Ruth Hunt: Culture Wars. 1

Featured

You can watch this here:

Ruth Hunt: Bridge Building

I have also transcribed (most of it and will add it here when I have finished Part 2.

After a potted history of her career (Baroness) Hunt made attempt at levity re the zoom times and engaging an on-line. She tells us she enjoys a live audience and, in the absence of one, she is going to get out her lego figures and pretend her Jodie Whittaker figure is here to appreciate her words of wisdom. As this is Ruth Hunt I fact checked this and there is indeed a lego figure for Whittaker.

I found it a rather painful introduction but I am not the target audience and it may have gone over quite well with “da yoof”. Ruth explains that she wishes she could see the faces of her audience. Trust me, she doesn’t want to see mine as I watch her pontificate on social justice issues.

She first provides some personal background information and we learn that her mother is a trained Nurse, midwife and a retired Professor of women’s health and midwifery. I wonder if her mum agrees with terms such as “bleeder”, “birthing person” and the attempts to pretend women’s historic position in our society has nothing to do with the fact we are of the reproductive sex class? She also shares a very personal revelation about the death of her young aunt, in childbirth. For both these reasons I find it hard to understand why she has allowed herself to be persuaded that biological sex is no more than an “identity”. Hunt also explains her Christian faith and realise she was a Lesbian. She talks about the books she read and which she doesn’t recommend, and that Lesbian kiss in Brookside.

Another revelation was that Hunt began writing for “Diva” magazine at age 16. She describes herself, at this stage as very much “Cock of the Walk”.

Diva magazine, as you may be aware, was started by Linda Riley who has an interesting background. Private Eye cover some of her chequered financial history and also her notorious involvement with the Jack the Ripper Museum; which claimed to be a Women’s history museum on it’s planning application. 😳

Ruth then treats us to a potted history of her progress through Oxford University where she became the first Lesbian to become the President of the Student Union following her grammar school education and being Head Girl. She relates how she was subsequently head hunted by prominent companies and how she was attracted to the idea of joining the Army. In the end she rejected all of these options because “they won’t want me, they want someone prettier, with longer hair and swishy head, brooch wearing and ears pierced and loveliestness (sic)” So, instead she took a job at Stonewall (U.K.) .

Ruth gives us a whistle stop tour of the achievements of Stonewall up to 2010 and how she felt they were “banking” success during this period. She also deliberately uses the phrase “Gay Rights” and explains, to her audience, that Stonewall was, in those days, campaigning for Lesbian and Gay rights and had not yet included the bisexual and trans groups in their advocacy. All that was about to change when Hunt became CEO, in 2014. Hunt’s appointment coincided with the legislation to introduce the right for Gay marriage so a cynic might say Stonewall was casting around for a new remit. Hunt describes this in a somewhat different way and seems to think her projective was all about collectivism and a move away from individualism. I find this deeply disingenuous. The neoliberalism on cross sex hormones, that is Gender Identity Ideology, is deeply individualist with a strong streak of narcissism.

Hunt contextualises the environment in which Stonewall pivoted to campaign for trans rights and makes an interesting slip in this clip. She begins to describe legislation about “Gender” and then corrects herself to acknowledge the legislation was actually to do with Sex discrimination. She makes a similar slip when she takes about the Trade Union movement being led by White male misogy…but she stops herself from acknowledging misogyny.

F29CBEEC-85B4-4853-9C25-18AC8F89CF91

Ruth then talks about opposition to “trans-inclusion” which is really an opposition to the sex denialism of Stonewall’s position with the concomitant impact on Women’s (sex based) rights and Gay rights. Like many commentators she situates this conflict of rights in the context of the advent of social media and the rise of Donald Trump. Indeed Trump which may explain some backlash, in the United States, but has zero to do with the Leftwing and Trade Union women who established, for example, Women’s Place U.K. This is how she characterises the debate on social media:

1AD24A0A-29CE-42A9-AEE1-54FAEFB4F270

Ruth Hunt clearly found the responses very challenging. She is keen to point out that she has many times sat in rooms with people who disagreed with her stance on a range of issues. It is, by now, abundantly clear it is in back rooms in which Stonewall has been operating. The people who were not around this ever inclusive table, which Ruth likes to refer to, were the female people with a second wave feminist analysis. Ruth prefers to lament a lack of social cohesion and a decline of acceptance to the Brexit vote and the rise of Trump. That serves her narrative better than the truth which is the opposition of simple, grass roots, women’s rights campaigners and Gay rights activists. Never let truth get in the way of a good story, eh, Ruth?

This next clip takes some chutzpah. Ruth thinks we don’t have FACTS! Ruth has deleted her twitter account ostensibly because it was an unproductive and agrees i’ve medium. I think she has deleted it so she can avoid scrutiny and accountability for the damage she has done to Women, especially Lesbians and our Gay youth of both sexes.

She characterises the opposition to Stonewall version of “trans rights” as “cruel” and “mean” . Yet not one word does she say about the violent threats, often sexual in nature, which accompany attacks on “Terfs”. It also doesn’t seem to occur to Hunt that is precisely the awareness campaigns, pushed by Stonewall, that have informed more and more people about Gender Identity Ideology.

65A95882-69FA-428E-827E-F7B88CA9EB35

In all this Hunt looks to the United States for inspiration and remind us that President Biden has his pronouns in his bio and appointed a trans person to a senior position in his administration. The trans-identified male, appointed to policy-making positions around health issues, is a heterosexual, late transitioner who publicly refused to oppose puberty blockers for children. Where Hunt feels hope there is only despair. She is right that there is a danger in our need to trade with the United States, especially post Brexit.

So where does Ruth stand on the bridge building? She concedes that there is a need to speak to the “enemy” but then goes on to say this:

F30F254B-C25C-47CA-922F-20E923E5D5BA

So it seems Ruth Hunt has declared WAR and yet she seems in utter ignorance about why so many people, within the Lesbian and Gay community, are also at odds with the Stonewall agenda. It also seems the Lady is not for turning. There is no golden bridge for those of us who are not won over by her arguments. So how does Baroness Hunt propose to win the war?

She will be using her position in the House of Lords and also her new initiative Deeds not Words. She will be withdrawing from those talks to more backroom discussions with government departments. What is becoming clear is that this agenda doesn’t have widespread public support and Hunt likes to operate in stealth. Using the precise tactics advocated for by the Dentons Document which I cover here:

That Denton’s Document

She the. proceeds to reference research on how to effect social change and I think she is referencing the work covered in this article.

 Tipping Point

The article explains that you only need 25% of committed activists to reach a tipping point and, ironically, the hypothesis was first tested on eradicating sexist behaviour in the workplace. The authors do however identify a danger in this type of activism. It can also be used by “organisations trying to control people”

All of which brings to mind the many articles that abound in the demonic power of self-righteousness. Maybe Ruth needs to consider the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. I am not in possession of religious faith but I get a strong sense of Messianic zeal from the Baroness. Pride comes before a fall.

C50D05F2-5981-439B-8C9D-C0F1AA435C36

Ruth then expounds on her theories of declining power of our politicians and presents a theory about different kids of activism and how to use your power for good. One of the ways Ruth intends to use her power in the house of Lords is to effect legislative change to help “trans people” or to destroy women’s sex based rights, depending on your perspective. She also claims it is important to be unafraid of uncertainty which is something she may also wish to reflect upon.

Next up Ruth shares her views on forgiveness. She recounts a tale about a good friend of hers being confused about the important of pronouns. Saint Ruth realists, she tells us, the temptation to lecture her friend by, er, lecturing him on any pronouns are important t until he adds pronouns to his email.

The Q & A will be covered in Part 2.

Ruth Hunt on Hard Talk

Featured

In this interview Ruth Hunt talks to Sara Montague about her time at Stonewall and, in particular, her decision to expand the remit of Stonewall, traditionally a Gay rights charity, to include the Trans community. Link to interview here. It’s audio only so the pictures are taken from images on-line. I may have over-used the ones that make her look like a Bond Villain. 😉

Ruth HuntL Hard Talk

I transcribed the interview here. RUTH HUNT HARDTALK

The interview takes place after Ruth Hunt has announced she was stepping down, after 14 years at the helm of Stonewall. This was during a period in which more voices were beginning to speak out against the, extremist, positions the organisation was taking. After a brief introduction Sara gets straight to the heart of the conflict around the Gender Recognition Act.  

EDDDF995-DFDE-4C0F-AACA-EC2202A3CF8F

It is certainly the case that Stonewall took the more extreme position on reform of the Gender Recognition Act. They advocate to allow anyone to self-identify, as the opposite sex, and have this belief ratified by the State. This changing legal landscape has occurred in countries such as Argentina, Malta and Ireland with little public debate. In Ireland this took place, notably, before Abortion was legalised and piggy backing on the bills for Gay marriage. This is a common tactic, a kind of forced-teaming. Very difficult to oppose a bull when a significant part of it is progressive and opposing it, because of the Self-Identified sex would have been easy to discredit as a cover for homophobia. The exact same tactic has been used with legislation agains Gay Conversion Therapy. The real intention is to out law therapy for gender confused teens, many of whom, if left alone, would simply be gay. A deeply sinister tactic.

The current position in U.K Law, is that a panel, made up of judges, determines whether an applicant can be granted a change to their birth certificate to retrospectively record a different sex from that recognised and recorded at birth.

I have covered the Gender Recognition Panel (GRP) based on an interview by one of the members , a Judge.

Gender Recognition Panels: A Judge talks.

As you can see, from the above, the system was designed to be “enabling”. It is also perfectly legal for a SINGLE Judge to overturn refusals of Gender Recognition Certificates, made by the GRP. I covered one such example below. Here a thrice married, father of seven, with convictions for obtaining explosives with intent to endanger life, was granted a legal certificate to say he is a woman.

Gender Recognition Certificates

Sara presses on with this line of questioning:  Here she makes it clear that Stonewall had other alternatives to the line they have chosen. 

4A790F30-96C7-446B-91A8-5790915C85FC

Ruth’s response was illogical. Apparently this is already the position and few people feel the need to get a Gender Recognition Certificate and self-identify already. Yet, she squandered Stonewall’s reputation go campaign for certificates which, by her own argument, few people feel the need to obtain! So which is it Ruth? A vital change? Or superfluous to “lived experience” ?

0E6A1D19-4040-497A-A832-0E1247645158

Next up Sara outlines what she thinks are the problems with the current process. I strongly disagree with this interpretation, as outlined in the above linked posts. I believe Sara has bought into the Stonewall narrative.

1A0FD400-EE48-4815-94C3-62ADAA30E6E7

Sara does, at least, follow up on why Stonewall determined to lobby for the most extreme accommodations to be enshrined in law pushing for Hunt to say something about the process she proposes.

Ruth Hunt fleshes out the desired process for a man, who wishes to be recognised as a woman “for all legal purposes”, should go through. Sign a fucking form! Make a pinky promise! I am being a tad sarcastic here but there are no recorded cases, that I wcould find, of any prosecutions for lying on a Statutory Declaration. She seems similarly unaware of what that would mean for detransitioners. There is already one young woman having trouble because she was advised to apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate to revert to her biological sex, in law. Problem is that it requires a diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria and she cannot get one. BECAUSE SHE IS DETRANSITIONING due to the abatement of her Gender Dysphoria.

Hunt is also mandating how we are to even “think” about this. Because they say they are a woman, “that’s how they should be regarded”. Again, you can’t dictate an instinctive recognition of biological sex. Women need to respond to recognition of sex to ascertain our safety in certain circumstances. You can’t unpick evolution with a piece of paper, we are hard wired to recognise biological sex.

3CC3685F-57B5-40ED-8114-37E5D7A8ACE3

It is quite chilling to hear Ruth Hunt dictate how someone should be regarded when all the evidence, especially for biological males, is likely to contradict the way someone sees themselves. Testosterone, on females, packs one hell of a punch and it is likely they will be more “passing” but for biological males this is rarely the case. Trans-ID females, of course, are unlikely to present a threat in male spaces. Though there are more females demanding to be included in Gay Male spaces which is likely why we are seeing more Gay Men with Gender Critical positions.

Sara moves on to explore the cases of males abusing the self-declaration process to access vulnerable women, especially in prisons. First up Christopher Hambrook. This case is in Canada. Christopher Hambrook assaulted women in two homeless shelters in Toronto.

Christopher Hambrook

Ruth’s, disingenuous, response is to say that changing to a self-identification process would not make this any more likely to happen!

D18A6D55-ED3B-431E-9C0D-2DD5426B1946

The above statement directly contradicts the advice of the British Association of Gender Identity Specialists, reproduced below, who had this to say in their submission to the Transgender Equality Inquiry. They called this stance naive.

Next up Sara confronts Ruth Hunt about the issue of female only spaces, generally. There are many reasons why women may wish to meet without any males present, however they identify. Some of them may relate to bodily privacy but others may be to discuss and advocate for women’s rights. Lesbians may wish to socialise with same sex attracted females. All of these things are under threat due to the domination of the Gender Identity Idealogues.

3E5AF53A-FE3E-46AF-9779-F26B557AA4F3

Ruth’s response is to advise that experts have been risk assessing the trans people (males) coming into female spaces for “a very, very, long time”.

Sarah’s rejoinder is to bring up the infamous case of “Karen” White who, according to the judge “used her transgender persona to put herself in contact with vulnerable persons”. Notice the judge grants the male rapist female pronouns but erases the raped women as “persons”.

Ruth’s defence of her position is to waffle on about risk assessments and how they clearly failed in the context of Karen White. She lays the responsibility firmly at the door of the Ministry of Justice. What she omits is any reference to who advised them in formulatig their policy. This was Jay Stewart., also from the queer theory stable. She even has the cheek to say we need to focus on safeguarding, which is the first casualty of this bonkers ideology.

6C39F11F-2970-4DFF-9A95-2388B46E5129

The next exchanges cuts to the heart of the problem with the Gender Recognition Act and it’s privacy provisions. You are not allowed to ASK to see a GRC, and if you come by the knowledge of someone’s biological sex, in an official capacity, you are not allowed to disclose it. The penalties for this have been set very high, it is a criminal offence which attracts a level 5 fine which is unlimited.

This accounts for the bizarre position public officials find themselves in. A patient detained on a mental health ward sees an obvious man and a Nurse is forced to lie to the patient about the sex, of an obvious man, in the next bed. Even when he is exposing his genitalia. This actually happened by the way!

Asked about if she understands why some women “who feel very, very, concerned about the ease with which somebody could now say “I am now a woman”…Ruth interrupts with more guff about assessments which we are now seeing regularly “fail” across the Prison system.

3A491F0F-9449-429C-8B4C-EB996E7AE9BC

The above amounts to Ruth telling us the privacy provisions set out in the Gender Recognition Act are already inadequate to protect female spaces so why not make it even easier?

Sara the. introduces the voice of transsexual campaigner Kristina Harrison. KH makes the point that Stonewall are enshrining the most extremist positions in law and the lack of any public debate. KH also takes aim at the stealth policy and legal capture and the “toxic authoritarian atmosphere and the dissenting voices being sidelined are particularly women”. I am not suprised Sarah uses a “trans” voice to articulate these points, which have been made by many, many women. This looks like a human shield tactic but nevertheless KH summarised the position well.

The astonishingly arrogant reply from Hunt is this. Apparently Parliament abolished sex in 2004 and there was a debate and everything…

53C77D6F-3F1A-4290-BEA9-87161B1BE729

Next up, without referencing Posey Parker /Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshall by name, Sarah talks about the billboard campaign involving the shocking use of the dictionary definition of women. Does Ruth find the words Adult, Human, Female offensive?

Ruth says no, she doesn’t find it personally offensive and says it’s not within her power to decide what goes on billboards or not. She then deflects with an astonishing bit of DARVO, (Deny, Accuse, Reverse, Victim and Offender).

69C5C010-02F7-45FC-B3A6-2763219F593A

I notice Ruth has now deleted her twitter account but she knows this bad on both sides argument is tosh. The rape threats, the obvious males posting with weapons, the die in a fire “Terfs” are ubiquitous from trans id males and allies. Women are generally much more restrained. Its almost as if this is a tale of two sexes. So, YES I agree with her, it is toxic. I part company on her delusional perspective which is wilfully obtuse.

0265D6E6-A601-46DB-B317-EFD455ECD19C

Next we hear about one of the founders of Stonewall, Simon Fanshawe, who has publicly broken with the organisation. Eventually he will be followed by Matthew Paris and latterly Simon Callow. When asked about this he is dismissed because “he hasn’t been involved in Stonewall for over thirty years”. Hunt also repudiates any suggestions that Stonewall has shut down debate. This is interesting because they had a whole campaign saying #NoDebate. Hunt then claims that Stonewall have been involved in constant debates on this issue. That’s a whopping great lie for a woman who likes to bang on about her faith.

Undeterred Sara presses her on the fact that Stonewall have refused to debate and pulls people from panels when the topic is the GRA and the impact on women’s rights. I would argue that it is not entirely coincidental that the BBC have cancelled women speakers when Stonewall have refused to appear. The BBC claim “balance” wouldn’t be achieved with only one side willing to appear. I would say this is strategic and the BBC have either been played (or played along?). They should have “empty chaired” rather than amplifying the myth that Feminists are too terrifying for Trans people to appear alongside.

B1A334A9-6A53-4A42-82E5-6AC2BEB0155F

Sara then moves on to question Hunt about the opposition from Lesbians and Feminists including the public repudiation by a Lesbian and former donor. Maureen is a writer and a had been a high profile and generous supporter of Stonewall.

83253199-D356-41A2-B9FA-26FCAEC16D32

Ruth’s answer to this quetion is very revealing she immediately justifies Stonewall’s stance by referencing how lucrative it has been for the organisation.

0A7449E9-C5B6-4452-8B8A-AF01FBDEE2F1

I do wish that Sara had spent a little bit more time exploring Maureen’s concerns and mentioned the famous penis bearing “Lesbian” who is one of Stonewall’s advisors. Ruth should also have been confronted with the bodily modifications young lesbians and gay boys are being groomed to think are “natural”. It’s not “playful” when you sit, as I have done, with young women post testosterone, double mastectomies, hysterectomies and ovary removal. Women in their early twenties who realise, in the main, they were just lesbians.

And what does Ruth pivot to? MONEY and, below, their support from the establishment.

AF0EF328-5091-4EEE-9A7F-4DD0D6B201B8

Ruth makes it clear that Stonewall have followed the lead of United States charities who added the T well before Stonewall. Nobody brings up the £100,000 the organisation took from Arcus Foundation to add Trans advocacy to their agenda. This was in 2015 and I am sure the fundraising  department soon realised they were looking at a Cash cow if they added the T. She also makes it abundantly clear that this course of action was approved by the entire board, as the actions of her successor confirms.  1C26C996-9CDD-4969-99D1-B3280272CCE8

Elsewhere Ruth has stated that they knew some people would be opposed to the addition of the T. They went ahead anyway. Who is paying for this?  The bodies of our Gay boys and Lesbians who are being mined for profit by the Gender Industrial Complex.  I don’t believe for a second she doesn’t know what she has facilitated.  I hope she enjoys purgatory because, for me, nothing will expiate her sins. Luckily I am not God. 

Ruth Hunt interview by Talcum X

Featured

Introduction:

Ruth Hunt may believe that she got out of, the UK Charity, Stonewall, reputation intact, I am here to state that she did not. More public, and private, bodies are declining to renew membership, of the Charity’s many, money-making initiatives. Hunt may be congratulating herself that this did not happen on her watch. She is in for a rude awakening, this is her legacy. I intend to capture as much evidence as I can while we wait for the public accountability as the dominoes begin to topple.

Now that Hunt has been elevated to the the House of Lords I want to remind her that it took decades for Lord David Steel to be held to account; over his failure to deal with the child predator, and MP, Cyril Smith. How many more children could have been saved from abuse had he spoken up? Similarly how many of our, young, gay males and Lesbians will have been unnecessarily medicalised before Gender Identity Ideology is defeated. David Steel, eventually, resigned from his party and stood down from the House of Lords. His status did not save him. Stonewall had a proud history of standing up for Gay Rights but have now trashed their reputation. They bear a significant share of responsibiity for the harm Trans ideology has visited on young Lesbians and Gay Males. As CEO Ruth Hunt is similarly tarnished.

Ruth Hunt will indeed have a reputation, even a place in history, but it is one likely to take the proud out of PRIDE! Queer Capitalism indeed!

412589D8-0ED3-485C-AD75-AD434782A1CD

Primary Source:

Here is the interview. I have saved a copy. There will be mass deletions of tweets, interviews, newspaper articles. We need to archive as many of these as we can. We must NEVER forget who is reponsible for the promotion of this ideology. (Ruth Hunt has already deleted her Twitter account).

Owen Jones interviews Ruth Hunt

Here is a transcript. I have tried to reproduce it accurately but I did have to correct some parts, the intent was clear, but it didn’t translate to the written word. You can cross check the interview for yourself.

owen jones and ruth hunt

The Interview:

The interview takes place when Stonewall were campaigning for a review of the Gender Recognition Act (GRA). The GRA allows someone to obtain a revised birth certificate to reflect a “sex change”. The legislation was designed to facilitate a legal fiction for, we were told, a tiny number of people who we commonly considered to be “transsexual”. What Trans Activists, supported by Stonewall, wished to do was to allow anyone to identify as the opposite sex on a “self-identifying” basis. This would remove any gatekeeping and, as I have shown in previous blogs the process, as it exists now, already allows fully intact, male, rapists to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate.

In the U.K, this proposed “reform”, triggered alarm in many women and led to the formation of Women’s Place U.K and Fairplay For Women as well as other, groups like Standing For Women. Other groups like Object and Filia had existed prior to the GRA.

The strategy Stonewall used to enable this legislative change was to avoid debate. We were told there was no need for one and we should just “skip it”. This approach was perfectly represented by this campaign material.

Stonewall and other Trans Activists also opted for a policy of #NoDebate on the spuriousgrounds that we “debated” Gay Rights and we should simply #Skipit this time. This strategy was exemplified in BBC Radio 4 Women’s Hour attempts to cover the issue. Those representing the Trans Lobby would refuse the appear, on the same programme as Women’s Rights campaigners, claiming this would render them unsafe. This propagated the myth of a vulnerable community and also avoided any, direct, challenge to their arguments. Sometimes Woman’s Hour used taped segments, other times Trans activists refused to appear, at all. Many segments were simply cancelled because nobody, for the Trans Side, would agree to contribute.

Freddy McConnell (Trans-identified Female) outlined their stance, re debate, for the Guardian. Note the framing, discussing this issue is presented as a literal threat to life. It is also notworthy that females are often put up to oppose Women’s rights campaigners to avoid people concluding, correctly in my view, that Trans Lobby Groups are dominated by Men’s Rights Activists. It is a lot easier to get away with the hyperbole of “vulnerable” trans people when using a female with a small build.

Ruth Hunt remembers Stonewall Strategy slightly differently. In this interview she claims the problem is that they had over-estimated the capacity of the general public to engage in the debate in a mature enough fashion. Elitist claptrap. I would, however, agree with Ruth on one point they legal/policy proposals are indeed “naive”. I would suggest the truth of the matter is that Stonewall thought that they could adopt the strategy of passing legislative change by stealth. (See my piece on The Denton’s Document. Thankfully the days of them operating in the shadows are over. We See You, as they say, and we don’t like what we are seeing..

F3512F67-D18A-4099-AEAF-9275DF028B0C

Owen’s response is to profess bafflement. Who are the people (can’t even bring himself to say “women) who want to discuss the conflict of rights between Women and Men? They would be WOMEN, Owen. This illustrates how out of touch Owen is with the Working Class on whose existence and lives he has built his career and income streams. Not one thought for the women in prison’s forced to share space with male rapists? Naturally he frames this as “anti-trans” rather than pro-women. He is grossly ill-informed.

4D79C13E-5BD5-4A84-B5F0-0D6026D5B06D

Ruth also knows perfectly well she is talking about people with no desire for a “medical” transition. She even claims that women, opposed to male-bodied people in their spaces, are in danger of putting pressure on the NHS who would not be able to cope with the demand. On this point I can set Ruth’s mind at reast. Surgery does not convert a man into a woman and women still have the right to single sex spaces irrespective of surgical status.

This is how Ms Hunt frames the discussion about the Gender Recognistion Act. It is well worth watching the footage to see the jocular way she and Tiny Owen discuss this proposed amendment to the GRA. “It’s just admin”.

0AE70E1D-EE27-42C4-B9A2-310DB990E940

Owen cannot contain his glee at the opportuniity to laugh at all those silly women, kicking up a fuss about nothing.

A32AB0BA-3918-498A-81C9-99F70D372F1A

Ruth then goes on to share her opinion on the existing, legal position. This is what is known as Stonewall Law. Repeat the law as you wish it to be not as it is. If the law already allowed all these things there would have been no need for the amendment. What she is doing here is making sure, even if the law does not change, they can continue training organisations across the land that single sex spaces are illegal.

06641AC3-556D-4BAD-A0FE-B7B4E676747A

Below is a clip from the Reindorf Report which investigated the no-platforming of Feminist academics from Essex University. Here’s what the author had to say about Stonewall.

78894345-0CB2-458F-B50D-8D668CF50B3B

Ruth then goes on to make a statement worthy of Goebels level propaganda. The breathtaking audacity of the following statement flabberghasted me to the point of a Benjamin “butter gasp”!

D01164D4-457D-43CB-9E1B-B25FEADDC9BD

Yes! It’s not as if we don’t already have male rapists in female prisons, competing in women’s sports, taking Women’s Officer roles in the Green Party and Labour. Its not as if a male, who lied about his sex, is now running a Rape Crisis centre for women. Its not a if Mental Health Nurses are telling a female patient, undergoing a psychotic episode the person who has just exposed his penis to her is a “woman”. Its not as if a man in Monkey costume complete wearing a Dildo is going into Nurseries to read books for children!

Hurdles versus Loopholes.

This is a major social engineering process which requires females accept males in every conceivable space. I cannot resist sharing one final screenshot of this interview. This is where Ms Hunt made a (freudian?) slip and substituted the word “loophole” when, from the context, it seems she meant to say “hurdle”. Daft!

4894114D-2EB0-406E-86C1-7F63884C1047

I am looking forward to looking at how Ruth squares this with her Christian Faith and why she claims she would be a good person to navigate the so called “Culture Wars”.

paypal.me/STILLTish

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 keep going.

£10.00

HOUSE OF COMMONS: Stonewall

Featured

222ABB6B-72CD-4681-B587-179D3EEEE0E2

Recently there has been a raft of Freedom of Information requests (FOIs) to ascertain the extent of the policy capture by Stonewall; a controversial lobby group. The intention was to discover how organisations demonstrate compliance with Workplace Equality Index, run by Stonewall, and how participants game the ranking system. {In an interesting aside the BBC refused to disclose the information requested. They claimed an exemption due to commercial sensitivity. I anticipate this refusal will be challenged but why are the BBC so reticent?}

The House of Commons did reveal the information requested and this may shed some light on the situation. Their response was in two documents which are reproduced, in full, below. 👇

HOC response to FOI Part 1HOC stonewall part 2

Subscribers to Stonewall schemes are subject to an annual audit and their submission is monitored for compliance and ranked accordingly. Stonewall are embedded across government, the public and private sector and allies, until recently, were keen to promote their score across Social media. I predict that will change as more public scrutiny takes place.

The House of Commons obtained 23rd place in the 2020 rankings. The Ministry of Justice ranks higher. I would love to see if the MOJ leverage their role in locating female prisoners in with transgender rapists. 😳

The process of allocating rankings is accompanied by lengthy guidance and examples members could use to demonstrate subservience to their Rainbow clad overlords. Naturally Stonewall play fast and lose with pesky details, like the actual law of the land. Below is a classic of the genre. Stonewall lists a legally protected, characteristic; sexual orientation followed by two that are not; gender identity and trans identity. They then proceed to talk about other protected characteristics which neatly obscures the fact that they are mixing fact with fiction. They also ask for explicit bans on discrimination in which they throw in another characteristic; gender expression. 👇. Stonewall is a master (mistress) of these linguistic sleights of hand.

94DF20B1-D279-4DC6-838A-45E052210047

So how does the House of Commons respond?  Credit where credit is due they lead  with a legally accurate list.  Whether this is a sign of resistance or naïveté about Stonewall’s agenda is not for me to determine. 

BCB362C2-8CBD-42B8-9D9F-59538D78E63E

Alas this is not consistently applied. Later in the House of Commons pivots to accede to Stonewall Law.  Here sex is omitted and replaced with gender. 👇

90779580-8A38-4DCF-B03B-4C3E7DA5BB9D

We then come to the thorny question of gender neutral language. Feminists long campaigned for the language to recognise that we, the female people, could chair meetings and fight fires. The fight to make language less reliant on the default use of men; when describing roles, or occupations, is now relatively uncontentious. However  women were not campaigning to make ourselves invisible! The intent was to lay claim to professional and leadership roles hitherto solely occupied, or dominated, by men. Using gender neutral language was to foster that aim. It was never intended to deny our bodily existence, as a sex class. 

Stonewall have a rather different agenda.  Their aim is to eradicate sex based language especially when it pertains to biological women in favour of the inclusion of ideological women (a.k.a males).  Women did not campaign to ignore the reproductive labour of pregnancy and childbirth or deny the role of the female sex.  Most theories of why women are subject to discrimination locate the explanation in our reproductive functions. We are subject to sex discrimination because we are, or are perceived to be, able to carry and bear children.  Here 👇 the House of Commons talks of “pregnant employees”  and the “person giving birth”.   This is Stonewall speak. 

4EB5C82B-759E-4CDD-9322-E66B4CBEBAF1

The induction process takes the re-education agenda one step further by using an example of a “transwomen” as part of employee training. This scenario 👇posits women, asking for sex segregated toilets, as problematic. Women are, effectively, shamed for a perfectly legitimate need. They are so proud of this example they use it twice labelling it “bullying” and “harassment”.

4AA077A8-E023-4807-96C5-011295D6AE92

The  indoctrination continues with lunchtime seminars led by a Trans activist. Helen Belcher is a Transgender Lobbyist most notable for being involved in Trans Media Watch. This organisation seeks to change the way the media covers trans issues. This is one of the organisations responsible for the press regulator (IPSO) mandating use of preferred pronouns for trans identified males. This is now normalised, even when they have committed sex offences against women!

4C68BB96-668F-47BD-9861-5A731D71B456

Helen Belcher is a Liberal democrat councillor and former parliamentary candidate. Layla Moran explicitly thanked Belcher for providing guidance on how to answer questions about the proposal to allow males to “self-identify” as women. Predictably pansexual Layla was all in favour of the proposition and provided one of the more memorable statements recorded in Hansard.

Layla dismissed women’s concerns and claimed to have a sixth sense in sniffing out predatory males. After some nonsense about women with beards she exposed her naïveté (complicity?) with this response.

Another invited guest to showcase the House of Commons willingness to subvert their public purpose to this lobby group was an invited artist, Dusty “O” who has a nice sideline in bepenised “women” in his oeuvre. 

There are also invitations to drag artists and lots of talk of rainbow lanyards. They do note one concession to women’s demands, for a female only space, but why does the HOC feel the need for the word female to be placed in inverted commas?

Another astonishing admission the House of Commons raising funds to one of the more controversial charities working with children; Mermaids. A charity led by a woman who took her own child, aged sixteen. for sexual reassignment surgery in Thailand. Surgery which would be illegal in the U.K and is now illegal in Thailand (until aged 18).

C8EE8A05-42FB-40EA-A929-76B6C5B0C942

The document is littered with positive references to Pink News. A comic which vigorously opposes women raising issues of concern about sex based rights. The editors also continue to conduct a campaign of vilification against author JK Rowling who, they claim, is “transphobic”. She is not but why let truth get in the way of a good story. 

The HOC also boast about  changing parliamentary identification to facilitate pronoun changes  and recognise anyone changing their “gender expression”. Furthermore they promote a member of staff who pushed for mixed sex toilet facilities. 👇

63E6864D-8AC8-437B-9AE6-9024F853D181

Finally, as I have uncovered before, here is conclusive proof that Stonewall actively encourages its allies to troll International Women’s Day. They do this by suggesting active promotion of “transwomen” on a day set aside for women. This, of all their actions, is the most provocative.. Anyone taking seriously the need to foster good relations between different protected characteristics (Sex and Gender Reassignment) should have predicted how inflammatory this course of action would be. Check #IWD2021 for how often this originates from Stonewall Allies. 6FF609CC-E545-4BB8-AD6B-41808C2EC141

I am  unwaged and donations are always welcome but, with so many important legal cases under way,  here is a  worthy causes who could use some support: AEA Crowdfunder

667C7321-C3C8-4DC3-8B36-6B8468147FA5

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

 

Putting the Loco in Loco Parentis

The Law: In Loco Parentis

Parents  entrust our kids to the School/Teachers to look after their safety and well-being, in our stead. Forcing our girls to share mixed sex spaces, and hiding information from parents is a grave dereliction of that duty.

C54CBFDD-B299-480F-8C28-12CC7D9446397486AFF1-A723-4438-B4FE-136586AA312D

Transgender Guidance in Schools.

More and more parents have begun to raise concerns about School guidance, supposedly, developed to accommodate Transgender pupils. Grass roots organisations, such as Safe Schools Alliance, have emerged to challenge these  policies. In 2020, transgender guidance has been withdrawn in Kent, Cornwall, Shropshire, Barnsley, Warwickshire and Oxfordshire.  There are challenges underway in three further schools, of which I am aware. Thus far all the guidance has been withdrawn rather than face a legal challenge.

The Oxfordshire case is illustrative of a problematic attitude to the protected characteristic of sex.  A 13 year old girl challenged Oxfordshire County Council  via a Judicial Review. Her case aimed to gain recognition of the conflict between the protected characteristics of Sex & Gender Reassignment.  The guidance from the Department of Education argues that the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment   covers pupils who identify as Transgender. Link to government guidance is here

Here is the relevant excerpt and look who is advising them! GIRES!

9817B132-2299-4E0E-9847-556594A248D8

This is despite the fact under 18’s cannot apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate or, legally, obtain Sexual Reassignment Surgery, in the UK.  The Transgender pupils are therefore anatomically indistinguishable from the rest of their natal sex.

415653BF-24C1-4495-8718-566771427E62

Rather than face a judicial review the council withdrew the policy. They  are clearly hoping to hide behind the skirts/trousers of the EHRC. Oxfordshire issued a statement which contained no apology, to the female pupil. Instead the Council ends with a statement about the safeguarding of its trans-identifying pupils. Nothing about a duty to safeguard, potentially vulnerable,  natal girls.

E789BCF3-ADBA-4CE1-8647-F1D2F4B336DA

C1BCF8C1-92E8-49B2-9749-3FBAF0A30F28

In this post I want to specifically focus on the way parents are regarded in these transgender toolkits.  Both the parents of children who manifest as Gender Dysphoric and the parents of other pupils.  I estimate I have looked at about twenty of these guidance packs. Below are examples of what they have to say about parents.

Most of the guidance refers to the high rate of  suicidal ideation, in our trans-identifying children. Yet the policies repeatedly state  there is no, inherent, safeguarding risk.  If our children reveal a state of gender confusion , to a member of staff, they are reminded that this is confidential  information, not to be shared, even with the child’s parents.  How can schools claim our children are at a high risk of suicide attempts and, simultaneously, state  there are no safeguarding issues. How is it  Ok to conceal this information from parents?   D7CA96FE-7B71-4AD7-B15E-78711FB533DC39310240-746C-45A5-A26D-17C3ED3F78DA

Suffolk council divides parents into the good and the bad ones.  The good ones “work alongside their child”.  Are the bad ones those who think the best outcome is a reconciliation to biological sex and not a  lifelong dependence on BigPharma?

Barnsley expresses the hope that parents will be concerned for their child’s welfare but is clearly sceptical.  At no point, in any of the policies, is there an understanding that  parents, who express caution, are the ones  acting in the best interests of our children.  Every pack I have examined is suspiciously  keen to emphasise actions the child can take independently of their parents.

5D59CE43-9CAC-4961-9C52-46EC8AB83AFC75D12F51-26FE-4E13-A40F-978E17271584

More sinister is an open statement that a school, in this case a Catholic school, can put in place a transition plan that does not involve the parents!  This is my old school and I have young relatives who attend there.

EF43C91C-8A52-4CA4-9229-4786D3A127C9

 

 

 

 

Here is another Catholic school which labels parent’s as prejudiced. It then goes on  to make the claim that Parents/Guardians may not be the most appropriate people to guide their child through transitioning!  Why is transitioning our children seen as an unmitigated good? A direct attack on parental duty of care and parental rights from the Catholic Church!.  I am an atheist but it is quite astonishing to see the undermining of Parental responsibility emanating out of Catholic schools.

8C2137E2-0B16-4F7A-8F8C-F136CADA15CFLeicestershire Council appear to see themselves as a Tavistock (Gender Identity Services) referral agent:  Actually stating here that Teachers & School Nurses, even Youth Workers are able to make referrals! 66BC6D03-BD45-465F-BEC5-54B8FE753E88

233B594E-424C-410A-8EA7-310279D9D029Where are the parents in the Leicester guidance? Once again the confidentiality of the child is placed in the foreground.  What this actually means is that the school has the right to keep secrets from the parents. Even whilst so many of these packs claim our children are at a significant risk of suicide attempts. Still it is not a safeguarding issue?

This next clip is even more disturbing.  The Leicester policy sets out a scenario where one of the parents will be actively deceived about what is going on.

F761388E-D52E-49FF-9A06-9D39780AE6E6

Of course we can all think of scenarios where parents are a risk to the safety and well-being of their child.  Why are parents, who question the uptick of girls (and boys) with Gender Dysphoria, labelled as problematic. Having navigated this territory, for my male child, I was keen that he was afforded protection but not at the expense of the female pupils.  Puberty can be a difficult time for teenage girls and they too deserve dignity, privacy and protection. Like the parent below I was able to navigate a careful path between the two protected groups.  Unlike this parent, from the Cornwall guidance, I was not faced with a Social Justice Warrior undermining these careful arrangements.

9F8A8897-F48F-4E43-B6ED-259E65F964D2The Cornwall policy was jointly drafted with a female police officer. I was surprised the statement on the left made it into the document.  Apart from a disturbing focus on links to reporting #HateCrime it was not the worst Transgender policy I read. It is, however, a, regrettably, low bar. The document also brands parents as potentially prejudiced and again argues that the child may have a perfect legal right to exclude parents from any role in preserving their healthy bodies. 1EF8DEAB-396C-4E6F-AC3F-75269D776959

You can read about the Fraser Guidelines, and Gillick Competence, mentioned above  here.   Activists  argue that transitioning children /teens against their parent’s wishes is in line with the rights of young people.  You will start to see more references to these guidelines and Gillick competence. This is intentional and designed to draw a false equivalence to access to contraception.  References will also be clothed in Human Rights speak and references to bodily autonomy. 

7BB1BE2E-9B6D-47BD-8698-646083CAB591 A lot of these guidance packs go to some lengths to make sure schools know they can honour a pupil’s preferred name and pronoun. School systems can be amended to reflect this. There is no need for a legal name change.  They also point out that, once a pupil reaches 16 they no longer need parental permission.

Shropshire also favours hiding this information from parents who are not “supportive”. I know, first hand, of parents who only discovered what was going on, with their own child, when a letter was  sent home with a new name & pronouns.  Do not tell parents can be a very dangerous message.  Some parents have children with eating disorders, psychiatric co-morbidities, and other conditions which the school may be unaware about.

CE78FE75-2E77-40EF-A11E-E7D76FF964FD

The pack which seems to be the template for most of the packs I have seen remains in operation. This is the All Sorts pack, from Brighton and Hove.  A pupil’s right to confidentiality is elevated above parental obligations, or the rights of other pupils.  Again,  because they claim it is not a safeguarding issue it can be kept from their own parents and the parents of other children.05FCA681-B055-4296-A81F-A80DB1E8C7F3

Where a parent raises a concern, about a male-bodied person in girls changing rooms, the pupil/parent’s are admonished for denying the “girlhood” of the other pupil.  In this scenario, I as a parent of a trans-identifying male, agree with the female pupil and her parent’s concerns.  I would not want my son to be exposed to the hostility, that would likely ensue, from such a stance. At the same time, if the guidance is followed, I would be totally unaware my child had formally claimed trans-status at the school. Who does this protect?  Not my son. Not the girls in his school.

2B9A333D-6B78-4879-B363-78F3F584845C

Another common feature of the Transgender Guidance is the near ubiquity of signposting to  Mermaids Charity.  This charity is a keen advocate for keeping secrets from parents.  Here is an article on their website. It  was  modified so  children could quickly exit the site and avoid their parents discovering they are seeking counsel on  Gender Identity Issues.

3596FA32-0B32-4C50-8949-CA90825E9F26

The BBC has now amended their guidance to remove signposting to Mermaids and other trans lobby groups.  I wonder how long it will take for all School guidance packs to do the same?

My Next blog will explore  this document?  Based on a project funded by the Government Equalities Office,

Here is what they have to say about parents.  This is a lie.  The Equality Act does not mandate pronouns.

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

FTM Transgender: Legal Case

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

FTM Incarcerated 

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

09578305-34DD-40E5-80CC-949C78702503658BA7A4-274C-4853-98A0-8DA9E18B18F9

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

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

A8739A80-B646-49D9-9CCB-436CD460C5ED

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

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

82FD8DEB-BCD1-4089-8C98-80ED0CE96AC0D32B2D60-EA7D-4016-AE53-E46408C0B33A9FF1AD19-6255-42C4-AFAD-C631794B7E07FC9374E0-3B94-4600-B6FA-E4A831F1DACA

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

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

DDF20446-1A81-4820-AB60-8F99359582F8

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

55D79EFC-DF45-4CE8-9692-B8D6E7B8974F

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

Transmen and prison location

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

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

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

69F26840-7F7C-46AA-9A00-51C128807FF5

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

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

Differential diagnosis/Treatment Pathways.

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

5C484258-322F-40B2-B468-0AC9A927C86BF099A915-27B5-4E99-8CE3-DBDA442748FAF354740D-08A8-49DC-841F-000FAA04AC23

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

34D81AD6-69AB-4C1D-B457-E56E04002B47

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

AA438CB9-560F-4338-ADA0-848CD1E9EDBC

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

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

D4A6D2C4-9270-438A-ACEF-8808730A1BB5E77BFEFE-C3E4-4E11-B558-8A21D8566D42

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

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

D9916B8B-E183-4EEF-9E1A-E0083FFDFA22

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

63732581-0E9F-4AD9-B00D-3BCF4D343729

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

CE08A0E6-A8B3-4C2A-B9A2-0F0C30ECCD70

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

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

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

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

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

Worth reading this Pronouns Rohypnol

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

 

 

 

 

 

The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. 

Let me state, for the record, I don’t believe anyone has an innate “Gender Identity”.  Gender is a social construct, super-imposed on biological sex to uphold Patriarchal structures.

Gendered expectations  limit and constrain women whilst grooming boys to occupy a dominant role, as men.  Historically, feminists made a distinction between “sex” and “gender” to deconstruct, biologically determinist,  theories of sex differences.  It was never a radical feminist position  that women, or men, were born with a “natural” gender.  (Note to evolutionary biologists. I am not a proponent of blank slate theory.  I am, however, wary when biology is used to justify women’s position in the sex hierarchy).  Feminists dispute that gendered roles  are a natural, inevitable, consequence of our biology. Our Gendered role is distinct from our Biological Sex.

Gender versus Sex discourse is now distorted into the antithesis of a feminist analysis. We now have a political class who have accepted the  proposition that “gender” is real  and innate, and biological sex merely “assigned at birth“.  Since gender comprises sexist,  stereotypes the reification of “gender” is regressive.  Furthermore medicalising gender non-conformity, has some serious implications for the health and well-being of our youth.

As a feminist I have principally registered the impact of sex stereotypes, on women. As a mother of two sons I have  an increasing awareness of gendered expectations, for males.  Watching them navigate the world, as boys, inducted into the male tribe, exposed the deployment of, often brutal, sanctions for boys who don’t perform  “male” behaviours.  As a parent of a same sex attracted, son, this has brought things into even sharper focus.

Not conforming to sex stereotypical behaviour is not unusual for  Gay males (& Lesbians). They may exhibit non-conformity early and it will often pre-date sexual awareness. Many of these children, like mine, will be brutally punished because they are deviating from expected “normal” behaviour. They may have atypical interests for their sex, hang out with, and even identify “with” members of the opposite sex. For males they are often explicitly rejected by their own sex and isolated by their peers. All of this is painful and confusing and years of bullying can, and does, lead to internalised homophobia.

Homophobia & The Cotton Ceiling

Homophobia is not a thing of the past.  A focus on the UK context can, superficially, suggest the main battles are won. Sexual orientation is a protected characteristic, under The Equality Act 2010.  Same sex marriage is legal.  Currently we are seeing a vicious attack on same sex attraction from within the LGBT community.  For Lesbians their same sex attraction is badged as  transphobic. There is even a name for this: “Cotton Ceiling”.  This is a play on the notion of a “glass-ceiling”,  a phrase coined to describe the  barrier to female achievement. This term has been repurposed to refer to Lesbian underwear, as a barrier to “all-inclusive” sexual availability.  Lesbians are explicitly under attack for rejecting male bodies in their “Lesbian” dating pool!  This is the new “progressive” Corrective Rape.  Article here:  Cotton Ceiling.

As always this is a tale of two sexes. There is no comparable campaign to shame gay males over their vagina-exclusionary orientation. They are not, on any significant scale, condemned and policed about their sexual orientation.  Some of the battles we thought had been won are being undermined, ironically, under the banner of “progressive” thinking.  None of the leading Gay publications, or Advocacy groups, have condemned the rhetoric of #CottonCeiling, indeed most deny it exists. Same sex attraction is being undermined by organisations which purport to represent the gay community. (Cough…Stonewall).

Inculcating Gender Dysphoria

It is in this context  we need to examine how the concept of an “innate Gender Identity” is being proselytised  in our schools. Children are being taught that “sex” is no longer dimorphic but exists on a spectrum.  Homosexuality is the attraction to one’s own sex. Its predicated on the notion of two sexes.  How do prospective gay adults reconcile this to the idea that they exist “on a spectrum?

The phrase “assigned male at birth” is being used in the media, by medical professionals and by our political elite.  Somehow the idea that a small number of disorders of sexual development (DSD), leading to “intersex” conditions, has morphed into a belief that accurate determination of sex is not possible, at birth.  There is no evidence that DSDs are more prevalent.  This belief is not borne out of concern for people with intersex conditions.  It is ideologically predicated to privilege “gender identity” above sex.  Same sex orientation is then seen as in conflict with attraction based on “gender”.  Gender can be de-coupled from “sex” and even sexual characteristics.  This places definitively homosexual males, & females. in the “wrong” for excluding opposite sex partners.

Here is an example of school based training.  A pack which has been used in various forms across the Education Sector: All sorts Trans Inclusion Kit  Here is a critique from the Transgender Trend organisation of the training in our schools:  Transgender Trend

It is my contention that this training is inculcating Gender Dysphoria: a disassociation from biological sex.  Nobody conforms 100% with the expected behaviour for their sex.  Yet children are being taught that failure to adhere to these , culturally determined, expectations may mean they are “Born in the Wrong Body”.  Lesbians and Gay Males frequently deviate from “gendered” behaviour and are much more vulnerable to this ideology. Its confusing and de-stabilising. The meme below was sent out by a young, gay male. 👇32884AA2-612B-4CB1-BAF9-86D808A4009F

Here is an example of Mermaids training slides.  (Mermaids is an organisation which exists to support “trans” children and youth).  This is being rolled out to schools and teaches a spectrum of “gender identities” with which children are asked to  “identify”.  At one end of the spectrum is Barbie and at the other end is GI Jo.

F4988425-6DF3-4205-8F02-4BA66B214725

The use of regressive stereotypes is only one area vulnerable to critique. If we were teaching  the variety of ways people express themselves and deconstructing sex stereotypes this could be a force for positive change.  We are , instead, using it to push the notion that one can be, literally, “Born in the Wrong Body”.  Instead of celebrating difference we are instead advocating that these children/teens should be medicalised and handed over to #BigPharma for Life.

I have one son who does sport most days, captains football and rugby teams, and has, largely, gender typical interests. Based on that criteria you could allocate him to one end of the spectrum. The same son does his own washing , irons clothes,  watches boxing but also likes poetry. Where does he now go on this “spectrum”?.  Are we not just pathologizing  personalities which deviate from the “man-box”?

I have another son who loves music, hates sport, identifies “with” girls and has always had female friends.  He also came out as “gay” when he was in his early teens.  When puberty hit he was still not accepted by his male peers but now female peers were retreating into same sex friendship groups.  Parents were not including him in female bonding experiences, like sleepovers. Those parents had every right to exclude him but it did increase his isolation.   Its not difficult to  understand why a boy like this would  identify out of his male sex, and his homosexuality, by retreating into a faux-straight, medicalised closet.  Superficially this can look like an attractive option.

Gender Dysphoria is a relatively recent historical phenomenon.  In the last decade, in the UK, we have seen a spike of over 4000% increase in girls referred to Gender Identity Clinics.  For boys the figure is 1152%.  Parents who are resistant to the dominant “affirmation” model of treatment won’t be included in these figure. Many know better than to enrol our offspring in these “treatment” centres.  Article here: Behind a paywall.  Rise in Gender Identity Clinic referrals

Are we medicalising away the Gay?

Recently whistle-blowers at the UK’s main Gender Identity Clinic ,The Tavistock, have broken ranks to highlight the real threat to gay children who are using their service.  Below is a  clip from this article in The Times newspaper.  Full article here (paywall) Transgender Experiment

gay children and GIDS times article

Here is a youtube  from another expert in this field asking: Why are lesbian and gay children being transitioned?

Professor Eric Vilain

Here is another article summarising studies which show that most children who identify as the opposite sex eventually reconcile to biological sex and, many are gay.  Author is James Cantor who works in this field.  Remember also that this much of this research predates the meteoric rise in referrals.  There is every reason to suspect that desistance rates would be much higher in the current “crop”  of trans kids IF (and its a big IF) they were not subject to irreversible medical treatment.

Do Kids stay Trans

Here are quotes from two other experts about the impact of early medicalisation on children. Dr James Barret, a consultant at the UKs oldest Gender Identity Clinic, makes it clear most would desist, reconcile to biological sex, and be gay IF allowed to go through a natural puberty.

2F47DB4D-D65F-4654-BEF1-B3F70F9A3F31

Ray Blanchard another expert, in this field, makes it clear that the addition of Puberty Blockers locks those self-same children on an irreversible path to medicalisation.

D6E8FB85-F3CF-4A53-9F09-D77FCBA36132

Proposal to criminalise “affirming” Biological Sex?

The standard model of  “treatment” is to accept the child/teens self-assessment of their “Gender” and to socially, leading to medical, affirm that identity.  Affirming a child in their biological sex is the least invasive approach.   Since most desist from a “trans-identity” and many are merely gay this seems to be the obvious approach and indeed has been the standard treatment for decades.  Fast forward to 2019 and this is seen as akin to Gay Conversion Therapy.  At this very moment affirming biological sex is outlawed in many US states.  Here is the UK we have a bill, currently going through parliament, which proposes to outlaw my parental practice.   Now I am told it is unlikely this will proceed but I have lost all faith in our political class over this specific issue so I am keeping it under scrutiny.  (Clip from Hansard below).

DCCA5DF9-F409-4902-B61B-571AC2ABB12D

Silencing dissenting Parents.

On Social Media parents, like me, adopting a cautious approach, to medicalising our children, are subjected to quite a lot of criticism.  Little of it is evidenced based. Here is a sample.  Not all of these screenshots were to myself but I have had pretty much all of this type of abuse.

 

 

4323FA06-7583-460D-AAEE-00071C52E47AB76CA1D8-A805-47D8-B72C-18C22C868753250FAE28-A6B5-470A-A0B1-C10F5F5C539F8366CF4E-4F16-4B01-9364-52C5CCEE2C683349F024-E78E-4DAE-A571-976CAB28E663

@Terfblocker were particularly egregious and their follow up, to the tweet above, was to find my real name and add it below to “out” my son.  Nice Touch.  Here is a reminder of the person who set up @TerfBlocker.

2360F9BB-3CCE-4C1E-9E78-59F5D974C054

Former Green party candidate now ensconced in the Liberal Democrats.  You may remember the name and a public statement that this person was dangerously unaware of basic safeguarding.  Also, as of June 2019, still appears an advisor to Stonewall.  Stonewall Trans Advisory Group  

More here if you are unfamiliar with. Aimee Challenor

What other alleged campaign for “Civil Rights” routinely labels caution and research as bigoted? What other campaign  uses the threat of children’s suicide as a tactic to terrorise parents into submission?  If anything the vehemence of the attacks has made me more confident that this is wrong.

Since writing this I commented on the issue of trans sports and was treated to another lovely comment,  No wonder perceptions of hate crime are sky-rocketing when someone sees hate in this comment.

B55D5164-997D-4F0B-9922-A732973C3F61

There will be a reckoning when society wakes up to what is being done to children under the, mistaken, belief that they are Born In The Wrong Body.   I hope we wake up to the problematic, and unquestioning, affirmation of a child/teens belief that this is the right path for them.  My biggest fear is that EVERY single political party and most politicians have gone along with this.  What will it take for them to reverse this position?  Are our children to be electoral cannon fodder?

What other issue has cognitively captured the political elite so swiftly?  One thing for certain is that this is not a grass roots movement!