Material Girls: Review

Featured

Full disclosure: Kathleen, very kindly, donated a signed copy of her book which she took the trouble to post to me. This was done with the clear understanding that I am unlikely to agree with every one of her ideas or conclusions. It is true that I diverge on some, significant, issues. I do, however, highly recommend this book and I hope it gets a second edition as the public discourse facilitates more women speaking up.

Kathleen (Professor Stock) writes from the perspective of an academic, philospher, whilst currently holding a post within a UK University. She has been subjected to a campaign of villification, from within her own discipline, and the university sector more generally. Even the main union for University staff, UCU, has not stepped up to protect women in Kathleen’s position. I cannot begin to imagine writing this book, from within academia, and I commend her courage in doing so. As Kathleen points out there is a huge struggle to get dissenting voices into the literature on this topic. This book represents a significant milestone in breaking this silence.

My reception of the book probably deserves some clarity about my own perspective, or biases, if you will. I am not pure enough to claim the label radical feminist but I would say I am radical feminist adjacent; since their analysis makes the most sense to me. In a twist of fate I now find myself the mum of a trans-identified male and caught up in a fucked up, post modern, version of Sophie’s Choice. I am expected to hand my son over to the medical profession who, I am assured, will return a living “daughter”. My perspective is thus informed by both my feminism and the impact on my son. This is not easy terrain to navigate when you are also a stalwart defender of women’s, sex based rights. It also makes me more, perhaps too, inclined to want to understand motivations for homosexual transitioners. My compassion should not be taken as compromise where women’s rights are concerned.

A brief history of Gender Identity

The book traces the origins of Gender Identity as a concept and covers feminist voices who argued that feminism could be advanced by a more extreme belief that sex differences were wholly “culturally constructed”. She covers Simone de Beauvoir, John Money, Anne Fausto-Sterling (of “five sexes” fame), Judith Butler and also cites Julia Serano as one of the trans voices covered. I would have added the work of Janice Raymond to this list because “Transsexual Empire” is a seminal text on this area. Its omission may have been tactical because Raymond’s book tends to inflame those who see themselves as activists for the “Transgender” community.

John Money and Robert Stoller concieved of the idea we each have a “gender identity” which, as we have seen, is now being embedded in society and rapidly being privileged over biological sex.

1E4DDB5D-564C-4D60-B6CE-1971AEED8D2E

This chapter also covers the Yogakarta principles which are essential to understanding how activists envision a world where gender identity is embedded in the law. There is also a section on the origin of the term “Terf” ; which is useful for those of you unaware of the history of it’s coinage.

What is sex?

The What is Sex chapter is a good debunking of the common arguments claiming it is difficult to define sex, that we are not sexually dimorphic and conflating issues of intersex (disorders of sexual development) with a trans identity. It may seem ludicrous but some, self-identified, serious academics proclaim we didn’t know to which sex to deny the vote. Apparently it was all a random act of disenfranchisement based on the nebulous concept of “gender identity”. If only Emmeline had come out as Edward Pankhurst the women’s rights movement could have been exposed as a complete waste of time. Below is a seaside postcard from the time.

For those of a philosophical bent this chapter will particularly appeal. I have rehearsed these arguments with trans-activists over many years so much of the content was familiar. One of the key issues that resonates with me is that we must not simply reduce everything to XX chromosomes. I am thinking of women with no abiliity to process testosterone. Their chromosomes will be XY but they will have had a female (oestrogen led) puberty They often have no idea they have male chromosomes until they fail to menstruate. (I am thinking of twitter user @ClaireCais when I type this and some of the painful things she has had to endure). If only for women with DSDs this chapter is important. It is also a useful source to debunk the false conflation of a transgender identity disorders of sexual development.

Why Sex Matters?

Stock then goes on to make a compelling case for why sex matters. She covers medicine, sport, sexual orientation and sex based statistics on crime. Women are still fighting for a world which doesn’t treat males as the default humans. Denying that sex is a significant variable in many areas will further, negatively, impact women. For more on this you can read Caroline Criado-Perez.

Though it is possible that somebody at the Guardian has read Kathleen’s book since the clarification, below, is from the Guardian in July 2021!

063D8FFF-2B37-4BBC-904A-69E85DED4A55 

Now we are starting to see males competing, at the Olympics, in the women’s category will more people start speak out. Laurel Hubbard , who is competing in the 87kg women’s weight lifting category, may prove a tipping point.

Legal cases addressing the issue of males in women’s prisons and the recording of male sex crimes as if they were committed by women is also a key issue covered in this chapter. I have covered many such cases on my blog about this so I am pleased to see this.

What is Gender Identity?

The topic on Gender Identity I found a difficult read, for personal reasons. As a woman I instintively recoiled from Monroe Bergdorf locating the film “clueless” as prompting their thoughts of transition. After watching this film they state: “Oh my God, this is where I fit in, these are my people”. Stock does not include some of the more controversial utterances from Monroe Bergdorf; one of them being to demand that women stop centring reproductive rights on a women’s march. This won’t please all readers but I think she is wise to avoid more sensationalist copy.

The recollections of Paris Lees and other gay trans people echo what I know of the impact homophobic bullying can have on self-acceptance. Interestingly this is a Paris Lees quote from an article (London Review of Books 2014). This was quite an honest assessment and pre-dates Lees adding “Adult Human Female” to their twitter bio:

On the topic of homosexual transsexuals I , inevitably, find myself conflicted. I want boys like my son to be protected in all their variant masculinity. I don’t want to enshrine “gender identity” in law and legitimate the sterilising of likely gay males. Neither do I want those gay males, who do fail to reconcile to their sex, to be unprotected. What I do know is that “gender identity ” must never take primacy over biological sex, for the sake of women, and enshrining “gender identity” in law , i fear would be disastrous for women’s rights. Sex also matters for trans-identified people. It is dangerous to become so immersed in an identity you deny that sex matters for your health care.

I was pleased to see this statement in the book: in my view there are no cirumstances in which minors should be making fertility and health affecting decisions involving blockers, hormones or surgery”. Personally I take a harder line re decisions to embark on medical pathways. Achieving the magical age of majority is not sufficient for me. I know, from personal experience, our teenagers are being handed prescriptions with no counselling and no interrogation of what motivates a flight from their sex. I would ban it for under 25’s which we know is the average age of brain maturity. Whether it would deflect many from this path we can’t foresee. We do know many de-transitioners embarked on surgery, in their early twenties, only to regret it. Persuading legislators of this is likely to be an uphill, near impossible struggle at this moment in time. Alarm bells should be rining as the number of detransitioners in increasing daily. Sadly I fear many more broken bodies before this madness gets reined in.

In this chapter the author also attempts to elucidate the position of various schools of thought on Gender Identity. This is no mean feat giving the contradictions inherent in Gender Identity Ideology. This chapter uses the terminology of Trans Idealogues comparing “Cis” people to “trans people” and even using “non-trans”. That will irk some readers. I, however, see this chapter aimed at an audience (academics? politicians? ) who have wholesale adopted the nomenclature of Gender identity Ideologues. The chapter does end with an unequivocal statement warning of the danger in accepting something which is “in danger of looking unverifiable as when Stonewall tells young people “” Someone else can’t tell you what your gender identity is – only you know how you feel””. This is not a sound basis on which to enact legislation, perhaps using trans based language will convince more people?

What makes a woman?

There follows a long chapter interrogating “What makes a Woman” and looking at the definition of Adult Human Female versus Woman as Social Role. I suspect some people view this chapter as capitulation and some as compassionate. I subscribe to Adult Human Female but welcome the recognition that some people have built their lives around the narrative “Trans Women are Women”. These quotes sum up the difficulty, with the demand that the word “woman” is handed over to males in flight from their sex.

Marilyn Frye is quoted on page 152:

“If a woman has little or no economic or political power, or achieves little of what she wants to achieve, a major causal factor is she is a woman. For any woman of any race or economic class being a woman is significantly attached to whatever disadvantages and deprivations she suffers be they great or small” In response to the (much longer) quote Stock argues “Getting rid of the concept WOMAN would mean we couldn’t desribe, explain, predict or manage these distinctively caused phenomena”.

To those who have built their lives around the idea they are really women, Stock has this to say:

“People have built their lives around this narrative. Perhaps it feels as though I’m ripping all that away, and that causes you pain”.

I have seen this pain up close and its not the performative, twitter, transperbole: though that certain exists. It can be raw and very real. I think compassion has a very real place on this topic and it needn’t include abandoning a very clear view about the necessity for sex based rights and a male exclusionary feminism. We don’t need to be inhibited from centring women in our feminism, indeed it is a necessity if women’s rights organisations are to serve women, as a sex class.

Once again, I quote Miranda Yardley (male transsexual): “Refugees from masculinity exist” and add my own caveat “it is not women’s job to run the refugee camps”.

Immersed in a fiction

This chapter begins with some commentary on the passing of the Gender Recognition Act, 2004. This enshrined to idea of a “legal fiction” allowing males, then the vast majority, to have their birth certificate at amended to show their sex as female. Its astonishing to see the quality (or lack thereof) of contributions to this debate. Well worth checking hansard to look at the discussions. Below is a link to historic archives on Hansard. I find myself in the unusual position, for me, of recommending Norman Tebbit’s contribution which Professor Stocks also references in this chapter.

Hansard Archive on GRA

Stock them goes on to discuss the difference between fiction and reality and quotes both Miranda Yardley and Fione Orlander. I met both Fionne and Miranda on the same night and it was the first time I spoke publicly about my situation. Here Miranda clearly states ” I now disavow use of the word “woman” for myself and other transgender males, preferring to use the term “transsexual” or “transsexual male”. I should also point out that both Miranda and Fionne used male facilities at the meeting.

Stock covers the therapeutic benefit , to the individual, of being immersed in a fictional belief about your place within the sex binary. She also expresses concern about the risk of losing capacity to think rationally about your biological reality. This detachment from reality can be maladaptive and harmful. Moreover what latter day trans activists are increasingly demanding is the coercion of others to overtly participate in this fiction. This can result in the controlling of others around you. I was particularly pleased to see this sentence“Yet it isn’t reasonable to expect the person who gave birth to you, or the person who married you, or your own children to permanently relate to you mentally as of a different sex when they know you are not”

In addition the author sounds the alarm about the corruption of data which occurs when “gender identity” is substituted for sex. A particular danger is to criminalise speech such as “misgendering”. Something, by the way, which is already criminalised in some of the United States.

How did we get here?

This chapter is an excellent overview of how trans-activists have been allowed to lobby government to set the legal agend whilst politicans were negligent, in seeking contributions from women’s groups. Stonewall figure prominently, as do Mermaids, and The Guardian newspaper does not emerge covered in glory. Jess Bradley of Action for Trans Health is also consulted. Professor Stock refrains from any reference to the sacking of Jess Bradley. He was the first Trans Officer at Manchester University and departed for sharing a bit more his anatomy ,at work, than would be considered decent.

This chapter has an excellent overview of the propaganda deployed to further Transgender Ideology. One of these is the egregious use of suicide statistics, which are based on dubious data. Hate crime statistics also create a false narrative about widespread abuse of this population.

This chapter also looks at the pornified representations of women and those public “transwomen” who draw on these depictions to demonstrate membership of the female “gender”. These performances reify dehumanising representations of what it means to be a woman; another reason why women are not served by any alliance.

The chapter on autogynephilia is where our attitudes diverge. In part this because my empathy goes to the women who find their husbands are autogynephiles. These women are now getting a voice by organising as “trans-widows”. I have read enough of these accounts to see commonalities with men who coercively control their wives. Many of these women found themselves subject to degrading and humiliating treatment. At the extreme end it involved forced participation in sexual acts which validated their husbands alter ego. At the milder end women report having their personal style and friendship groups co-opted by their husbands almost as if they were replicating, or replacing, their wives.

Even, seemingly, benign, behavioural autogynephilia includes males inserting themselves into female spaces, and conversations, to gratify their need to assert their membership of the female group. The wives, or trans widows, then find themselves excluded from the support of women because their ertswhile husbands have colonised their places of refuge.

Kathleen asks why the lack of coverage, on the gender critical side, relating to trans-identified females. This is surely because, whilst it exists, androphilia (sexually fetishising a male identity) is relatively rare? Women tend to focus on “trans-men” as female and gay males. Gay males are latterly, waking up to the encroachment of these femaled on (gay) male spaces. Defending gay male spaces is surely the job of gay men and they do seem to be, belatedly, joining the debate in growing numbers.

A better activism in future.

Those not immersed in this debate may regard this chapter as even-handed and reaching out to those who have feared to dip their toe in the water. Others may bristle at the criticism of Radical/Gender Critical feminists.

Julia Long came in for some criticism by name. For the record I am an admirer of Julia Long’s uncompromising stance. I think we need straight-talking women who reject the mantle of “Be Kind”. As a (heterosexual) woman who lives with three males I think Lesbian feminists, of a separatist persuasion, have often been the clearest sighted about the threats Gender Identity Ideology poses to women’s rights. I wish I had listened to them sooner. I also find Julia funny, she has Ovaries of steel; and is unafraid to offend in her direct action. She appeals to my Yorkshire bluntness and I admire her, albeit from some ideological distance. She is unashamedly woman-centred and some of the terminology used is reminiscient of attacks used by Men’s rights activists. For me we need the range of activists challenging this ideology and some of the women shifting the overton window won’t be invited to the top table discussions but will have opened the doors for the women who do get a seat.

At the same time Julia warns about using terms, such as “transsexual” and “transwomen”. I no longer use the latter but I do sometimes uses the former whilst also sometimes, speaking plainly about “men”. I am inconsistent in my application and I don’t advocate for my, selective, approach as a basis for any women’s movement. It just happens to be a response to my personal circumstances. I choose to use less alienating language for those I love, or like and respect. I therefore do perform “polite fiction” on this issue and live with some cognitive dissonance.

Kathleen also warns about the alienating use of words like “mutilated” when describing the surgical harms to girls; subject to double mastectomies and other surgical procedures. Again those of us with our offspring’s skin in the game, literally, adopt different tactics in this area. I do regard these surgeons as butchers who are mining my son’s body for profit. I am angry about this. At the same time we need to find a welcome back, into the sex class they never left, for detransitioners. I was irritated by blue-tick feminists (not Kathleen) getting the vapours about some graphic images of phallioplasty procedures. Simultaneously nobody wants to exacerbate the regret of those who have found their way out of the gender cult. This is extremely difficult terrain to navigate because we want people to stare directly at the reality and not minimise by using euphemisms like “top surgery”.

The chapter outlines some ways in which these disparate groups might make common cause. I honestly don’t know if the extreme sex denialism, of the Trans lobby, will allow for compromise. Will it allow women the right to define ourselves and exclude males in any settings?

At an individual level, I find some of the more ruminative transsexuals, suprisingly, find meaning in a radical feminist analysis. They see common elements in questioning sex based expectations and are reflective on how they may have been followed very diffent paths had they encountered this framework. At the same time I know of transsexuals who found Kathleen’s analysis of their path as an immersion in a fiction meaningful. Invariably these are homosexual transsexuals who are not quite so invested in the need to validate the “woman” they wish to consecrate their lives to….

It is possible therefore that some of the linguistic concessions, in this book, will reach a new audience who would shrink from the plain speaking of a Janice Raymond. It is also a book written from within existing employment in academia and that surely has an impact on which audience it is intended to reach.

One page 272, there is a really useful list of all the areas which need more exploration (data) and research. She devotes three pages to these areas and it is quite shocking to consider the policy decisions taken without this data. Stock argues that their is a “surfeit high theory” in activism and public discussion. This includes Trans Studies. She goes on to say “High theory is abstract, totalising, seductively dramatic in its conclusions and relatively insulated from any directly observable empirical consequences – which ….makes it harder to dislodge”. She then returns to a critique of Judith Butler whose conclusions are “reached through a byzantine set of theoretical manoevres”. I think it fitting that a critique of the High Priestess of Gender Bollox is in the conclusion.

My conclusion. I think this is a very important book. I imagine every single reader will diverge at some points with the book’s stance. We all are in this with varying perspectives and we need to navigate a path to enable disagreements to be voiced from within feminism. I am one of six sisters and only one of them feels able to agree with me. I still love them and hope they will come round. Thanks for writing this book Kathleen. I hope I have done it justice.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income). All my content is open access so if you can’t speak publicly, and you have spare cash, this helps me maintain some independence.

£10.00

THE APARTHEID OF SEX: Rothblatt

Featured

Who exactly is writing policy for the Ministry of Justice?

This blog is going to focus on what Rothblatt had to say about prisons. Rothblatt has a lot to say about a range of issues; as a late-transitioning transsexual with an interest in Trans Humanism. I will do a series looking at Rothblatt’s ideas across a range of topics impacting women. Women are a SEX CLASS not an “identity” for men to claim whether it is done as an act of dominance or as a refuge. We can support males who reject their masculinity but no ally would claim to be the same as a woman; especially now the damage, to women, of Gender Identity Ideology, has become apparent.

Martine lays out his vision in his manifesto for a new “sexual revolution”. I find that an interesting choice of title because, from my vantage point, this is the perfect description. This a Men’s Sexual Rights movement masquerading as the civil rights issue of our time.

A261B8D5-E068-4276-A6F6-CB58DF8E93C4

In this book he argues that the categories of male and female lead to a sort of apartheid, which is how he categorises sex segregated spaces. Martine argues that this proposals have emerged from feminist thinking. When a man like Rothblatt starts, approvingly, quoting feminism, he is either going distort it beyond recognition, or he is quoting Dick pandering, Doormat Feminism.

I did a long thread, over on twitter, about Martine Rothblatt which you can find here:

@STILLTish Apartheid of Sex

A modest proposal for the Prison System.

What does this Martine’s vision have in store for women in prison? Martine argues that the justifications for sex segregated prisons are postulated on the basis of women’s “frailty”. He argues that these claims are suspect.

B6FBD5DF-E896-44C9-B526-23FB2AE1167F

Before I continue here are some facts about the U.K Prison estate. These were published in 2020 and represent the data as of November 2019. Please be aware that, stark as the sex differences are, some of these offenders are males allowed to blame their crimes on women. Despite this, state-sanctioned, gaslighting, the male-inclusive, category of women is still a tiny proportion of the prison population. Women are less likely to be imprisoned for crimes against the person and only 2% are recorded as imprisoned for sex offending. Note that some of those “female” crimes are actually committed by males. Thanks to a recent court case we now know that there is an over-representation of male “women” incarcerated for sex offences. With such small numbers even one male added to this category of criminal offences can make a huge difference. Hence we have an entire programme on the BBC expressing horror at an 84% rise in female paedophiles. Are they female? Really? Shamefully the BBC chose not to question the data, Fairplay For Women did, see link below.

Female paedophiles rise by 84%?

He goes on to argue for his own solution to prison accommodation in a novel version of carceral feminism. Unbelievably he argues sex segregated, prisons have done nothing to stop rape in prisons. What he fails to mention is he is talking about male on male rape! (See below). Of course the Prison Industrial Complex, especially after the introduction of the profit motive, keeps costs low by providing low staff to prisoner ratios. I don’t disagree that the prison system fails to protect vulnerable, male, prisoners in the male estate. Prison reform campaigners have long argued single occupancy cells would reduce the numbers of men raped and murdered. Yet the solution selected has been to place, actual, and so called, “vulnerable” males, claiming a female identity, in the women’s estate. This has resulted in male sex offenders being housed with women, illustrating the naivete, or worse, nefariousness, of the architects of the policy. A system which denies women’s need for sex segregation and prioritises the needs of males, is a blatant example of institutional sexism.

1526B04F-FD9C-48C3-87ED-62485F1B42CB

Even worse is that final sentence. Men are to be allowed to mix with women because it may help with their rehabilitation. This is woman, as support human, territory.

FARMER V BRENNAN

Here Martine quotes a court case from 1994 where a be-penised inmate, who Rothblatt calls “her”, sued the government to be moved out of the prison where he was held. Ruth Bader Ginsberg was also involved in that case, but didn’t act for the prisoner.

CBD0ED8E-C3FD-4B24-82DD-08861E2AA17C

I took a little detour to look at the Farmer case. Dee Farmer had a twenty year sentence for credit card fraud. They appear to have been moved to a higher security prison following further offences in the prison estate. They were a pre-operative “transsexual” in terms of being penis-intact. They had been transferred to the higher security prison because of a continued pattern of criminal offences. (No violent ones were reported or sex offences against women).

62C67A74-443C-4AE7-814C-0EFC2307D1F2

Dee was moved to administrative (segregated) detention due to engaging in consensual sex, whilst HIV positive. Farmer was seeking a move to a lower security prison with less violent offenders. Ruth Bader-Ginsburg drew attention to other groups of vulnerable male offenders in the oral arguments. In my darkest (or more realistic?) moments I think the madness may end when other (Gay?) males claim discrimination because they are being treated less favourably. Maybe men will be listened to and effect some change? Policy makers and politicians are clearly comfortable with ignoring the negative impact on women.

They were not asking to be moved to the female estate having dropped an earlier petition as detailed below. Undoubtedly, were this case to be brought today, the claimant would have targetted a move to the female estate.

4D05614D-D910-4620-8156-1193DCC5F6A9

BACK TO ROTHBLATT.

Now we come to some of the practicalities of this new utopia. Here Martine has to deal with the fact that women exist, as a sex class, and the fact it is the female people who get pregnant. How does he propose to get around this? We will forcibly implant contraceptives in the women and suppress sperm production in the men. The risk of pregnancy, he argues, can be remedied by a pharmaceutical solution which he is quite happy to be “mandatory”.

82E97D85-B6D9-47E4-A057-C1E4FA77F689

Here he avoids the use of woman but reduces the inmates to their “genitalia”. The use of “accidental pregnancy” also avoids having to confront whether these pregnancies would be the result of rapes; a distinct possibility when female prisoners are forcibly confined with men. Nowhere does he address the fact that 98% of prison convictions for sexual offences are committed by the male sex or the fact the female population will be vastly outnumbered by the men.

6EBAA27B-2A03-4D94-B342-A24300975F07

In summary, Martine constructs an argument which ignores the significance of biological sex in determining likely predators and prey. He leverages the clear vulnerabilities of a pre-op transsexuals. He conveniently ignores likely vulnerability of other young males; who may be gay and also deviate from accepted performances of masculinity. Worst of all he is prepared to expose women to serious risk because he cannot bear any division between his imaginary female identity and actual women. This is the misogyny peculiar to autogynephiles.

He then proposes the barbaric, and likely illegal, mandatory contraception for women. He shows little concern this is necessitated by the higher risk of rape. As an aside he claims that mixing the sexes may encourage lower rates of recidivism, a spurious claim given that you are providing sex offenders with captive prey. These men are not known for their restraint.

This book is from 1994. Had I encountered it at the time I would have dismissed this as merely the work of a deranged mind. Never could I have imagined it as a blueprint for the future. In 2021 it is eerily reminiscient of official Ministry of Justice policy and that should enrage us all.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income). All my content is open access so if you can’t speak publicly, and you have spare cash, this helps me maintain some independence.

£10.00

Talcum X talks Butler Bollox

Featured

Owen Jones talks to Judith Butler the Queen of Queer Theory. Full transcript attached. It was almost impossible to work out where the punctuation was intended. Apologies in advance to the Grammar police, I may have lost the will to live at some point. Transcription errors are mine. Failures of logic are Butler’s.

Owen Jones and Judith Butler

Here is the YouTube.

Owen Jones and Judith Butler

Who will rid me of these pesky transphobes?

OJ seems very keen to draw Butler into his public disagreement with Suzanne Moore. The piece starts, quite abruptly, with Butler criticising an unnamed woman who, we learn later, is Suzanne Moore. I would call this a response but it bears little resemblance to Moore’s actual writing on this topic. JK Rowling also comes under attack, as do feminists Janice Raymond and Sheila Jeffries. All women. When a man seeks to draw women, oops Non-binary persons, into criticising their fellow women, I am a tad suspicious of the driving motivation.

Plenty of men have expressed skepticism about Gender Identity Ideology, including Douglas Murray (Gay Man) and Piers Morgan. He could have also targeted Simon Fanshawe (Stonewall founder and Gay man) who gave his support to LGB Alliance. Why did Jones pass up an opportunity to skewer his, male, political opponents? Instead he has his sights trained on a bunch of left-wing, trade union, women. Could it be that Owen knows what biological sex is when it matters….to him?

Transphobia and Islamophobia. 

Owen asks Butler for her opionon on what is happening with British transphobia. Butler hesitates, for about a millisecond, to be the kind of American who comments on other countries. In her reply Butler hands Owen the answer he wants about British feminists, and simultaneously demonstrates her their complete ignorance about the U.K context. Butler is another U.S “feminist” who would be better concentrating on fighting for maternity leave and reproductive autonomy in their own country. U.K women will continue to fight for the sex-based rights these silly women are giving away. (Butler refers to UK women as silly and our arguments ridiculous so I make no apology for replying in kind).

BDE6BE39-66E8-4260-A310-26CE3B3CE0F8

If you are looking for dazzling insights, into feminism, prepare to be disappointed. If you seek incitement to hate on women, you came to the right place: It’s full of bitchwhistles. Owen, “I am not a misogynist” Jones runs through the usual slurs.

Transphobic. ✅

Racist.✅

Dismissal of “Older” women. ✅

Homophobic ✅

Owen deliberately ignores the impact of Gender Identity Supremacy on Gay Rights. What happens to SEXual orientation if men can claim to be Lesbians? Nowhere does he mention that many of us are parents of Gay Males. Some of us find it hard to see why calling our sons “girl” in the playground is “bullying” but when the Tavistock and Queer Theorists do it it’s affirmation”. Why let the truth get in the way of a bit of performative misogyny?

In Butler Land sex, is of course, assigned at birth. The way Butler talks about the inside of the delivery room is reminiscient of the bonkers group Action for Trans Health. For those of you who are unfamiliar with this group, let me remind you, they argued that identifying biological sex was a violent act of State coercion. Butler continues in this vein with the inevitable guff about chromosomes making sex so, so, complicated to determine. Butler’s ham fisted attempt to deny biological reality echoes an average day, playing intersex bingo, with the Queer Theory twitterati.

I expected she would have enough in her arsenal to make me second guess myself. Nope. Turns out What the Butler Saw was not much.

 The Trans person’s burden. 

The idea that “transphobic” feminists are responsible for the deaths of “trans” people is  how   Owen chooses to frame the interview. The  reference to suicide, at the outset, is grossly irresponsible. To promulgate the False suicide narrative, knowing people who identify as “trans” are among his most devoted acolytes, shows a reckless disregards for the dangers of fostering suicide ideation. Not only is this contrary to Samaritan’s guidance, on media coverage, it is cheap, emotional blackmail.  This is Butler’s response to Suzanne Moore’s purported stance. 18E90194-A10D-43EE-B2D3-74A3D81E368B

This is quickly followed by more transperbole. Women.  Look what you made me do!  Failure to recognise the preferred name/ identity of trans-identifying people means they will be unable to eat and breathe! 

AE50C213-73E6-48E7-8C7B-A05C0E02947D

Later Butler depict’s Moore defending of women’s rights as based on a deep, subjective feeling that women wish to deny others. 

F99D7FE0-7634-4948-B627-AE37816F553F You have just spent ages saying there is no right way to be a woman. Yet, here you are, saying being a woman is defined by  this  inner, subjective, feeling that we are woman. I don’t have this “genderfeelz” thing. I just am a woman. On the basis of this argument I will have to kick myself out of my own sex class… and see Butler in the non-binary section.  

After the diatribe on Moore’s failure to understand trans peope etc Butler makes an astonishing attack:

Now, when someone like Suzanne Moore says “Oh transwomen just think they’re women because of a feeling they have”, That’s a deeply dismissive, transphobic… I’m sure she would be proud to be transphobic I don’t think it’s a falsehood to call  her transphobic.  I think she values transphobia. She wants more of it in the world.

No wonder Jones felt obliged to insert this slide..

8D08CDAE-EAE8-4B80-B130-1BEF4433403C

Next up Butler bastardises feminist thought. They/Them repurposes centuries of work questioning the social construction of “femininity”, to better serve our Trans overlords.  UK feminists have long argued that Gender Identity appears to be based on regressive, sex stereotypes. Butler bollox twists this to lend credence to the foolish notion that we  have no idea what a man or woman is!   Queer Theory does not, in fact, deconstruct “femininity”, or “masculinity” , it merely reassigns the sex of anyone who doesn’t successfully perform sex stereotypes. Queer Theorists also throw in a veritable smorgasboard of other identities like a post-modern pick and mix.  Butler has, we later learn, opted for Non-binary, something inbetween. Sigh. 

What is a woman?

F6C2F968-E3BC-4BEC-AA8D-6AA962537FDC

This might fool a neophyte, like Jones, it ought not to have fooled so many others. Of course we should deconstruct societal expectations, of both femininity and masculinity. That should not mean reifying sexist stereotypes to assign flamboyant males, or butch women a new sex designation! Note the failure to conform to uber pornified “femme” presentation covers many more of us than Butch lesbians. It’s the stereotypes. Stupid!

More on the same theme. Who are these Women who do a thing and then immediately think, the doing of the thing, means they are “not really a woman”. When I was the person paying the mortgage one of the banks we applied to only had the option for MAN:Yes or MAN:No. This was twenty years ago, in England, not Afghanistan! Who exactly was telling me this was not something a woman should do? Could it be that the computer system was designed by a bloke still shocked that women had their own bank accounts? Why would this make me question my sex, rather than note the sexism?

85BDC421-8FD7-4796-8B5B-1A0C16B2EEAF

What is “gender”?

The current trend for asserting the primacy of “Gender Identity”, over biological sex, is doing the EXACT same thing as rigid enforcement of sex appropriate roles. Are you are girl who likes short hair, trains, playing with boys, computer games? Are you really a “boy”? Same for boys who are bakers not fighters. It’s so utterly regressive. Before all this Queer Theory bollocks we were making some headway fighing to liberate females and males from these constraints. NOW? Oops I seem to be a great scientist and I fancy women: I must really be a man.

Butler’s arguments are so full of hesitation, deviation and repetition. They are also hard to follow. We are informed that, after Butler publishing her book,Gender Trouble, she had some negative feedback from the Trans community and how she learned to listen to trans people. They were were at pains to dispute the idea their Gender Identity was not innate. Butler offers up trans theorists who claim an innate Gender Identity and advises this is an area of much debate within “trans-studies”. She is abject in her desire to learn at the feet of the great trans theorists and scold’s transphobic feminists for not reading her recommended gurus. (We have, Judith. We just thought it was regressive claptrap, but, hey, maybe if it were not for my #LadyBrain I could grasp how this is meant to be progressive).

Butler concedes that there is a vast difference in expections of 1950’s women to modern day expectations. She understands the formation of “Gender Identity” varies according to historical context but still claims “Gender” is so deeply seated it is not really a choice.

48643B4C-921F-472B-B454-E6F7ABCB4F30

So it’s not chosen. It’s not innate. It’s historically changeable but also deep seated. These are the kind of intellectual acrobatics required to include Bearded Lesbians, like Alex Drummond, under the trans umbrella.

Butler also takes issue with the misunderstandings about Gender which she patiently explains, obfuscates. Gender is performative but not a performance, its deep-seated but not innate, it is performative but it’s not artificial, it’s a powerful social and historical reality but it isn’t just based on sex stereotypes. Keep up on the back benches. Are you really going to legislate based on this nebulous concept?

6F0621D6-9E82-4027-920D-820B27163AC9

Here is how Butler experiences their “gender”. Seeing so many drag queens in gay bars helped Butler understand that some men could out perform her in “femininity”. Yep. People. This is what passes for progressive thinking. Women who don’t perform in the s expected way are somehow failing at being women and therefore must be non-binary? Men? #NobodyDoesItBetter apparently.

Stonewall and Historical Revisionism

Below Owen reminds us that Stonewall only added campaigning for the T in 2015. It has taken just five years to destroy an organisation once remarkable for it’s work defending gay rights. As we can see from this clip they justified this by the historical revisionism which claims Transwomen were key players in the Stonewall Riots. This is an egregious lie. In fact the Stonewall Riots were started by a Lesbian and supported by Gay men. Transsexuals /Transwomen played a minor, to non-existent, role. To see OJ cravenly thanking trans people for their liberation, as a gay man, is cringe-making. Later in the piece both Butler and Jones criticise historical revisionism and completely overlook this example of their own. In the same section Butler claims that post-modernists are not in the business, as far as she knows, of denying facts. Pull the other one.

F6C3E574-9080-497D-980D-C0F99949B830

RUTH HUNT

CDDED25D-B9E4-43FF-A6D4-3EAC28D8709B

(Ruth Hunt now has a seat in the House of Lords. For swelling the Stonewall coffers with Trans Lobby cash and, in doing so, destroying the reputation of a once venerable organisation. Interview with Ruth Hunt , below, on Hard Talk makes it clear she measured success by revenue. Looking forward to how Ruth Hunt revises her history when the damage to young lesbians becomes clear. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csy97p)

Next up. This is how Butler characterises writers like Janice Raymond and Sheila Jeffries and women who are campaigning for penis free spaces. This argument would not be out of place on a Men’s Rights Forum, because this is exactly what this movement is. Butler below doing the classic #NotAllMen so beloved by MRAs and TRAs.

Once again. We exclude ALL men to safeguard women and girls from the FEW. We exclude ALL men not just for safety but for privacy and dignity. It is perfectly reasonable for women and girls to wish to undress, shower and acccess the toilets in FEMALE ONLY spaces.

F829EF5B-644B-44D5-8C12-29D8AF345108

Here she is on JK Rowling. Women talking about a history of domestic abuse are leveraging their trauma in order to persecute others!

97A0361C-05AA-4822-9127-39F90074152B

Here are JK Rowling’s actual words.  Trigger warning.  They are PERFECTLY REASONABLE!

JK Rowling Statement   

Owen commits and unpardonable faux-pas! 

To end.  Well worth watching this snippet to see Owen spluttering an apology after making a capital error and failing to respect Mx Butler’s identity!   OJ decides to ask a question from one of his viewers and …

He, of course, blames the questioner..another woman and Butler makes her their feelings perfectly clear.  

7B84B34D-2897-45E3-B5BE-EE051D448AC0

Lol!

3456B102-0876-4400-8C56-ECD6A1494BDE

Agreement?

I didn’t disagree with Butler on everything.  She gives a creditable account of why the work of Kimberle Crensaw is important. Not withstanding the reputation of intersectional feminism is now utterly ruined by the parasitic leeching of Gender Identity Ideology.  It is certainly true that women could have made common cause with refugees from masculinity  IF they had not turned out to be neo-colonialists.  Certainly those of us who are not willing to give up our sex based rights are not, as Butler mischaracterises us, unconcerned with structural racism.  Once again the hijacking of #BlackLivesMatter by the obsession with trans issues has haomorrhaged respectability for that campaign, but the initial aims were laudable.

I also wholly endorse this statement though for rather different reasons than Butler 

182CAA5E-B084-4776-86EA-A69F08EAFC2E

If you can support my work your contribution would be deeply appreciated. I am able to speak up because I have no employer, and therefore no income. If you have the latter but are not able to speak up this is a way you can help.

£5.00

The Department of Education

Featured

Transgender Guidance, for schools, draws support for its interpretation of the law from the Department of Education (DFE). This document illustrates how they have been cognitively captured by many of the prominent Trans Lobby groups. Many references to GIRES and Stonewall. None to women’s groups. Not a single one. The DFE also reference the Cornwall guidance which was the subject of my previous blog.

Cornwall: Transgender Guidance

A3DD1383-9E62-4116-B85A-2AC65630858D

This guidance, from 2014, asserted that the protected characteristic of gender reassignment now extended to school pupils. You can read the full document below. 👇

Equality_Act_Advice_Final 3

This is the document which advised schools how trans-identified pupils are covered by the, legally protected, characteristic of Gender Reassignment. 

D7264C55-E403-4600-BF12-5F33B10C81B8

It is important to remember that sexual reassignment surgery is prohibited for under 18 year olds, on the NHS. Granting permission to male pupils, to use facilities in accordance with their “gender”, is mandating girls to accept penis in their intimate spaces. Gender reassignment was not intended to cover the modern idea of what it means to be trans. We did not consent to this.

The DFE briefing relies on advice from Stonewall and the Gender Identity and Research Education Society. (GIRES). A brief look at their supporters and trustees shows a heavy presence from trans-identified males. Below is a quick look at attitudes to sexual harassment from prominent transgender activists some of them associated with GIRES.

Backlash?

Anyone remember #MeToo? Is this the backlash?

D57A8429-3CC3-4E34-A63C-7CDDAE9973990B95985E-8116-4D3D-9419-15214F1963D7

Carlotta is not the only trans-identifying male who thinks women over react to men’s sense of entitlement to our bodies.  There is a marked difference between a male and female perspective on sexual harassment.  Paris Lees is advertised as a  GIRES supporter on their website. Here Paris celebrates being objectified and arrogantly dismisses female fears about how transgender rights are being used to attack women’s right to single sex spaces.  Ironically statistically escalators are more of a risk than Paris appreciated.  There were, in fact, more people killed in escalator accidents than trans people were unlawfully killed, by all causes, in the year of this tweet.  I would not trust Paris Lees to risk assess women’s expose to harm when single sex spaces become uni-sex.

 A cursory look at the hyper-sexualised, look at me,  performances of “femininity” from prominent TransGender activists bears witness to the fact that Paris Lees is not an outlier.  Here Carlotta  illustrates that males look at sexual abuse in a different way to women?   For transgender males their perception is skewed because they have an excessive need to be validated, as women, which predisposes them to welcome what we repudiate. F36B0912-78F8-4C62-A38F-51485982EDFC

I bring this up because, it seems to me, policy around sex segregated spaces is being DICKtated by males.  Yes they may wish to identify as women but they seem unable to identify with our experience.  The lobby groups advising government are drawn from this same population. Is it any wonder they have absolutely no idea of what it was like to grow up as a teenage girl?  A cursory glance at the trustees of GIRES and supporters is enough to illustrate their likely bias. 

School context

As a result of these lobby groups we are opening up single-sex spaces at a time of unprecedented rates of sexual assault in schools.  Here are a couple of slides from a presentation by Maureen O’Hara.👇.  Over 600 rapes in a three year period.  I was staggered by that figure. 

9D205CC0-1976-4F64-BD90-7D3DE82BDA9D

Here is your regular reminder De Facto Self-identity, of “Gender” has already been introduced in policy if not in law. 

74006E3E-0D69-45C8-AFC7-BC37D0675211

The DFE will end up with a future appearance at the Inquiry into child sexual abuse, the only questin is when. We do not want to wait thirty years. We need to hold  people accountable, during their time in office, and not when they are deceased or honoured with a with a seat in the House of Lord and a massive pension. 

The usual suspects. 

A lot has changed in the six years since this guidance was written. I suspect even the most zealous of Transgender Rights Activists (TRAs) didn’t anticipate the explosion of trans identifying children. My school, of 1000 pupils, had at least three females and one male in one year group! This is no longer “rare”. Eventually one would hope that politicians would wake up to the obvious connection between proselytising Gender Identity Ideology and rising rates of children claiming to be transgender.

A2991067-906D-4C9B-A1E6-E1958C1FFCAD

Here the DFE expand on the protected characteristic of gender reassignment and why it is deemed to cover school children.

👇 Again they link to GIRES website.

25DCD2C2-97EB-4E86-9F98-983AF945546F

This was surely not the intention of the original lawmakers. Exhibit A. John Bercow. Hansard. Once again the interchangeability of gender as a proxy for sex makes for bad law. Bercow may have intended to reassure over single sex spaces or to obfuscate.

4BEAFA81-1456-4610-B540-99E0EAC41929

I am starting to come out in a rash when I see the word “gender”. The word that needs to be used all the time is sex. This quote below is disingenuous because all the guidance that flows from this has, effectively, stopped treating sex as a protected characteristic. This is a major change and not simply a reduction in paperwork.

09609E87-B5E1-488A-B5E1-9E9FCF4A7360

I was not aware that harassment only applies to disability, race and sex but not the other categories listed. I will defer to legal peeps on what this means in reality. One noted feature of this is that gender identity is covered by hate crime legislation, even though it is not a legally protected characteristic. Sex, which is a protected character, is not covered. I am no fan of hate crime legislation, especially the ridiculous hate crime incident category, but women can’t point to any statistics on the hatred we experience using this method. A man can report misgendering as a hate crime but women can’t report any sexist abuse.! Women can’t laugh at a man but he can abuse us with impunity.

3470A4A5-1857-4DC6-BAFB-22C379F4ECB7


The inevitable referral to the Stonewall website and more links to GIRES material. The guide quoted below was made possible by funding from the Home Office which you can find confirmed in their accounts for year ending December 2013. When the fashion for outsourcing took over the governments, of all political persuasions, I had not understood this included sub contracting their own critical thinking. Lobby groups have been allowed to corrupt policy, and law, in this area for far too long.

C7A0D8A6-A2F3-420C-8242-0A6D5DA88093

It is well worth having a look at the GIRES website and, in particular, their trustees. Populated by trans activists with a strong presence from late -transitioning males with backgrounds in hyper-masculine occupations. They also have a trustee who is steeped in Queer Theory and can be found quoting Judith Butler in what reads like a PhD level argument for men who want to retain their penis. Here is a quote from Reubs Walsh from their public writing and their YouTube channel.

Reubs can also be found opposing the Keira Bell judgement and arguing for the early medicalisation of children. Once again I am struck by the contrast between adult men constructing arguments against surgery, presumably for themselves, but advocating medical solutions for children.

DC78F372-4149-4CEA-8826-8085D1DFDD7B

Support for my work. paypal.me.STILLTish

If you are unable to speak out and can support me to continue to undertake research my details are below. I am not in receipt of any form of income so every little bit helps me continue to devote myself full-time. Only give if you are able.

£1.00

Get ahead of the Law!

Featured

A short piece of published advice by the Solictors Regulation Authority. You can watch it here: https://youtu.be/kHXsaNMkQSU. Below is a transcript:

SRA Trans Inclusion

This YouTube was put up two years ago whilst the Gender Recognition Act was out for public consultation with a view to potential reformation. As you can see, from the title, it promotes advice about Exceeding U.K. legislation in respect of the Equality Act 2010 and the Gender Recognition Act. Interesting choice of word.

Rachel Reese is the subject of the interview. Here is a little biographical information about Rachel.

There is a PhD waiting to be written about the number of, late-transitioning males, who have backgrounds in the tech industry. I have my own theories. While women’s rights to single sex spaces, roles and services are subject to a concerted attack, Global Butterflies “comprises trans only staff” . Not the first time I have seen such rank hypocrisy. Only a trans person can understand the “trans” experience, goes the argument. Meanwhile women are not allowed to advance the same argument about our experience.

Rachel’s organisation, Global Butterflies, is an advocacy organisation for Trans and Non-Binary people. The latter category, Rachel claims in this interview, make up the majority in the Trans-Community. That’s a bold statement.

Rachel is keen to advocate for the concept of “Non-Binary” to be enshrined in law. This would create a legal category denying the FACT we are a sexually dimorphic species. I am pleased the latest attempt, to erase legal sex, failed, (Search Christine Elan for more information on this) . Rachel also argues for 16 & 17 year olds to be able to “Self-Identify”. I presume this is to cover the age group not currently allowed to apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate. GRC applications have a qualifying age of 18. Other activists wanted all ages to be able to Self-Identify.

Here is a bit more information about Rachel’s organisation and their own extensive networks within the legal profession, and beyond. 

The final statement is incredible, coming from the Solicitors Regulation Authority. I should really have lost the ability to feel astonishment, after five years studying this movement. However, my ghast was flabbered by this next statement:

The breathtaking arrogance and presumption of the above statement. Changing practice in anticipation of a legal change! Didn’t we used to call this “breaking the law”? What they did not reckon with was that women would say NO. This is exactly what we are saying and not always in approved in language!

Support for my work.

If you are able to support my work it would be gratefully received. I have no independent income and this represents my full-time work. Only do so if you can afford.

3.00 $

That Equaliteach Project

Featured

This project came to my attention when they were asked to remove the Government Equality Office (GEO) endorsement from their project report. The first version, below, clearly included the GEO logo.

Online Link to the project report is here

Document uploaded here. FREE-TO-BE-rev5

In fact the GEO  funded this project to work with 27 primary schools.  At a  superficial level  the project  aims  may seem laudable, a resource to tackle bullying in Primary Schools.   However an examination of the materials in this pack reveal the underlying relationship to Queer Theory and the political project of disrupting social norms.  Some social norms, such as homophobia, needed (still need) to be challenged.  Other social norms exist for a reason, for example, to stigmatise the dangerous sexualisation of children. This entire document is a clear example of the political project of Queering the classroom.  You can read and article on this here

My first red flag was a dangerous reliance on Stonewall reports. 561937C3-D0A9-443C-9A4C-F09EB47AB0D6

The rise of hate crime on the basis of homophobia is disturbing. Especially since this is the least covered of the letters by Stonewall.  However Stonewall extrapolates from the data to show an alarming % of hate crime, 53% in the 18-24 age bracket.  However a hate crime is recorded based on the self-perception of the reporting individual and we know some of these are simple “mis-gendering”.  Another puzzling claim is that this project aimed to dismantle gender stereotypes.  This is the most disingenuous of claims since we are teaching children, who don’t perform sex stereotypes “correctly”, that they may be #BornInTheWrongBody.

My next red flag was a reference to this person Dr Ronz. The good doctor describes zimself as a “queer, black, androgynous, intersectional feminist”.  Of course zie does. After making a good point about lack of visibility; which does impact Lesbians, in particular, she then colludes with the literal erasing of female, often Lesbian, bodies.   A young woman describes difficulty walking, struggling to breathe, a hunched back and ribs popping out, all caused by breast binding.  This young woman is manifesting an obvious bodily hatred. Dr Ronz fails to interrogate any underlying, psychological, issues, instead she merely advises her to wear a larger binder!

4C93A0F6-7114-4F1E-AB8B-6812E1F6EF3A

For further reading you can check out this excellent article on the different attitudes to breast ironing (bad) and Breast binding (progressive) in this article. here.  What next corsets?

At last more organisations have realised they cannot get away with lying about the nine, legally protected characteristics. This is, at least, an accurate list. 👇. Brief sigh of relief but read on….they are still going to do it, just in a bit more of a sneaky way.

373FC3F8-662C-4AB6-B512-284F9AA68030

Later on we see the sleight of hand.   They emphasise that the correct legal terms should be used except its OK to use “gender” instead of Sex & Gender Reassignment.  The very same two protected characteristics now under attack can be replaced with the Stonewall preferred term.  Coincidence?  I think not.

076FFAF9-4F7C-485B-BBEB-A3913CAD02DF

Don’t take us for fools Stonewall. We see exactly what you are doing even if you have successfully hoodwinked the GEO.  This is straight up Stonewall Law. Here’s Stonewall on  The Equality Act.  👇

99FD1B71-653E-440E-A38C-0B327F1C7706

To ram home the point it quotes some of the schools involved who have proceeded to introduce mixed-sex toilets.  No doubt after being introduced to this US Transgender Rights Activist who they quote in the document.  👇 Their  claim to fame is destroying access to single sex toilets/changing rooms in their home state.  There is quite a lot about making sure toilets are “gender neutral” in the pack as teachers fall over themselves to queer the toilet facilities.

 

Policing Language

There follows a long list of terminology for our primary school children, and likely the teachers, to learn. Why do primary age children need to know about “cisnormativity”, “heteronormative“, “pansexual” and “queer” . Kids are taught about “heterosexism” which is defined as a “belief that heterosexuality is normal and the norm”. Again this is straight out of Queer Theory.  A reference to disrupting social norms which exposes the social engineering inherent in “free to be “.   A long list of terminology but it only includes the word for the majority sexual orientation in the description for “heterosexism”. These Trans Ally activists seem to have studied Module 101 of how to provoke a backlash,  to hard won rights for the LGB and even, ironically, the T.

753CD08B-ED38-488D-A4E1-06D31F51AF66

A dissertation on pronouns follows.  Why are we telling primary school children that an incorrect use of pronouns may constitute harassment?18B733A7-5D8B-47F9-9183-A7C80BFF8957

Actually lying about the Law in a project sponsored by the Government!  The Equality Act says no such thing!  Wrong pronouns do not contravene the Equality Act!

These are primary age kids and, just in case we have all forgotten, we don’t use pronouns to anyone’s face!  They are used to refer to people when they are not there!

Welcome to Dystopia. 👇8808212C-7D53-4B10-A0A9-506F35F5C837

Gender Identity Ideology.

Naturally the document is saturated with  teaching about Gender Identity.  The pack quotes research showing that children from age three “can be aware of and talk abut their gender identity”. Children, as young as three, can show awareness of the expectations for their sex and  conform to behaviours based on Gender stereotypes.  This does not mean they have an innate “gender identity”. It just means boys and girls are socialised to conform from a very young age.  Primary school children can indeed be aware of their sexual orientation but it is over-reach to claim that both sexual orientation and Gender Identity are innate.  There is much evidence for the former but not the latter.  This is not education its indoctrination.

E97D932E-DF45-49F7-BAFB-D5A2C7390B0C

This curriculum seems designed to inculcate a bodily dissociative disorder.  The below quote is to remind us of the odious Section 28 legislation, which forbade references to homosexuality. However, Gender identity Ideology is actually the Woke Section 28. We are disproportionately sweeping up our gay youth in the Transgender phenomenon because, guess what, Butch Lesbians and Femme Gay males are a thing.  We used to bully femme boys by them by calling them cissy/girl  and now we are telling them they are literally girls!  So, yes, we are promoting being transgender.

4DEC57E5-E430-40FA-9E79-B2FA4DDE2402

The document also admits that staff, who were worried about reactions from parents, initially, proceeded to teach this ideology in secret.  As more parents became aware of this it generated a backlash. Recognising the days of stealth indoctrination have passed, our woke overlords  resort to lying about the law and emotional blackmail. Teaching about Gender Identity is not mandated by law.  Parents are objecting! And NO it is not a moral and legal duty. 👇

A3605284-7F7C-4841-BBF3-72F5D6F3B78D

The document addresses questions of religious belief in the context of sexual orientation and then proceeds to answer the question encompassing the LGB & the T.  This is a standard tactic.  Many opponents of Transgender Identity Ideology are themselves homosexual.  This is because there is a conflict between   having a SEXual orientation, and demands that you include anyone with the same Gender in your dating pool, regardless of their biology.  Activists know that people are generally shamed by being called homophobic so they exploit this fear to push transgender ideology.

Beware!

Next up is a scurrilous attack on organisations which question the new hegemony of “Born In The Wrong Body”, or raise issues of concerns about the impact on  Women’s Rights.   Worth reproducing this in its entirety.  Note that once again Stonewall are quoted, approvingly, as are  Mermaids.  (The latter is a prominent, UK based, charity, which promotes medicalising “transgender kids” . The BBC has recently removed Mermaids from the list of charities they refer to as sources of advice). This document quotes them as a reputable group.

B63D6392-003E-4F8B-BC2C-C85324E26FBB

The authors are keen to  make sure that parents and schools reject these organisations and do not, on any account, read what they have to say.  They then  detail tactics for making sure the entire school buys into the ideology.   Get the Governors on board, get parents in for friendly coffee mornings…..basically “groom” them.  The document also wrongly tells parents they can’t reject LGBT education.   Not true.  Sex Educations is expected to be mandatory from September 2020. It is not yet. There is no obligation to teach Gender Identity in schools but note that this document makes it clear it is to be embedded across the curriculum.👇

B3647BE5-58E6-410A-8925-5E0BD3E522C9

However if the Government reverse the mandatory sex education the document outlines how to make sure there will be no escape. There are pages and pages of all aspects of the curriculum and how to “Queer” it.  There are examples of Home/School contracts so that parents know what is expected of them and their child.  There are books like this by Jazz Jennings, the poster child for Gender Dysphoria. 👇 The little boy who had his puberty blocked and sadly, at age 16, did not know what an orgasm felt like.  Nice accessible, heart-warming stories. Nothing about puberty blocking causing a penis so small there was not enough material to fashion a neo-vagina and Jazz Jennings multiple, and continuing, corrective surgeries.

Another part of the document includes retrospectively transitioning women, who masqueraded as men to access male professions,  such as Dr James Barry. Or even claiming that Plato supported the LGBT+ which is ahistorical nonsense.

They do manage to dredge up an actual transsexual to offer up as a role model for children.  Robert (a) Cowell was a late transitioning WW2 Fighter pilot, with a less than savoury tale.

Woke Stasi?

There is a reason why this term exists.  Here teachers, it is suggested, observe pupils and keep a diary of their behaviour. Checking for implied homophobia or, heaven forfend, a style of play that assumes heteronormativity!

6D6BFCC3-1E43-4B60-9235-C04759BA55A9

Parents

I have written about the way parents are treated in these guidance packs. Suffice to say that this one also advocates hiding information from parents.  Affirming children at school and concealing this information from parents, This despite also claiming our children are at a heightened risk of suicide.  Whilst repeating the mantra:  This is not a safeguarding issue?  

I will restrict myself to this one quote.

EC9D9D07-0D72-4B9E-8CEE-555E91F44F80

More on parents and transgender guidance is available here Putting the Loco in Loco Parentis

Queering the curriculum. Sexing it up?

The references and signposting at the end tells its own tale.  Stonewall, Stonewall, Stonewall.   Also Gendered Intelligence and Mermaids!  Not to forget the Proud Trust, proud purveyors of the Dice Game as covered by this article. here. 

2020-08-01

 

The forces pushing this ideology have finally come out of the shadows, they have spread their tentacles throughout councils, parliament, police forces, the Judiciary, Universities and our schools.  No longer acting in stealth more and more “normies” are waking up to its more sinister content.

If you wish to support my work here is my paypal address @tishnaught@me.com

 

#TheseAreNotOurCrimes

Featured

I don’t have the judicial transcript for the case I am covering here.  I will add those details when they become available. These are the published  details in these two articles. https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/derby-news/derby-pervert-im-paedophile-123-4320791    and  here

In brief the defendant was caught with a substantial hoard of the most serious category of Child porn (Category A).  He attempted to use his “Gender Dysphoria” in mitigation, The judge dismissed this,  The offender received a suspended sentence.

He was also given the “courtesy” of female pronouns in the press coverage. This is because it is mandated by the  Independent Press Standards Organisation. It will be interesting to discover if the Judge also used female pronouns, in accordance with the advice given to Judges, via the Bench Book governing Equality Issues.  This also mandates pronouns to be used which accord with someone’s “Gender Identity”. You can read this here. Bench Book

Even more interesting to find if this has been recorded as a female crime. These are crimes of the type overwhelmingly perpetrated by the male sex. A male with an unhealthy, predatory, interest in female children.👇

E8C6ED08-B036-40CA-88A6-D566C099EF62DAA4F396-8A64-468C-A105-40C2EA644DC5

Category A offences are defined thus:

Category A images

Category A images are considered to be the ‘most severe’. The repercussions for indecent image offences within this category are typically the heaviest of all related offences.

Images classed in this category depict gross assault, sadism or bestiality – obscene images involving penetrative sexual activity. This category also extends to all images that depict a child subjected to pain.

Apparently it is still a step too far to correctly sex the perpetrator.  In both the above articles we are treated to the hijacking of female pronouns to define a very male crime.

BF1269A7-6298-458E-A970-C09A65FA2A31

Here is the guidance produced by the Independent Press Standards Organisation which mandates female pronouns for the above offender.

https://www.ipso.co.uk/member-publishers/guidance-for-journalists-and-editors/transgender-guidance/#CasesInvolvingChildren

Here is the guidance on pronouns:

B343CCB8-1EF1-45CD-9010-CF78AF5754DA

Here are the resources which IPSO links.  All are Trans Lobby Groups. Were any women’s groups consulted about male crimes being blamed on women?

64D1BF54-5444-4BED-9E99-115ECFF850BF

I have documented, in an earlier post, a small number of individuals who openly admitted their motive for “Gender transition” was paedophilia.  This blog is here: Survey of Referrals to a Gender Identity Clinic. 

Here is another blog about a male paedophile subsequently identifying as female: Girl Power: The Spice of Life?

I will shortly add a further case. The next one will be of an incarcerated paedophile, also male. This case is in the public domain because the offender has taken the NHS to Judicial Review to seek Sexual Reassignment Surgery. All whilst he is detained, indefinitely, at Her Majesty’s Pleasure.

2020-07-14

#THESE_ARE_NOT_OUR_CRIMES!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can read another case in which similiar cross overs were identified Girl Power: The Spice of Life?

Domestic Violence: A Sister’s Story

As we are dealing with social isolation, here in the U.K, we have seen a spike in intimate partner homicide and family annihilation.  (16 cases, by my reckoning, in less than a month.) This is sadly not unexpected. Agencies which support women fleeing perpetrators warned that Covid19 would see women isolated, with their abusers,  and at elevated risk.   And So it came to pass.

This piece is about my own Sister’s experience, though from an external vantage point. It will cover our interaction with the police force, prison service and the Judicial system.  This experience is over twenty years ago and, roughly, spans a period of about seven years.

At the time my youngest sister reached  16 years of age I was living in Australia.  We were a large family (6 girls and 2 boys). Relations with our dad had not always been easy and, for the girls, tended to become particularly fraught when preparing to go onto higher education. The males didn’t come out unscathed but the experiences were highly differentiated by sex.  I cannot do the details justice in this post, suffice to say, I was not happy to leave her in that situation.

My  “baby” sister is 7 years younger, than I, and was a favourite of our father. We would tease her, relentlessly, about her special place in his affections. At the same time we were not above deploying his affection, for her,  to calm fraught situations.  I have no doubt that we all used her, consciously or otherwise, as a peacemaker, from a far too young age.

Continue reading “Domestic Violence: A Sister’s Story”

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.

72BE02E4-6B0B-4768-854F-0CDA0BEB86B8

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 👇

3BF808AE-0E02-4F53-BA5B-2093E0E98A7B

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

FA705565-D5EA-429B-BDCC-16D80C1CAB16

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.

1A22C50C-3BD7-4A9D-AFD8-A7CFBD1B9747

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.

28B441F0-0927-4249-A269-D429B12FCA3E

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 👇

8749C580-98B4-4C9D-AC20-A9405F3C34E1

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

DD9181BE-F2D2-4133-BFF6-A819080CE769

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.

30EC78B2-EA98-4A2A-AED8-0857633A8980

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

8DC7D9F0-C0A1-4B3C-8BC0-526934C2A99431209137-01DC-45F1-904E-FC1E14F8F8FE

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.

FE47444E-604E-4B77-A0F0-03F896A99205

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?

63E46B84-87DE-4809-96BE-08C7789279A4

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.

FF7305F4-C160-48C1-8639-C0781558F013

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

DB7DADE2-DA4E-4D00-B1DE-3053DABF38EA

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!

5F2D5D47-3AC3-42C4-84DD-D60CCCBB5DCE

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!

A61E7427-4CED-4E2B-B288-D4F83BD0F79BA44C59F2-DAC1-494E-A68A-A86B2C76D5AF

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).

02870846-A6E2-46A5-9D2D-F0B94DEAEF629A2A5FB5-8849-4577-ABF1-065D53E57F73

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.

3633A2A3-83DE-4B91-B111-3D288A48F961
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:

1334EE62-7FB8-4A16-98ED-FA1DB0C6154D
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!

63A57780-DA69-4C44-8333-0B63A6B09694

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?

14347C86-E91D-4E94-AAFC-1A60E5E73A46

cropped-18142c48-bb5e-4d86-b725-ef9cf0eca82c

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?

BD6A53A3-EC8E-45CE-881B-8A58172FA083