 👇EBAEAFF6-5E21-4B22-AD0B-8B90D5131A19

These, frequently bullied,  proto-gay children are now subject to,school taught. programmes which present a scale of “Gender Conformity” and children, are told it is possible to be born in the wrong body.  A “trans diagnosis” is based on the notion of an innate gender identity, which can be at odds with your biological sex.  In his book Bailey raises the risk to gay males from this ideology:


Whilst some developments may lead to complacency about homophobia this utopia is not yet with us.  Young children are subjected to slurs about their prospective sexuality from a very early age.  When they become aware of their sexuality they are now presented with an alternative hypothesis and a retreat into a faux-straight, medicalised closet can look, superficially, like an attractive prospect.  Recent whistle blowers from Britains foremost Gender Clinic  (The Tavistock) raised this concern directly. Here is one of those clinicians, quoted  in an article published by The Times Newspaper:

gay children and GIDS times article

Given that the leading activists for Gay Rights have aligned themselves with the T, now added to the LGB, this represents a real tension between the rights of the Trans community, who agitate for earlier medicalisation, and Gay Rights.  Most gender-non-conforming children would, if left un-medicalised, go on to to be Gay Males or Lesbians.

puberty blockers

Yet there is total silence on this issue from the main advocacy group, for gay rights,  Stonewall. Why would this be?  The answer to why Stonewall is complicit with Trans Ideology has been explored in many articles.  One such analysis is here, by Michael Biggs, so I don’t propose to expand on this topic here: Stonewall Funding & Focus of Activism. Crudely. Money.

The other puzzling feature of this “debate”, for me, has been the silence of adult gay males or downright advocacy of the notion that feminine males, who are same sex attracted are really “trans”.  I have been twitter blocked by a number of prominent gay males for asking questions about this.  Bailey presents a lengthy analysis of sexual attraction in gay males to masculine men.  His hypothesis is that despite a predilection for “femme” behaviour in gay males these self-same gay males are not attracted, maybe even repelled, by their own femininity and that of other gay males.733A665F-47DE-480E-85AE-3F4CA46B2C31



The above was shared by a gay male who is tired of people asking him why he is not transitioning because he’s “so feminine”.

Some of this may be rooted in child-hood shaming, as Bailey suggests. The other strand is, he argues, that it is not unremarkable to find that gay men are attracted to the masculine qualities in a sexual partner.  This may then lead to a rejection of “femme” gay males and also an internalised shame and loathing for the “femme” parts of themselves.


Bailey argues that homosexual transsexuals (HSTS) are drawn from the feminine gay males and they transition to access masculine males who otherwise are less available to them within the gay community.


Parents of gay males, like the aforementioned Danny, are perfectly reasonable in resisting a lifelong dependence on cross-sex hormones & significant surgery.  This is a pro-gay stance.


Boys like Danny are lucky if they have  a mum like him.👇


The other part of the transsexual community, using Blanchards two part typology, are opposite sex attracted, or auto-gynephilic trans.  These are males who are attracted to the idea of themselves as a woman.  It was the depiction of AGP that aroused the ire of the transactivists.  Even now the mention of AGP triggers fury as we can see in twitter interactions.  It is also a deeply shaming orientation which is often lied about.  Many researchers have highlighted that it is extremely difficult to research this population because they are driven to conceal and disguise their real motivations. These motivations matter when women are subject to demands that we include them, in single sex spaces, as literal women.  Their motivation matters.

I will cover this in part 3.


The Man Who Would Be Queen: Michael Bailey {Part One}


Part 1: The Controversy.

Having seen many references to this book I have, finally,  tackled it.  It doesn’t take a strictly biologically determinist or a social constructionist stance. It is sympathetic to gay and trans rights.  {Though not in ways likely to satisfy Trans Activists, in 2019}. There is plenty to disagree with, for one,  I think the cover was needlessly tabloid.  However it’s  well worth a read and, finally, I understand the acronym MWWTBQ. Bailey talks about erotic motivations for transition, why feminine gay males are in danger of being, wrongly, diagnosed as “trans”, and why gay males reject their feminine brothers.   All topics deeply unpopular in some sections of the Trans community and with *some* gay males. Hence  why it feels necessary to discuss the controversy, prior to discussing the book itself.

The book had sold only 4000 copies,  when it became the centre of a Trans Rights Tornado. This, predictably, drew it to the attention of a much wider audience; a phenomenon known as the Barbara Streisand Effect.  [Named for the singer’s legal attempt to block a publication which revealed the location of one of her properties. Ironically ensuring much wider dissemination of the information she wished to protect].

Alice Dreger covered the controversy in forensic detail.  She spoke to all the key players, or at least those who were willing to go on record.  Some wished to remain anonymous and others refused to co-operate at all.  Dreger was also subject to a campaign of vilification following her piece.   The key to the controversy is Bailey’s lack of acceptance of the main thesis of gender identity ideology, namely that transsexuals have a gender identity at odds with their biological sex.  Bailey, instead, locates its origins in “erotic interests” and, in particular,  covered the issue of Autogynephilia (AGP). Worse, even though this book was aimed at a more popular audience, it was based on rigorous science. Dreger:👇734650A7-99AE-4C11-9FB9-98390E6BD77C

Full article here: Dreger on The Man Who Would be Queen

Even today any mention of AGP is furiously denied in sections of the Trans community. Most often the AGP deniers are late-transitioners who, coincidentally,  appear to fit the typology like a velvet glove. AGP is, put simply, described as an erotic target location error, a male, normally heterosexual, becomes erotically charged by the fantasy of himself, as a woman.  (See Ray Blanchard Abstract: Blanchard)

Dreger is an intersex advocate who is also concerned about gay and transgender rights. Despite this, her coverage of this controversy over MWWBQ garnered attacks on her own work, and provoked attempts to discredit her,  particularly, in the intersex community.  Once  her account was published the backlash escalated  to personal attacks on Dreger herself .

Support for Dreger and Bailey came in the unlikely persona of Dr. Ann Lawrence a, self-proclaimed, autogynephile, transwoman.  Lawrence analysed the controversy with an insiders knowledge of AGP, as a condition.  The fury, Lawrence argues, originates in the shame of the AGP community which makes sufferers vulnerable to “Narcissistic Injury”.  One response, to Narcissistic Injury,  is internalised shame but a more common response is to externalise the response and display “Narcissistic Rage”.   The full paper is available below:

Lawrence: MWWBQ & Narcissistic Rage

Lawrence reflected on the savagery of the campaign and located it in a co-existing vulnerability to “narcissistic rage” in the AGP community.


Another, related,  backlash is the  attempt to shut down another, emerging, research area: Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria. Childhood identity confusion,  and late onset Gender Dysphoria (of the AGP type), are relatively well researched and documented.  A more recent phenomenon is a spike in late childhood (often at puberty) Gender Dysphoria.  The spike in female children declaring a trans-identity has inverted the sex of those expressing themselves as transgender.  In the UK a spike in girls,  referred to Gender Identity Clinics , well over a 4000% increase over the last decade,  has generated theories of social contagion.  There are also increases in males, identifying as transgender, but the increase has been nowhere near as dramatic.  Early speculation about the causes has resulted in the label of “Rapid Onset Gender  Dysphoria” and calls for further investigation of the phenomenon. The first attempt to capture data on the phenomenon was published by Lisa Littman.  Like Bailey and Dreger, the author of this study Lisa Littman has faced similar opprobrium which resulted in the withdrawal of her paper, at the behest of a Trans activist.  Not an academic, or peer in her field but this “transsexual”. I wish I was joking. AFFF47B8-F5F4-43B9-929A-7E16C96304E7CD30CAAA-C74D-47A3-B3C9-8CA1F4CF83D3

This is also the person who applied to become a counsellor at  Vancouver women’s refuge and was involved in a 10 year campaign, still ongoing, to defund /close the refuge for offering single sex services.

You can read more about this here: 👇

Lisa Littman Controversy

The paper was then subject to a second peer review and republished, virtually unaltered.  You can read further about this controversy here: Interview with Lisa Littman

What all these controversies have in common is a reluctance to accept any opposition to the idea of an innate gender identity at odds with biological sex.   The mantra of “born in the wrong body” attempts to cement the idea that gender non-conformity (often a hallmark of future Gay males and Lesbians) is an early sign of being “transgender”.  The existence of “trans-children” de-sexualises transition for the adults, with AGP, and cleanses some of their shame. It also presents the public with a population (children),  far more likely to garner sympathy than adults with a paraphilia.  This seems to be the motivation for the backlash to both Bailey’s book and any professionals who adhere to Ray Blanchards typology of Transexuality.

Transactivists are keen to convey the idea that transsexuals have always been with us and are a naturally occurring phenomenon. There is scant evidence for this. Cross-dressing is indeed a historic phenomenon. Women disguising themselves as males, to escape the restrictions imposed on the female sex are similarly not a recent phenomenon. Yet our children are being taught Transgender Ideology in schools. Our Judicial system has accepted this, our legal system is involved in wholesale sex-denialism. I have done other blogs about what is happening in our prison estate but this quote is from Family Court. Where is the evidence for this assertion?



Before I publish part 2 , which looks at the book in some detail, here is a recent interview given by Michael Bailey to Benjamin Boyce. As it is from 2019 he also speaks on the topic of ROGD. (Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria).  As he is careful to say, at the moment, we are operating on a “hunch” at the reasons for the spike in referrals.  We need empirical evidence and, at the moment, any forays into this area are met with the same backlash as his own book.

Benjamin Boyce Interviews Michael Bailey



Girl Power: The Spice of Life?


Preferred Pronouns.  A harmless courtesy?

During my trawl through legal cases involving Transgender Prisoners I came across this case:

Paedophile: Victim and Perpetrator

The prisoner had committed sexual offences against young boys.  Their offences started whilst young and continued to adulthood.  The prisoner had also been a victim of childhood sexual abuse.  Makes for a pretty grim catalogue of offences.


It is hard to read without reflecting on the damage done to young males, by early sexual contact, whether by direct force or grooming. I did wonder  how this shapes their attitude to their own bodies, warps their boundaries and perpetuates a cycle of abuse. [Note that many CSA survivors do not go on to become abusers.  Female survivors , in particular, quite rightly baulk at the inference and maybe more likely to internalise the consequences in self-harm. Once again we find sex matters.]

Another startling finding is the seemingly higher rates of CSA transitioners. Are they trying to escape the physical shell in which their abuse took place?

Child Sexual Abuse and Transgender Identity


From the study 👆

For the purposes of this blog, however, my focus is on how the judicial system deals with the needs of these prisoners, primarily the impact on women. Especially when this places males in the female estate. All prisons have policies which require them to at least consider housing males according to their “gender identity”.

The case opens with the kind of statement I am becoming accustomed to:


The prisoner was “born a man” and “remains physically a man” yet the case will use female pronouns, out of respect. The legal system is using she for a male, child sex offender. Let that sink in!  Furthermore, as the case makes clear, this is not someone with a Gender Recognition Certificate.  (A  GRC confers the  “legal fiction” that a male is female). What is apparent is the  legal system already extends this “recognition” prior to any assessment by a Gender Recognition Panel.  Polite female pronouns for a male sex offender are a dis-courtesy to women across the land but, hey, we are only women. Gillian Flynn had it right when she reflected on the me too movement:


Well worth taking a break, at this point, to read this post about the ubiquitous use of female pronouns, to describe males, and the impact on our cognitive abilities.  This was posted on mumsnet and earned the poster a 7 day ban! 👇

Pronouns are Rohypnol

Includes this clip:CC60D63A-B850-4D49-ACDE-04EEAC65E72B

Now the law is using this linguistic rohypnol of “preferred pronouns”. Even for male sex offenders who have committed sexual offences against children, do not have a GRC and have not medically “transitioned”.  The overwhelming perpetrators of crimes of a sexual and violent nature are males, so in whose interests is this linguistic shift? It is NOT in the interests of the female sex to obscure the sex of the perpetrators of sexual violence.

The offender , in this case, had already been tried and imprisoned for the sexual offences committed. However, what if the preferred pronouns were “she” at the time of the offence?  Would the young boys he victimised have been admonished for using “he”?   We have already seen that Maria McLachlan was legally compelled to use female pronouns for her attacker.  In addition, despite the perpetrator being found guilty, her use of male pronouns was actually used to reduce any compensation that may have been due.  In her own words :  Maria McLachlan: Trial

Sexual Offender Therapeutic Treatment Programmes.

To return to the case in hand.  These are offences that no woman or girl could have physically committed. The number of females imprisoned for sexual offences against children is statistically insignificant.

There are lots of interesting points, in this case,  about parole hearings, indeterminate sentencing and whether the prison system is equipped to deal with transgender sex offenders. Those remain issues that require resolution.  I remain steadfast on the principal that women are entitled to single sex spaces. However, even were I to set that aside, women’s prisons are not sufficiently experienced, or sufficiently resourced, to deal with male sex offenders. Indeed if you read the case the male prison seems similarly unable to identify the correct risk reduction programme for such a prisoner.

Another salient point  is the absence of a Gender Recognition Certificate proves no barrier to anyone  “self-identifying” as Transgender. This, in turn, allows them to  invoke the legally protected characteristic of “Gender Re-assignment”.  If , like me, you assumed that a GRC must be obtained, to be covered by this legal protection, the law is not operating in this way. These are some of the legal arguments which make it clear the case was heard on the basis that the prisoner was entitled to be legally protected by the characteristic of “Gender Reassignment”.  No mention of even hormone treatment and definitely no surgery, at this point.


No wonder every political party is signing up to getting “Self-Id” specifically enshrined, in law, they know we have already let the Fox in with the hens!


A year ago I may have expressed less concern about Homosexual transgender offenders as a risk to women.  However, if you read this earlier case on my blog   Male Sex Offender in Female Prison   , you will see that this is no guarantee of female safety; not even protection from sexual assault.

The prisoner, who is the subject of this blog, was housed in the male estate. A same sex attracted male would obviously have less incentive to petition to be moved to the female estate. There is only one reference to this preference. Here:👇


HMP Send is a female therapeutic community.  The prisoner expressed fear at being in a male sex offender treatment programme (SOTP) and this fear was taken seriously.  Nowhere is there any reference to the fears of females at HMP Send, to have a (fully-intact) male in their treatment programme. In the end , despite  more than one overture, this request was turned down.  In my view this should simply not have been considered.  A fear of males is not exclusive to the Transgender community. Cannot quite believe I have to actually state this in 2019.  Female prisoners have an over-representation of women who have been abused at the hands of men.  The Prison policy should act on the legally protected characteristic of sex.  It simply should rule out housing a male, sex offender or not, with women. Neither should there be any compulsion to admit one to a female therapeutic programme.

Note also, in the above clip, the prisoner reports they are three months away from being granted a Gender Recognition Certificate.  I have no way of verifying this. However, thus far there are no details of any hormone treatment and certainly no surgery has taken place.  So it would seem being imprisoned for child sexual abuse, and handed an indefinite sentence to protect the public, is not an automatic bar to applying for a Gender Recognition Certificate. Whilst activists are campaigning to relax the requirements for a GRC  I ask why the requirements not made even more stringent? Or, indeed, why we have accepted them at all.  If the GRC is supposed to reassure women then it is transparently not worth the paper it is written on.

There are safeguarding implications and this study raised a concern. 👇

Motives for Transition.


Predators will always take the path of least resistance. Safeguarding principles tell us to look at where these weak links are because this is where you will find predators.

Its OK if they are homosexual.

A feature of this “debate” , we fought to have,   is institutionalised sexism which fails to understand the nature, and extent, of sexual offences against women.  In my earlier blog, linked above, I quote  the motivation for the attempted rape of a woman.  It was a male-attracted offender. His motivation for a sexual attack against a women was rage.  Narcissistic rage because she was a woman this  was the status the male wished for himself.  Narcissistic tendencies are frequently referenced in respect of this prisoner:


References to this prisoner’s narcissism and fragile self-image recur in the psychiatric assessments quoted.  What bigger threat to your self-image than to present yourself as “female” and not be accepted, as such, by actual females.  So much of the rage directed at women, from trans activists, seems driven by a recognition of this simple fact. The mere existence of natural women triggers a malevolent response. It seems simply being is interpreted as a threat and an act of confrontation. How dare we  just exist as women. 

There are so many layers to this societal shift that it is difficult  to maintain focus on one aspect.  In this case we have a relatively young male with a history of sexual offending from their early teens.  He has been convicted of grooming and manipulating young males, for his own sexual gratification.  The case indicates that this young man had also been sexually abused, prior to becoming a child sex offender himself.  They have a history of self-harm, and vengeful behaviour, when their self-image is threatened . A clinician has diagnosed Narcissist Personality disorder.  During their time in prison they adopted a female identity which would seem to add another layer of vulnerability to a fragile personality.  We have already seen that the prisoner acts out against staff and prisoners when threatened. The Sexual Offender Treatment plans are not deemed suitable for the prisoner and finding a suitable therapeutic approach has been problematic. Treatment has therefore been significantly delayed.  This has further rebounded on the prisoner because, without a risk reduction programme, they remain indefinitely detained. There is also a pending police investigation because the prisoner alleges a rape in the male estate. (At the time of this case).  All of these things can be true.  They are not, however, issues that can, or should, be resolved by handing over the problem to female prisoners and staff.

Placing prisoners with this profile (below)  in the female estate forces women to co-habit with a high risk , narcissistic male, with a fragile sense of self and a need to control and dominate the environment in which they are based.  If they are doing this in the male estate how much more vulnerable are the women going to be?  How is putting a self-identified “woman”, who will not be read as “female”,  in with women, going to help their self-image? What form might the “vengeful schemas” take on the women who don’t demonstrate, sufficient, acceptance of that “identity”?


How does a male feel like a woman?

This is a recurrent question to which it is difficult, to impossible, to achieve a coherent answer.  This subject is littered with people who speak of “living as a woman” or “adopting a female role” but what does that mean?  There is no answer ,I have seen, that doesn’t resort to circular reasoning and sexist stereotypes.  This prisoner is no different.  Their version of woman hood, and no I am not kidding, is as defined by the Spice Girls.  This is a male fantasy about what makes a woman. These males display a unique version of mysogyny


Don’t let a man tell you, you can’t do something because you are a girl! 

Not for the first time I quote Miranda Yardley who coined the term “refugees from masculinity”.  I agree.  Refugees from masculinity exist.  It is still not the job of the female sex to run the Refugee camps. Reject the mantle of maleness. De-programme your male socialisation.  You have my full support in this. Telling women  their biological reality  can be colonised and you lost me.

Girl Power was an empty slogan revolving around the mythical empowerment of  hyper-sexualised women.  This 👇


I don’t accept  a man can tell me, a woman, that he, a man, has any right to pontificate on what makes a woman Less #GirlsLikeUs and more #JustWomen.













Biological Males in the Female Prison Estate.

It came as a shock to find that pre-operative “transgender” males were being housed in the female prison estate. Given the jaw dropping idiocy of the policy I assumed, wrongly, this was a recent phenomenon,  a temporary loss of State Sanity.   I was wrong. While high profile cases, which resulted in sexual assaults on female inmates, (see Karen White  and Paris Green ), have only just penetrated the public consciousness, it is not a recent aberration. It is policy. This has been going on since at least 2009! Because of legal cases like this one 👇

Transgender move to women’s prison.

The claimant, in the above case, was a pre-operative, transgender male who had been convicted of manslaughter and imprisoned.  5 days after his release he committed an attempted rape. Following this offence he was returned to prison and sentenced to life imprisonment.

The prisoner had been granted a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) in 2006.  Thus, only two years after the Gender Recognition Act (GRA)had been passed,  a bodily intact, biological male, who would go on to commit attempted rape, was recognised as a “woman” for all purposes.  Because of this legislation the prisoner was allowed to mount a legal challenge to his incarceration, in the male estate.   Let that sink in. 👇


[As an aside the wording of the above reports the historic offence as “committed whilst a man”.  This strongly suggests that, at the very least, post GRC offenses are recorded as committed by a female.  Work is still on-going to find out the exact legal record keeping when someone “self-identifies” as female.  More on this here  Crime statistics:Sex v Gender]

Update September 2019: Going by the details provided in this case it seems likely that this is the same person invited to speak to the House of Lords on how we can better serve Transgender prisoners Sex Offender Advisor to the House of Lords

Details of the offence are  below.  Note that this offence was committed whilst staying in a female bail hostel.

2019-09-06 (3)

Our law makers have re-defined woman and granted  legal rights, as women, to males. This is an issue regardless of an individual’s  criminal history.  However, in this  case, a GRC has been granted to a fully intact male who went on to attempt to rape a woman and still retained his GRC!  This law (in practice) legally compels women to admit male bodied individuals into sex segregated spaces. The  is a measure of how much contempt the legal systems has for women’s rights.  Our right to privacy, dignity and safety has been stripped from us, by a male centred legislature.  We have, by stealth, had our right to congregate, as a sex,  and enjoy the company of other women, free from male interference, removed by a state sanctioned lie. Refugees from masculinity exist but women should not be legally compelled, or emotionally blackmailed, into running the refugee camps.  

Below is a reference to the Gender Recognition Act from this court case.  This is a lie. It is impossible to change sex.  Women were assured this was only a “kind” “legal fiction”.  Yet judgements are being handed down which show the State is treating it as a literal truth! This gives the lie to the, oft repeated, assertion that the GRA has no impact on the protected characteristic of sex (Equality Act 2010). The GRA collapses the female sex class into a male’s subjective sense of self-identity.

Men see only the societally imposed notion  of what it means to be  a women. They now take the objectified version of “womanhood” for women’s lived experience and reflect this stereotypical version of ourselves back at us.

See David Thomas, becoming a woman.  David has a “previous” life as a Men’s Rights Activist and is the  author of these two books:


The first book is a rebuttal of feminist charges against men focusing on sexual harassment, child abuse and domestic violence endured, by men, at the hands of women. In Girl the main protagonist is a man who is mistakenly given gender reassignment surgery.  This is a staple of some fetish porn known as “forced feminisation”.   An MRA and a Porn devotee.  Welcome to the Sisterhood David! 

Back to the case….


The Legal muddle this has created is even pointed out by the prisoner:87777052-5FB0-48C3-A522-00BC945E3DACThe fact “trans-men” can select to remain in the female estate, and they do, tells its own tale. Sex Matters, it seems, when the State decides it does. Here is a discussion between Transmen on prison location.  Male Pronouns yes.  Male Prison? Hell no! Transmen discuss prison

State capture, by Transgender Ideology, inevitably involves the regressive endorsement of sex stereotypes. Below is a  description of how this, legal, woman is enabled to live in the male estate.  A case is made that the prison has been accommodating by allowing access to cosmetics, blouses and skirts.  The Prisoner, we are told,  “lives as a woman” . This is demonstrated by the inevitable links to the most regressive sex stereotypes which feminists have been deconstructing for centuries.  Make-up doth not maketh the woman!


A wise woman on twitter (@HairyLeggedHarpy) interrogated a more reasoned, commentator on what he means by “living as a woman”.  Ask to define it he  listed sex stereotypical behaviours associated with a female role.  Pressed to confirm whether he would  say “living as a Black or Indigenous Man” he didn’t answer. So why is it OK to say “Living as a woman”? Do the cultural expectations of “being a woman” confer some sort of Lady Essence on women, which gender  non-conforming men share?

Does anyone pay any credence to Rachel Dolezal’s claim to live as “black”? No.  In a delicious irony, completely lost on MB, this was not Monroe Bergdorf’s favourite Netflix recommendation.


TransRacial Identity was roundly rejected but pay attention. This is the blurb for a course on Trans Racial Identity at Rhode Island University. “We will use the discourse of Transgenderism to build an alternate vocabulary of race”.  Feeling a bit too weighed down with your white, male, privilege?  Here’s a handy way to garner oppression points! If anyone can “identify” into a marginalised group any laws or policies enacted to protect or empower them, are rendered meaningless.  Imagine if Dolezal had preached to black people that they had “cis-black privilege” and were her oppressors?


I digress. (Homage to Ronnie Corbett!) Back to the case in hand.

Below is a list of the  reasons the prisoner was not felt to be a suitable candidate for parole. To release him into society presented “a risk to life and limb” but to incarcerate with vulnerable women was OK?


Below a recognition of the “risk” is cast aside because the claimant has a clinical need to associate with women for therapeutic reasons.  So the women are to be validation aids for a male, with a history of sexual assault against women.  Who asked women if we thought we were “peers”?  Women should have had equal representation in these court cases but because of the insistence  the GRA has no impact on women’s rights these wrong decisions are consistently made.

BB8B921E-3E63-473E-97AB-667CC10F8A65The nature of the risk to women is imperfectly understood by the participants in this legal farce.  Here is what, in their view, constitutes mitigation for the rape attempt.  Don’t worry it wasn’t that type of rape.  The motivation was less sexual and more frustration and jealousy!


Witness the absolute rage of *some* Transactivists, when facts threaten their validation as female. Women cannot help being born female. Our very existence is a direct affront to those who aspire to be women. Where “passing privilege” is that rarest of things a threat to a “female” identity will always be embodied in the woman who merely exists. This is a different kind of misogyny.  👇


Dr Ann Lawrence, a transsexual and self-proclaimed autogynophile, on this topic.  This paper on narcissistic rage is worth perusing to gauge the potential risk, to women, from AGP transsexuals. AGP, Shame & Narcissistic rage.

This clip from the claimant is very striking for the insistence that nobody can take away their “female” identity.

B403E0C6-0EAA-4E4B-A973-F496B0DDD6D7Because it is literally not possible to change sex many , older, transsexuals report significant counselling to reconcile themselves to this fact.  Without this counselling in an era of “Transwomen are women” how much harder to face the truth on the occasions, when it is brought to your attention?  Women are literally the emodiment of the denial that TWAW.  Here is a clip from Dr Lawrence’s paper on the increased risk  of narcissistic disorders in AGP males.

2019-08-09 (2)

Despite the obvious risk to the female population it seems pretty clear that it is not the practice to actually *tell* the women that amongst their number is a male-bodied, attempted rapist, with a potential, predisposition to narcissistic  rage. Another clip from the legal judgement 👇


At least one of the expert witnesses spelt out clearly the claimant’s own narcissism fuelled rage. Controlling, Aggressive, violent and sadistic.  Does that sound like a risk to which women ought to be alerted.  Is this compatible with  “Living as a woman”?


Up next is Gender Identity Specialist, Dr James Barrett. Here we have a belated recognition that the women may have opinions about co-habiting with a male-bodied, attempted rapist.  Predictably this is what he has to say about those uppity Prison women.  They would be the sort of women who enjoy conflict.  Women asserting boundaries is always badged aggression by those who wish to deny them.


So there you have it.   A prisoner deemed to be too high risk for release, who had attempted rape, and was still equipped to do so, placed in a female prison.  Female prisoners are disproportionately victims of male violence and sexual abuse.  They are predominantly working class and have no social capital or voice. The silence of female MPs on this topic seeks volumes. Maybe, like, Layla Moran (Liberal Democrat MP)  they will need to cultivate a talent for seeing into male souls to minimise the risk.


Are you angry enough yet?



Why are the Guardian suddenly so woeful on women’s rights?


Why is the Guardian so woeful on Women’s Rights these days when, arguably, we are facing the biggest attack on our sex based  rights in my lifetime? Coverage of Marie Dean was a low point

Marie Dean  (Article by Sarah Ditum)


It was this article which first confused and then outraged me.   (You can find more on this case on my blog  here.)  For the purposes of this article suffice to say it was campaign journalism to facilitate a move of a prisoner to the female estate.  What the Guardian did, until shamed by angry readers, was to de-sexualise the nature of the “burglary” and, in effect, disregard any risk to the female prisoners.

It was the above piece that inspired me to do a bit of digging. The Guardian has a history of exposing #DarkMoney & labyrinthine ownership structures, which mask influence or hide money.  So this was where I started.

The Guardian itself reports that it has a unique ownership structure. Part of that structure is The Scott Trust. As you can see 👇 the Board of the Trust have ultimate editorial control & power to sack the editor


This is one of The Board members. He is also on the board of The Paul Hamlyn Foundation, which immediately looked familiar.


It was the Paul Hamlyn foundation that caught my eye because I had seen them referred to in the accounts of the Mermaids charity. The foundation have a search facility to see who they fund here  Paul Hamlyn Foundation Grants

Sure enough 👇


Here is another beneficiary of The Paul Hamlyn Foundation.  This is an organisation working with children as young as 11.  If I was in charge of their branding I would definitely recommend a name change.


Naturally the Map Youth Fund also advise on “Gender” and have an interesting book collection including  The Testosterone Files, Gender Outlaws, Transgender Voices. They have an entire section on Gender and this is not matched by other sections on the LGB.


The Paul Hamlyn Foundation also fund “Ditch The Label”. This is an anti-bullying charity whose CEO (Dr Liam Hackett) uses a misogynist slur (Terf) and who targeted a Lesbian, Feminist philosopher.  He has blocked a lot of women who raised concerns at what appeared to be bullying behaviour.  You might remember these.  A lack of understanding about women’s dignity and privacy at a Breast Cancer Screening, and targeted abuse.

Another beneficiary is Gendered Intelligence. They are another key player in the debate women were told was not allowed to happen. I have seen them frequently referenced in Hansard.  In particular as independent advisors on the management of trans prisoners


Here are a couple of those Hansard references.  “Independent” Advisors on managing risk and safeguarding for “all” prisoners.  Apparently , despite the lack of any representation from women, all stakeholders were consulted.  (Cough…Karen White, Paris Green)


Some of you may remember the sexual health booklet, produced by Gendered Intelligence, and aimed at “trans youth”.  Quote: “A woman is still a woman even if she enjoys getting blowjobs” .  A celebration of diverse sexual practices.  Remember no “kink-shaming” allowed.


This clip  is the submission, by Gendered Intelligence, to the Transgender Equality Inquiry, courtesy of  Marked up to make it clear their aim is the dismantle legal provisions which allow for same sex delivery of specific services.

Parliamentary Inquiries publish submissions and the ones to this inquiry are well worth a read. (You can find them here Hansard)


The Paul Hamlyn Foundation also fund another organisation “All About Trans” to enable them to employ a press officer and media trainer.   They train “media professionals” from a number of different organisations.   All About Trans website.  

It is well worth looking at the media guidance emanating from groups like these.  The definitions are highly contested and the re-shaping of language has significant implications for women and non-gender conforming children, of both sexes.  You can see the resources they provide and who they work with  here

After you look at the guidance it makes sense that they claim to have advised the BBC & Channel 4. Very noticeable increase in using “gender” where “sex” seems more appropriate.  Also “assigned female at birth” & reductive references to women as “cervixhavers” etc seem to have emerged. There seems to be an excessive sense that female biology is inherently transphobic or that referencing women’s sex based experience as insulting to the trans community.  This is, as an aside, not a good way to foster good relations between different protected characteristics. Further information below.


I first published this as a thread on twitter.  Courtesy of some sleuthing by some mumsnet warriors I was sent some information on the fouder of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation.  (No idea why it did not occur to me to start there!).  Here goes:

Quelle Surprise: Lord Hamlyn & Madam Lash

I don’t share that just as some titillating story. Anyone following this debate needs to understand how BDSM (Bondage and Sado Masochism) figures in the fetishizing of sex stereotypes. Queer theory relies on maintaining women’s subordinate status so as not to ruin kink for our overlords!  Well worth reading up on queer theory & Judith Butler,  in particular.  I recommend this. Dr Jane Clare Jones


So I singled out the Guardian because it was my daily paper for decades so the sense of betrayal runs deep.  They are not alone but they do appear to be significantly compromised on this issue.  (No disrespect to the women, working there, who are working to get women’s issues covered appropriately. I imagine it is not without some personal and professional cost).

Anyone watching Pink News coverage will be used to the lack of any balanced reporting from that outlet.  Here is the CEO and his husband. Trustee for Mermaids Gender.


Trustee of MERMAIDS

This does offer some clarity about why the media is out of step with the majority view by trying to erase biological reality. Women’s status in society is based on our sex.  It is the epitome of privilege to identify into a marginalised group and then tell, your unwilling hosts they are YOUR oppressors.  This is what women are being told when we are labelled “Cis” against our will and then told this means we have “cis-privilege”.   Not enough privilege to resist a male-imposed nomenclature though!




The 2019 Witch Hunts.


The Witch Hunts, which began in the 1500’s, swept across Europe in the 17th Century. Estimates of the deaths vary wildly with the most conservative estimates, of casualties, ranging around 60,000.  Feminist theories of the trials focussed on the sex of the victims. In England a staggering 90% were women. Coincidentally (not) this was inversely proportionate to the sex composition of the saintly class. Theories which contradict the feminist interpretation can’t dismiss the sex of the victims. Some theorists point to the role of the rising printing press in the spread of Witchcraft Trials. This modern re-enactment owes much to Twitter.  Twitter Shaming has replaced the burning.  Just when this will tip over into more serious violence, against a woman, is anyone’s guess.  The violent incidents we have already seen have been denied, dismissed and minimised. This is a dangerous climate we are creating for women.


The focus was on a particular type of woman. Those who were not assimilated & under male control.  In the 2000’s this can extend to women with an “unseemly” critique of a male dominated society / financially independent women.  Many of the twitter hunts echo this pattern of selecting modern-day witches. Women defending  our right to name ourselves, organise as a class, and exclude males, in defined spaces, are the new witches, or, Terfs, if you will.


Women who have been paying attention, or directly involved in the Terfwars,  are not surprised by the demonization of women.  Lately the target group has widened to include public attacks on JK Rowling and Caroline Criado-Perez. Maybe we can snatch some positives from the, increasingly vitriolic, Social Justice Warrior crusades. Maybe it will finally trigger some self- awareness in our political elite.

Caroline Criado- Perez has not, to my knowledge, entered into the fray regarding the conflict between women’s rights and trans rights.  She has, incurred the wrath of the Trans Activists for two cardinal sins.  The first is for a book which looks at the experience of women, as a sex class, in a world built around default humans, otherwise known as males.


The book analyses the way the world has been built to accommodate males and left women, the majority, obliged to slot into a world where we are not the template human.   Some of those things relate to female biology and this is anathema to the robotic mantra chanters of  “Transwomen are women”. For example, female heart attacks are 50% more likely to be misdiagnosed. One would assume that redressing this would be welcomed by feminists across the land.  Not so. The problem is that discussing female matters now triggers cries of “transphobia”.  Women centring ourselves in our own political movement is viewed as discriminatory against wannabe women.   Medically women have different bodies. Different physiology. Women don’t have prostates!

If we are not allowed to say how we are different to males  we will remain invisible.  Sex matters.  If you identify “with” women, you would understand this. The need to erase all distinctions between transwomen and women is a pathological obsession with *some* TransActivists. Logically “trans” should exist as a distinct category to capture accurate data, for example,  for medical reasons or documenting crime , both against and by the trans community. If feminists were demanding the eradication of data, specifically related to trans people, we would be accused of erasing trans identities. The demand, ironically, is coming from within the Trans community.

Criado’s second “offence” was to reject the label “Cisgender”.  This attempt to impose nomenclature on women is interesting.  Cis, for the uninitiated, is the term given to women who identify with the “gender” they were born with.  Women protest in vain. We don’t identify with a “gender”, we just are women.  Apparently, being “CisGender” affords us “privilege” over born males who identify as women.  Not only are we being “told” we identify with a set of crass, reductive, stereotypes, we are further advised we are privileged  to do so.  Let me break that down.  Members of the male (oppressor) class are colonising a female identity and then telling their, unwilling, hosts  we are  actually the oppressor of the, mainly white,  male class of colonisers.  Truth Inversion is a common feature of this discourse. Any woman with her wits about her would reject the label “CIS”.


No Gender Apostate can be allowed to go unpunished and twitter duly obliges.  I love this one.  Any woman over forty, who has a platform, is guilty until proven innocent.  There is a common pattern in misogyny which often targets older women. Mature (Wise-women)  were similarly overrepresented in the witch trials of the 1600’s.


JK Rowling’s has a bigger platform so the attacks are louder. The threshold for “offences” is low and seems to be limited to “likes” &  follows on twitter.  Rowling has been subject to the popular twitter past-time of offence archaeology; where whole threads are dedicated to excavating her twitter feed for outrage opportunities.  As far as I can ascertain it can basically be summed up as “Goody Rowling was seen talking to Goody Berns”.  In this case JK Rowling has followed Magdalen Berns, a Radical Feminist, and Lesbian, who was unforgivably, it would seem, prescient about where this was all heading.  In response to the witch hunt Rowling has, incredibly, stuck two fingers up at the haters and added Julie Bindel and Fionne Orlander to her follows.  Fionne (if you don’t already know) is a self-proclaimed male, battling Dysphoria, embracing gender transgression & trying to forge a path that makes a claim on male spaces, not female. (@FionneOrlander)


Here are some examples of the abuse hurled her way.  First up the peremptory demand for an apology. Repent Ye Witch!


Information sharing to drag in other Terfs is another familiar theme from Witch Hunts.  The Woke Stasi trawling for gender apostates.  We’re going on a Terf Hunt!


Next come the book burnings!  How on earth did Enid Blyton survive the Author pogroms?  (Oh. Wait. She is forgiven because we can, retrospectively,  “Trans” George)

B66C76C5-C550-4E0F-B21D-E4ABB08C3D40And, naturally, it would not be complete without casting aspersions on her personal attractiveness.  Inconvenient women are totally unfamiliar with this tactic. Women deemed “unfuckable” have no other purpose but as a receptacle for male rage.


For anyone puzzling about the women are joining in the attacks on their “sisters” you need only look at the work of Christina Larner and Ann Bastow , on the original Witchcraft trials.


An interesting feature of this “debate” has been the attacks on trans allies for deviating from the every more complex and changing script.  The trans equivalent of “witch” is “Truscum” or , latterly “Transmedicalists”.  The latter term is imposed on Transexuals (another verboten description) who have actually made some meaningful attempt to escape their masculine bodies. They are an affront to the #LadyPenis proponents. Particular opprobrium is reserved for those who accept their biology and eschew single sex spaces in alliance with women.  This is a necessary part of any alliance with women.

Some of these women allying against the “Terfs” have not learnt the lessons of the past.  The fate of one of the accusers, in the 1600’s, illustrates, how wh the hunts widened, and former collaborators were swept up. The law to allow younger children to testify was specifically modified to lower the prosecution bar for the witch women.  Jennet was persuaded to testify against her family and lo she was implicated and executed in the next round up. First they came for my mum…..


Watching this unfold it is ought to be clear, by now, that no amount of compromise will be enough. Women are required to completely capitulate and allow males to mandate us, as a class, out of existence. Heaven forfend that women define ourselves, meet to discuss our rights, and fight to keep same sex spaces.  Handing women’s rights over to anyone, who self-defines as a woman, renders our rights obsolete and unenforceable.

Maybe this latest Terf-Hunt will end the silence and generate some self-reflection on how widespread the “witch-hunting” has become, across the political spectrum.  Male Feminists (short for Maleficent, in my mind today) are amongst the worst offenders.

In this modern re-enactment of the Witchcraft  Trials there are some common themes with the trials of yesteryear.   In Scotland the Witch finders acquired a delicious nickname.   The wannabe Mathew Hopkins If 2019 well deserve an updated, abbreviated, modern version. I will think on it. 👇



Get ready! Women are waking up to this. We are saying #EnoughIsEnough.



Project Nettie: scientists supporting biological sex — Project Nettie

Sexual reproduction, the generation of offspring by fusion of genetic material from two different individuals, evolved over 1 billion years ago. It is the reproductive strategy of all higher animals and plants, including the mammalian class to which humans belong. Humans can be differentiated into two categories by their reproductive roles. Females make eggs and […]

via Project Nettie: scientists supporting biological sex — Project Nettie