Month: January 2023

Leicestershire Trans Policy 2.

I covered the first iteration of this policy in the blog posted below. This new version is from September 2022.

Leicestershire NHS Trans Policy.

Here is the new policy.

Transgender-and-Non-Binary-Service-User-Policy 2022

The first thing I noticed is that the Trust claims this is the first version of a new policy which, we know, is a lie. They also make no reference to the Trans-Identified male who advised on the first policy. It was not possible to ascertain if “Rebecca Shaw” remains on the Equality and Diversity group who were involved in the policy.

They repeat the misrepresentation of the Equality Act 2010, also present in version 1, to add “gender” to “sex” and pretend it’s a legally protected characteristic. Presumably this is to justify their single sex accommodation policy which is a LIE because they count “men” as the female sex. Just to be clear, they are not even talking about post-operative “transsexuals”, they include part-time cross-dressers and any person professing a denial about their biological sex.

They claim to have done an Equality Impact Assessment but the appendix 5, to which they refer, is missing; though they do include a couple of paragraphs that purport to be assessing the impact. (I will include this at the end and leave you to make your own judgement.)

Definitions.

The glossary teaches new speak to their staff who are expected to force this indoctrination on their patients. The NHS think performing “femininity” makes a woman. The blatant sexism underpinning this definition of “gender” is absolutely staggering.👇 At least the definition of sex is straightforward.

Naturally they impose the offensive term “cisgender” but get a load of the word salad under non-binary; bi-gender, pangender, neutrois, gender fluid etc.

I won’t detail all of the glossary suffice it to say they accept that women are defined by an internal self-perception and they implicitly accept women can have penises. This has major implications for the LIE that they are providing single sex accommodation.

Who are the people signing off on these policies and why have the Conservative, government allowed this madness to infect the entirety of the NHS?

Clearly this trust think that women demanding single sex accommodation are “transphobes” and promote the primacy of “gender identity” over sex with which women must be forced to comply or face chants of “transphobia”.

The pronouns 👇 are simply ridiculous. I believe they are now called “shownouns” which perfectly sums up the narcissistic nature of the gender ruminants.

The new policy reminds staff IN CAPITALS to hide details of a patients sex on pain of a criminal prosecution. It reminds its staff to “go above and beyond” for this demographic and lists all the policies you could be breaching if you refuse. (There are no such warnings in the policy they laughably call “Single sex Accommodation”. ) Staff are instructed to accommodate the “trans” service users in the bay which “matches their “gender” and “non-binary” are to be given a choice. Staff are warned not to reveal the sex of their patients to the other people in the bay. They also mandate that a persons “trans” status should not be recorded on medical notes or shared with other clinicians. There’s also whole section on making sure the dignity and privacy of the “trans” patient is cared for, at all times. Shockingly they include this statement 👇 about patients who need care based on their biological sex. I think this is shockingly negligent because we have all seen people who are utterly delusional about their biological sex because it is a feature of this mental health condition.

This section, below, is a blatant lie about the law. There is no legal “protection” for the category of “non-binary”. Once again staff are enjoined to go “above and beyond” for people who are in denial about their biology. Why would the NHS collude with biological denialism when sex matters in health care?

Another warning that “transphobia” will not be tolerated. These recur throughout the document. I saw no such, insistent, warnings about misogyny in the single sex accommodation policy. Notice also that, because the NHS thinks a fully intact male can be a “woman” , it is likely that accurately sexing a man would be deemed “transphobia”. This is why the policy has to be littered with veiled, and explicit, threats of consequences for recognising the reality of biological sex. Women must be compelled to accept this reality denying, woman hating ideology even though our safety requires recognising inherent risk, when in proximity to biological men; even where you are not already vulnerable and sick.

After a few more instructions to adhere to pronouns for all patients, even children, staff are now required to change how they refer to patients based on their fluctuating “gender”. Once again I am flabbergasted that this has been passed by senior personnel.

Th Trust than go to elaborate lengths to make sure that they don’t out patients to their family by checking if they need to use different pronouns in front of their family or in any written correspondence. What a waste of time! This is followed by another reminder to ignore the single sex accommodation policy and any decision to allow females privacy and dignity should be a last resort. A decision to provide single sex accommodation is “very unlikely to be justified” has to be made at a very senior level and defer to the EDI people.

The documentar makes it explicit that neither single sex toilets or showers are off limits to any male, irrespective of bodily modification. To be clear there are post operative men in the public sphere who are heterosexual men with a prurient fascination with women’s bodies. They are not a safer demographic within the male sex class but demonstrate higher rates of sex offending than their fellow men. I will say it again, we are not just letting any men in our spaces we are selecting then from a group that includes transvestic fetishists and autogynephiles.

Rape in hospitals.

An enterprising woman produced this illustrative graphic based on the census and Ministry of Justice information. I will just add a small caveat. We now know that men are having their sex offences counted in the statistics for women so they also corrupt the data on women.

I will skip over the bits reminding staff to be careful of the wigs and binders or other ways the patient needs to be indulged. They even have a specific instruction to be mindful of their bodily privacy but not the vulnerable female patient who does not know there is a man in the next bed. Or worse, she can see it’s a man and the staff are legally mandated to lie, to her face! Just like they did to this rape victim. They lied to her for a year until she got CCTV footage proved they had a man on the single sex ward; a man who claimed to be a woman.

Now that we know how many rapes happen on NHS premises it is unconscionable that they are adding risk by these policies. 1318 rapes, that we know about, in hospitals!

Feminazis and Hate Crimes.

This policy then goes on to compare people raising concerns to racists!

The policy warns there may be a risk of harassment and details the measures to be put in place to protect the “trans and non-binary” patients. Not a dicky bird about the risk to females!

The policy gets even more draconian! Staff are to be disciplined if they don’t demonstrate atonement for their sins. This may include being charged with gross misconduct and dismissal. (I would also suggest that this now breaches the law given that gender critical beliefs are now legally protected.)

If this doesn’t scare staff the Trust can involve the police.

These are the organisations who were sent the policy for comment. 👇. No women’s organisations were consulted.

Equality Impact Assessment

There is reference to an EIA in Annex 5 which is missing. These clips appear at the end. It is anti paged that the policy will have a “positive impact on “Trans” service users. They have a completely blank section on the other groups impacted by this policy. They are worried about being sued by these users but not, presumably, women.

And who do they recommend for advice? A list of the usual suspects.

You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute. (I will add other methods as soon as I have figured it out. 😉)

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00

Gender Recognition Certificates and De-transition.

I recently read that the word “Kafkaesque” is over-deployed but I make no excuse for using it for this piece.

Recently someone wrote to the Gender Recognition Panel (GRP) to ask what process they could follow after realising they had made a catastrophic mistake and wished to re-identify with their actual sex. They had come to the realisation that Gender Identity Ideology was hokum. Because they had already obtained a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) they needed to ascertain what the process was for amending their documentation to reflect their biological reality. In this piece will cover the response from the GRP and add it to my series on Gender Recognition Certificates.

My series on Gender Recognition Certificates covered an interview with a member of the Gender Recognition Panel (GRP)who talked about how “enabling” the panel is; rather an unfortunate choice of word now we know they enable male rapists to be recognised as “women”. I also covered a man who was turned down, three times, for a Gender Recognition Certificate, by the GRP , but was able to get the refusal overturned by a single judge. The thrice refused man also married three times, fathered seven children and served prison time for obtaining explosives with the intent to endanger life (. I don’t know about you but this bio absolutely screams LAYDEE! ) Another in the series covers a man who was, I believe, the first man to get a Gender Recognition Certificate from within prison. He was serving a sentence for manslaughter but was released, to a female bail hostel, only to be recalled to prison, five days later, for a brutal attempt to rape a woman. I also include Owen Jones and Ruth Hunt,laughing about women who opposed the reform of the Gender Recognition Act, calling the right to self-identify, as women, with even less gatekeeping, a mere “administrative change”.

You can read that series here:

Gender Recognition Certificates

The response came from the office of the Gender Recognition Panel.

Paula Gray is the Judge who has spoken publicly about the process who I covered in my series.

The letter sets out the limitation to the powers of the Gender Recognition Panel. The correspondent expresses no view about the legislation but any right thinking person should be kept awake at night knowing what kind of man they unleashed in women’s spaces.

The letter is a follow up to earlier correspondence where it is made clear that the enquirer can not amend their documents on the basis of a mistaken diagnosis of “Gender Dysphoria”. Instead a full application must be made to the GRP which must abide by the requirements of the Gender Recognition Act. Basically a detransitioner must demonstrate they have lived in their birth sex for a further two years and obtain a diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria, again.

Because there is no process for “reversion” the only way forward is to claim, not that you are your biological sex but that you now have a “gender identity” at odds with the official certification the government provided. The language is, of course, all about “gender” though it is impossible to change your biological sex and it is our sex which recorded because we are not born with a “birth gender”.

The next paragraph is interesting as the panel make it clear there are no penalties for anyone who fills out a Statutory declaration saying they intend to live “in that gender until death”. Of course this is good news for detransitioners but it rather exposes the lie, which I have seen countless times, that a statutory declaration is a weighty enough document to discourage predatory men from taking advantage of the process. The GRP do not test for “proof of intention”.

The detransitioner wishes to acknowledge their biological sex because they no longer believe in “gender ideology”. This is not sufficient because the GRP is built on this ideology. Instead the person, who is likely to have been harmed by any medical interventions, has to seek help from the very people who make a living from “gender identity medicine”. These people very likely have a conflict of interest and are incentivised to discourage public records of “regret”. Moreover this disregards any legacy trauma the detransitioner my have. Instead they must collude with a ludicrous pantomime wherein they show that they are now suffering from “gender dysphoria” about their actual sex! 🤷‍♀️

A few MPs attempted to raise the issue of people who come to regret their “gender” change and the general response was to dismiss the consequences and minimise the number of such cases. David Lammy was asked about this during the passage of the bill. As of today there are 47,000 members of the detrans reddit forum and I am followed by new detransitioners almost daily. In addition my next piece on an NHS “trans” policy outlines the process for dealing with NHS numbers for detransitioners. Seems it is no longer such a rare phenomenon.

Here the pretence is that our birth certificates record our “legal gender” when in fact they record our biological sex. Only the loony extremists claim a baby is born without a sex.

You can watch Dawn Butler, Labour MP, saying babies are born without a sex, Trans Women are Women etc in this clip.

Dawn Butler

To be clear the process will make sure there is no record of why the person detransitioned. No audit trail for people to declare they have realised they were simply gay, or autistic or were a victim of child sexual abuse. Or that they realise the trauma of being in the care system and from a fractured family left them vulnerable to this ideology. All these groups are over-represented at Gender Clinics.

This process will therefore take at least two years before you get to the waiting lists which have increased significantly since the fee (formerly £140) has been reduced to £5. Hence the #FemaleForAFiver hashtag.

You can support me by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute.

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00

Leicestershire NHS Trans Policy.

Featured

Here is the link to the policy produced by this NHS Trust. This one is dated September 2019. There is an updated one.

Transgender and Non Binary Patients – Supporting UHL Policy

You can access the full series on NHS “Transgender” policies at the link below:

NHS & Transgender: Series

This policy is, so far, the most authoritarian in respect of the way it mandates, both patients and staff, to comply with Gender Identity Ideology. We need a woman directly impacted to mount a legal challenge because the NHS must be forced to backdown.

I took the trouble to look at Leicestershire’s published policy on Single Sex Accommodation; which they are required to publish, monitor and have a system to report any breaches.

In that document the Trust include “sex” as a legally protected characteristic but add “gender” in brackets; even though that is not the Law. They claim the document abides by the provisions of The Equality Act but they do not address the issue of forcing women of faith to share mixed sex spaces or, indeed, the right of women to be held in single sex accommodation. This is despite producing a document that claims to be all about preserving single sex spaces. This is the NHS gaslighting women.

They know the actual law because they include the correct list of the protected characteristics within the same document. 👇

In the “transgender” policy they simply lie about the Law and replace “sex” with “gender”. The single sex accommodation policy is very easy to find on their website. It’s also easy to find the new Trans and Non-Binary policy from September 2022. I have downloaded that and will cover it in another post, after a quick look, I can only say it is even worse than the one I am covering today,

The advisor:

For the “Transgender” policy they are keen to advertise the input from a trans-identified male who sat on their Equality Advisory Group.

This would appear to be the Rebecca Shaw they consulted.

Shaw has a twitter account and posts about “trans day of visibility” and the debunking of autogynephilia. The old “my skirt lifted up”; happens to #GirlsLikeUs all the time. 😳

Vagina Monologues

Shaw also took part in a production of the Vagina Monologues and writes about it on their blog.

I like the “because I can” at the end. It has a certain sort of energy.

The Vagina Monologues were considered “transphobic” because these “new women” don’t have vaginas. Productions were halted because they were deemed to be “exclusionary”.

Now it seems zero vagina is not a bar to celebrating what you haven’t got! I like the “because I can!” at the end; has a certain type of energy.The first all male line up was in 2004. This despite the biological fact that none of these men have vaginas! Wherewere all my fellow Liberals, who leap on evidence of “cultural appropriation” when this performance took place.

One of the performers was Marci Bowers, a surgeon who performs the surgery known as “sex reassignment surgery”. Bowers is now the President of the World Professional Association of Transgender Health. Another one was Andrea James who is infamous for waging a hate campaign against Michael Bailey: the author of The Man Who Would be Queen.

The Policy.

The policy mandates the use of the patient’s preferred pronouns and name and warns staff not to make assumptions based on “appearance”. It also cautions staff to use this language even if it goes against the family. The patient is to be asked where they would prefer to be cared for and if it is a female ward, and he is male, his wishes should be respected.

They provide more guidance on this checklist.

The staff are urged to be mindful of discrimination from staff, or other patients, and warned that they should not share details of the patients real sex except on a “need to know” basis. It would be interested to know how rigidly they apply this because symptoms, test results, and medication doses all are impacted by someone’s biological sex. For example female heart attacks are often missed because medical staff are used to the symptoms in males; women present differently. Some measures of organ function are such that a normal reading, for a male, would be dangerous in a female. There has already been one case of a trans-identified female losing a baby because clinicians did not think her admission, with stomach pains, could be labour pains; because she presented and was recorded as, a male.

There is the usual dictionary to educate staff on the new speak demanded by this ideology. As you can see, just like East Cheshire NHS Trust, they include transvestites under their definition of “trans”. I draw your attention to this because, once again, they all seem to ignore the condition of “transvestic fetishism” which is sexually motivated. These men get an erotic charge by wearing women’s clothes and it comes with a side order of boundary violations and a desire for women’s participation in their sexual thrills.

The Trust has a lengthy glossary that includes agender, gender fluid, gender queer and even neutrois. Later they seem to have got cold feet about including “transvestite” and “transsexual” and issue this warning to staff. 👇. Basically they have used the term in their own policy but heaven forfend their own staff follow their own terminology,

This policy is also littered with veiled threats about which hospital policies you may be in breach; should you deviate from this, imposed, ideology. Staff are warned that they could face charges of “gross misconduct” and, even criminal charges for misgendering. This is quite draconian and, likely, outwith the law.

They at pains to be clear they will use the patient’s preferred pronouns etc even with family members. I can certainly understand the position of staff on this one, for the patient, but it seems provocative to stoke conflict with family members. However, an ideological crusuade it is and they also offer this advice, about children, which seems of dubious legality to me:👇. The hospital is instructing staff to expressly go against the wishes of parents even if the child is not deemed “Gillick competent”.

Gillick Competence

The Trust also are on the alert for “spurious” arguments about “discomfort’ to mask their “transphobia”. 👇

I am not surprised at the thinly veiled contempt for women emanating from this policy. The Trust clearly know the legally protected characteristics because they are included in their single sex ward policy. Yet, in the “transgender” policy all of this is forgotten and the Trust resort to blatant lies. The protected characteristic is “SEX” but the Trust use “gender”

So what about the Equality Impact. assessment? “No detriment was identified”.

To add insult to injury, after ignoring the protected characteristic of “sex” they had a special note that all Equality Impact assessments must consider the “trans” experience.

References:

The authors reference the work of Stephen Whittle, from 2007. Whittle is a sex denialist activist having repudiated her own sex many years ago. I think they probably are referring to “Engendered Penalties” which I covered in my series on Whittle:

Stephen Whittle

They also reference the beleaguered charity Mermaids, The Gender Trust, who advised East Cheshire, and Christine Burns.

I will follow this up with the 2022, updated policy. At first glance that looks even worse but I see they have removed reference to “transvestites”.

You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute. (I will add other methods as soon as I have figured it out. 😉)

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00

NHS Policy ignores Sex! (Part 2)

Those of us who have been looking at Transgender policies, at NHS Trusts, have noticed that they are much more difficult to find. For a previous post, on Birmingham Hospital, I was sent an email copy of a policy which I had not found but was, apparently, available to employees. My suspicion is that NHS Trusts know that women are checking whether they are defending single sex spaces for vulnerable, female, patients. I suspect more of them are restricting their policy to their “intranet” to hide these policies from the general public. The policies for their employees are still mainly available and they tell a diabolical tale.

You can see the rest of this series, including part 1, at the link below. The Trans ideologues have been hard at work for decades and the women’s rights groups are notable by their absence. Men (in the main) have been allowed to write policy that primarily impacts women; just because they claim to have transcended their biological sex.

NHS & Transgender: Series

This policy is from the East Cheshire NHS Trust. I couldn’t find a pdf so I had to screen shot it. This is the link to the policy. Searching the NHS Trust website yields zero results .

Transgender support Policy

I have archived it too. Before I get to the policy see the link to the policy I could find easily. Here the Macclesfield hospital, part of the Trust insist that they operate single sex spaces.

What the trust policy actually says is that people should be treated according to how they identify, irrespective of their sex, which they cover by some guff about genital configuration; as if that’s irrelevant.

The policy drips with the language of the captured; tell tale sign is echoing the belief that sex is “assigned at birth” rather than observed and recorded; which is the case for over 99% of us. The policy is drafted with one group in mind who consider themselves “transgender”. They admit, however, that the policy will impact patients, staff, visitors, and contractors. Females make up 51% of the population but, I suspect,, will we are over-represented in the patient population, Most women will have a hospital experience via pregnancy and childbirth even if they are otherwise healthy. Our longevity also means we are likely to need hospital admission in later years. Did this Trust speak to any women’s groups? NO!

They did get help drafting the policy from The Gender Trust. This policy was drafted over a decade ago.

Part 1 covers The Gender Trust and man behind it.

NHS Policy ignores Sex! (Part 1)

Advice given by The Gender Trust to the NHS.

I should no longer be shocked at the betrayal of women, by the NHS, but, I confess, I was appalled at the gaslighting in this document. It begins by a statement on patient centred care and then pitches the notion of “most persecuted minority” and lays down the law about not tolerating any discrimination; which, I presume, covers women recognising a man’s biological sex. How bigoted!

The NHS Trust do make a statement about their opposition to discrimination on the following grounds 👇. This is a doctored list of the, legally, “protected characteristics” which they list but get them wrong and include “gender” instead of “gender reassignment”. More sleight of hand to come later in the document.

These are the facts about rape in hospitals. In the U.K. the crime of rape involves a penis. These are all Men!

After some stern words about disciplinary measures for non-compliance they move on to a list of definitions. In this section they make it clear they include “transvestites as “trans”. Given we know there is a paraphilia known as “transvestic fetishism” the hospital are recognising men ,with a sexual fetish, under the “trans” umbrella and as “women” according to their wishes.

The document goes on to say that some people may emerge as “trans” overnight. This becomes important because the Trust insist that, even these “overnight” “transitioners”. Note also that the badly worded Gender Recognition Act (GRA) allows a misrepresentation of the law that, in fact, does limit the rights of men, even with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) to female only spaces. A right which is poorly tested, via case law, and very much ignored in policy and practice.

There is a long section about the “privacy clauses” built into the GRA and the fines associated with disclosing the sex of a person, if disclosed to you in an official capacity. This, legally mandated, sex denialism, is why hospital staff are obliged to LIE to women’s faces if they see an obvious man in a female only space.

The section on the Human Rights Act (1998) acknowledges that one persons’s Human Rights cannot limit the Human Rights of another group; this is exactly what the NHS is doing here. Letting men’s rights trample over women’s rights. Forcing women to change in front of biological males is a form of torture, and, frankly, sexual assault. This is a reminder that men are treated as the default human.

This next but is contradictory on the Occupation requirements which were designed to restrict certain roles to a particular sex. This was supposed to allow female only rape crisis counsellors and for women to refuse intimate care from men. This is what the Trust has to say. The second paragraph contradicts the first.

There follows a detailed section on the employment of “transgender” people and the process for ensuring criminal record checks are obtained without revealing someone’s sex. I have a long-standing concern that this seems to rely on honestly disclosing your previous names and also, even if they are honest about their previous names, this means they can hide their sex from the employer.

After making it clear that there are no restrictions based on any bodily changes the NHS here mandates that females must accept males in their toilets and changing rooms. To be clear Nurses in my local trust are not allowed to wear their uniform on the way to, and from, work so must change, at work, twice a day.

This is the problem with the “real life test” it forces women to serve as handmaids to these men and validate him as something he is not; irrespective of her own discomfort. No man who really “identified” with women would be comfortable forcing them into this position. It shows a level of entitlement I can only describe as “male”. The sooner the NHS is forced to remove all these policies the better.

After another reminder about the severe punishments for “bullying and harassment” ; clearly designed to override women’s rights to object, the NHS Trust proceeds to explain that a man’s wishes are paramount. (I am saying “man” here because females don’t present the same risk to men and those who insist on being in men’s spaces are placing themselves at risk. At the same time these women are also disrespecting male boundaries).

As you can see the NHS trust prioritise part-time “women” over actual women; the biological and only kind. It gets worse: 👇 I cannot even bring myself to be grateful for the crumbs offered at excluding *some* men from open showers.

Single Sex Facilities.

There follows a long section on single sex facilities. Beginning with this belter. Here “full transition” can still mean the person has “Different genital or breast sex appearance”. This is absolute madness!

There follows a section on times where people will be held on the ward for their sex, in the case of females having hysterectomies who think they are men. It is noticeable that a female example is used here. {What the hospital should really be asking themself is why they are performing unnecessary hysterectomies on young women.}

I wonder how many women are going to be gratuitously offended by this policy of trying to ascertain your biological sex. Women are already being asked for preferred pronouns even while pregnant! Notice also the directive to comply immediately with the patient’s preference to be accommodated with the opposite sex illustrative of a total lack of consideration for female (or male) boundaries.

Apparently if sex is indeterminate it should be inferred from “presentation” and clothing but heaven forfend we take into account the sexed bodies. Imagine waking up in the male ward because you have short hair and wear trousers? Or worse, if you are a woman who has lost your hair because of chemotherapy or your breasts through a double mastectomy; you are already feeling stripped of your femininity and the hospital just compounds matters. I am not saying that the sex of a woman, in this situation, becomes unrecognisable but even to ask these questions, as a matter of routine, creates the potential for real offence and distress.

The next bit is unintentionally “transphobic” and raises issues about the differential of females post testosterone and males. The hospital betrays that it knows men generally don’t pass as women.

This brings us into the difficulty of “trans men” and female spaces. They do tend to pass, at least superficially, as men. Hence all the “gotchas” when people post their pictures and ask if women would be comfortable with these “women” in our spaces. Clearly many of us would not be, just based on appearance; they are likely to disrupt the social norms in female spaces. Which brings me to the difficulties faced by female detransitioners. I already know of a couple who feel like there is no way back and now dealing with a new kind of “sex dysphoria” about their actual sex. I wish I had an easy answer to this that doesn’t add to the distress of detransitioned females. Obviously I welcome then back into female spaces but I can’t undo any physical changes which may mean they are questioned, What a mess!

Parental Consent.

The next section makes it clear that the rights of parents must be over-ridden by the hospital staff if the child wishes it even if they are not deemed Gillick Competent. As mad as I would have been if my son was put on a female ward, against my wishes, my anger would be dwarfed if I were the mum of a girl placed on a male ward. As a parent I would then, potentially, face the anger of the parents of girls who resented my son being was placed with them, against my wishes. There is also an asymmetry, based on sex, here, my son would likely be more safe on a female ward, the reverse would be true for females. Because, guess what? Sex Matters!

The Impact Assessment.

The Trust acknowledges that 51% of the population is female but I can’t see a break down of the sex of its patients but I am going to hazard a guess that women make up the vast majority of their patients; given our longevity.

It then goes through each of the protected characteristics, bar one, to pretend they are in compliance with the Equality Act (2010). Before I get to the most egregious example I just want to say they have not addressed the impact of people with Muslim or Orthodox Jewish women; who are unable to share mixed sex spaces. Neither have they considered the heightened vulnerability of disabled women, forced to share spaces with men, including transvestic fetishists. Similarly for older women they have an enhanced vulnerability and may be deeply distressed by being lied to about the sex of the “woman” in the next bed.

However they sank really low with the omission of any consideration of one of the protected characteristics. They omitted SEX and they substituted “gender” ; making it clear this included “transgender” people. They then have the gall to say this policy will impact positively! I am genuinely unable to contain my anger at this.

You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute. (I will add other methods as soon as I have figured it out. 😉)

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00

NHS Policy ignores Sex! (Part 1)

Featured

Those of us who have been looking at Transgender policies, at NHS Trusts, have noticed they are much more difficult to find. For a previous post, on Birmingham Hospital, I was sent an email copy of a policy which I had not found but, which was available to employees. My suspicion is that NHS Trusts know women are checking whether they are defending single sex spaces for vulnerable, female, patients. I suspect more of them are restricting their policy to their “intranet” to hide these policies from the general public. The policies for their employees are still mainly available and they tell a diabolical tale.

You can see the rest of this series at the link below. The Trans ideologues have been hard at work for decades and the women’s rights groups are notable by their absence. Men (in the main) have been allowed to write policy that primarily impacts women; just because they claim to have transcended their biological sex.

NHS & Transgender: Series

This policy is from the East Cheshire NHS Trust. I couldn’t find a pdf so I had to screen shot it. This is the link to the policy. Searching the NHS Trust website yields zero results .

Transgender support Policy

I have archived it too. Here are some clips I could find easily. Here the Macclesfield hospital, part of the Trust insist that they operate single sex spaces. This is a deliberate strategy to LIE to women.

What the trust policy actually says is that people should be treated according to how they identify, irrespective of their sex, which they cover by some guff about genital configuration; as if that’s irrelevant.

Quick reminder of the context in which hospitals are lying to women.

The policy drips with the language of the captured; tell tale sign is echoing the belief that sex is “assigned at birth”, rather than observed and recorded; which is the case for over 99% of us. The policy is drafted with one group in mind who consider themselves “transgender”. They admit, however, that the policy will impact patients, staff, visitors, and contractors. Females make up 51% of the population but, later, we will see that they are over-represented in the patient population, Most women will have a hospital experience via pregnancy and childbirth even if they are otherwise healthy. Our longevity also means we are likely to need hospital admission in later years. Did this Trust speak to any women’s groups? NO!

They did get help drafting the policy from The Gender Trust. This policy was drafted over a decade ago.

The Gender Trust

I did a bit of digging on The Gender Trust. It wasn’t entirely straight forward. They do have a website but it contained no link to its Charity status or details of who was behind the organisation. It also appeared to be inactive.

gendertrust.org.U.K.

The organisation. is a trans lobby organisation.

I managed to track down a Charity registration number but, it turned out the charitable registration had been removed, A search on the U.K. register, directly, yielded no results associated with this registration number. I did find this.

There was also a neither charity called The Gender Trust Association. I found a record on Total Giving which liked it to the same website as The Gender Trust but this charity has also been removed.

There appears to have been accounts filed up to at least 2010.

Thereafter no accounts were filed from at least 2015.

I was able to establish that our old friends the National Lottery had given grants to The Gender Trust. You can search their database for those in receipt of grants. It’s a bit of a clunky database but appears to show they had 4 grants, in total, amounting to £138,000.

Another search turned up the name of Michelle Bridgman acting as a spokesperson. This was the only name I could find; publicly linked to The Gender Trust, I searched Michelle Bridgeman. (I also got a tip off that The Gender Trust had been working with the Scout Association and a link to Bridgeman’s own website).

Michelle /Shelley Bridgeman.

Bridgeman has a website. (Thank you to my informant). Here is a link:

Michelle Bridgeman

Further digging revealed that Bridgeman is a heterosexual, married man who had fathered children, before “transitioning”. You can watch a Ted Talk by him and hear about his past as the “effeminate” son of a distant father and how his parents suffered the early loss of a baby girl. I mention this fact because the loss of a sibling, often, one of the opposite sex, seems to figure more than usual in these narratives.

Dare To Be You

Bridgmen talks at length about a court case he was involved in to oppose the requirement to have his marriage annulled, in order to get his “gender” recognised. (Or as he described it “to get equal rights with other women”.) A fight that took over 10 years and would result in a Supreme Court victory.

Bridgend explains he is registered as a counsellor /psychotherapist and works with both adults and children. He also seems to have been somewhat of a media commentator. Of course he appears on Lorraine Kelly’s show; she has been a chief propagandist for Gender Identity Ideology. [Though I believe the Kelly on TV is not the same person as Loraine Kelly, in real life , for tax purposes.]

Bridgeman has also written a book, which I have not read, but if anyone wishes me to review this let me know.

I had intended to do just one post on this policy but it ended up rather long so part 2 will go into more detail about the policy.

You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute. (I will add other methods as soon as I have figured it out. 😉)

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00

Fox Fisher: Trans Schism

Featured

This is another in my comprehensive or ridiculously long series on the book Trans Britain. Fox Fisher has been around for a good few years, from an early age, so is still relatively young. Fisher appeared in the documentary “My Transsexual Summer” and now has their own content creation vehicle, “My Genderation”. I first came across Fox Fisher while investigating how Childline “educated”, I would say “indoctrinated”, my son. Childline is run by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to children (N.S.P.C.C).

You can access that series at the link below.

Queering the NSPCC? FINAL

Fisher appeared on breakfast television over 11 years ago to talk about their role in My Transsexual Summer, her voice already has the tell-tale timbre of a female on testosterone. This is how she described her realisation that something was different about them.

Ugla Stefania

I write Fox Fisher identifies as non-binary and is in a relationship with a male, Ugla Stefania, who also identifies as non-binary/genderqueer. The partner was an activist in Iceland and is known to me because they wrote the introduction to the Denton’s Document.

I did a piece on the Denton’s document which you can read here: In order to understand the tactics of the Trans Lobby group the Denton’s document is a must read.

That Denton’s Document

You can also watch Ugla’s Ted Talk and lean how he came to understand his female gender identity after adopting a female avatar on World of Warcraft. This talk is also full of the usual sex denialism, claiming people with disorders of sexual development justify a “trans” category and arguing people have no right to know a man is in women’s intimate spaces. The talk is, predictably, littered with references to this rates of suicide and violent death caused to “trans” people.

Ugla Stefania

Back to Fox Fisher

As of this year Fox Fisher has undertaken liposuction to remove fat deposits that she felt were too feminine. They have also, recently, had a metoidioplasty which is surgery to create a simulacra of a penis. This involves moving skin, fat deposits /cheek cells and this creates a non-functioning sex organ. Fisher appears to be the “trans” version of a polysurgical addict. Looking for Gender Euphoria. 👇

In a YouTube to discuss the surgery, Fisher doesn’t rule out getting a phallioplasty, if the metoidioplasty doesn’t deliver.

Fisher also did a joint TedTalk with Ugla and it was fascinating how the relationship was described. Sounds like being validated is a key component.

Fisher’s chapter in Trans Britain is focussed on how non-binary people are not just oppressed by people outwith the “trans” community but by people within the “trans” umbrella who believe in “cis-normativity and adopt a binary view of “gender”.

Fisher still finds time to critique Germain Greer and women defending our sex based right.

Their is not much new in Fisher’s chapter. There are ahistorical takes on the existence of “trans” people; confusing gender nonconformity with “trans” and appropriating the way different cultures found a way to accommodate, usually male, homosexuals. Fisher also takes time to defend trying to no platform different views and denies trying to get Greer banned was a free speech issue. Elsewhere Fisher exposed her own difficulties with homosexuality. This was something they were caught saying at a Mermaids camp for “transgender” kids.

You can access a link to Fox Fisher saying this at the link below.

Fisher on homosexuality

This paragraph 👇seems like an apologia for any violent backlash to people who don’t subscribe to gender ideology.

Fisher’s chapter rehashes many of the arguments put forward by her follow travellers. It’s worth reading for the exposure of the schism emerging between the gender binaries and the new sect of the neither male nor female sect. Both Fisher and Stefania conform to male and female stereotypes in their presentation to the extend of taking synthetic hormones and having surgeries. I don’t think a life dependent on #BigPharma for your authentic sense of self is a liberating life style. I should just mention that Fisher is also under the mis-apprehension that puberty blockers are safe and reversible. This is a dangerous ideology which Fisher also pushes via children’s books.

Masquerading as written to opposes sexist stereotypes the book is a thinly disguised propaganda tool for Transgender Ideology.

The authors and the messaging: The Blue-Haired non-binaries are coming.

You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute. (I will add other methods as soon as I have figured it out. 😉)

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00

Helen Belcher: Trans Britain

Featured

By coincidence I have just reached the Helen Belcher Chapter at the point of the New Year Honours list which has granted him an O.B.E. Helen remains in a heterosexual marriage and has fathered two children. He reportedly began his “transition” when his daughter was a toddler. Belcher is a Liberal Democrat Councillor and has also stood for parliament. Outside of his political work he is involved with Trans Media Watch is on the trans-advisory board for Stonewall and is also involved with trans actual and LGBT Consortium.

He has fingers in lots of pies which include advising Baroness Barker and attending the All Parliamentary Group for LGBT rights. I have written on the APPG group for LGBT before.

APPG on LGBT: Publication

This APPG have had their secretariat funded /provided by trans lobby groups such as Stonewall and Kaleidoscope trust. Belcher was also name checked by the Liberal Democrat MP, Layla Moran, as recorded on Hansard. Layla Moran, you may remember, is able to see into souls and discern who they really are:

The Liberal Democrats have also taken 1.4 million from the Pharmaceutical company that manufactures triptolerin which is the drug used to block puberty for children labelled “trans”. I wrote about that here:

Liberal Democrats & Big Pharma

Belcher, like a lot of these men, claims to have always known he was “different” and tells a familiar narrative arc of denial and repression until finally coming into their “trans” identity. He remains married to the mother of his two children.

He is one of many of the contributors to reference the BBC documentary about George/Julia Grant. This statement does contain a kernel of truth about how a man can possibly know what it is to be a woman.

In this chapter he outlines the lobbying undertaken by Trans Media Watch to influence editorial decisions of key broadcasters with the most initial success in capturing Channel 4 but Stuart Cosgrove, their employee, also facilitated access to the BBC. One of the earlier triumphs for the representation of “trans” people was “My Transsexual Summer” which tackled civil rights issues like being unable to work in a Bridal Wear shop.

Trans Media Watch managed to inveigle their way into OFCOM (Broadcast regulator) and the Press Complaints Commission. Some of these meetings were attended by Jane Fae who is a man who defends extreme porn and sexual fetishes like consensual slavery. The link to cross-dressing and sexual fetish is something that trans campaigners, I would argue, have successfully suppressed in U.K. media who are terrified of accusations of “transphobia”.

Belcher was delighted to secure the support of Lynne Featherstone, M.P. who also appears in this book and, at one point, launched an attack on actual feminists, ( those who defend women’s rights to exclude all males from female spaces) telling them they were not welcome in the Liberal Democrats.

Her words were also captured on Hansard. She didn’t hold anything back.

Belcher also approached the Labour media spokesperson and by this route was able to ensure Trans Media Watch were able to influence the Leveson Inquiry to raise issues of “transphobia” in the media.

Here he lists some of the people involved in Trans Media Action which was funded by both Channel 4 and the BBC.

One of the YouTube events on the Trans Media Watch channel also includes this person who may be known to Scottish women: Jennie Kermode. Kermode identifies as both “intersex” and “gender queer” and a journalist.

Belcher takes detour to attack journalist Susan Moore and Julie Burchill in this chapter. Worth including this superb clip where he mentions Julie Burchill calling these men “bed-wetter in bad wigs” .😂😂😂

He has continued to attack female journalists in recent history most notably Janice Turner. Turner is a Times journalist who has been a stalwart in covering women’s rights issues. Belcher made outrageous claims about suicides related to Turner”s journalism. Thankfully IPSO did not uphold Belcher’s claim despite being woefully captured by Transgender Ideology themselves.

Belcher has the temerity to bleat on about false claims of threats to free speech whilst, checks notes, trying to restrict free speech. He takes a moment to praise the Louis Theroux document whilst lambasting another documentary focussed on Ken Zucker’s clinic. I wrote about that documentary here. Belcher did not approve and complaints were made to the BBC.

Transgender Kids: Who knows best?

Belcher talks of a horrific climate where media articles were allowed to question whether men like himself were “real women’ but he ends with a round up of all the positive news, like the capture of prominent politicians and the corruption of erstwhile gay rights organisation, Stonewall. He is particularly pleased with Stonewall’s Vision for Change document which committed itself to ending sex segregated spaces and the sex by deception laws.

Belcher is more revealing in media coverage and in YouTube interviews. While standing as a prospective MP, for the Liberal Democrats, he simultaneously claims he gets more hostility as a Liberal Democrat, than a “trans woman” but also that he fears being murdered.

In another YouTube interview Belcher makes a claim for his right to use female spaces. Apparently his fear of the male facilities is to be taken seriously but women seeing Belcher, an obvious and rather large, male in single sex spaces is to be disregarded.

Yes, this is what we are saying. Men aren’t women. You can watch this interview in full, below.

Helen Belcher

He also claims that the following in this interview:

Here is another interview which makes it crystal clear he has no idea about women’s lives, he is not a woman, he is a selfish man willing to expose women and girls to real harm providing we validate him as something he manifestly is not.

Belcher

He makes all the usual bonkers claims about genital inspections and then says this argument would lead to a tax on women who would have to get identity documents to prove they had female genitalia etc. I will say it again; we are not just letting any men enter women’s spaces we are selecting for men who don’t respect women’s boundaries. There are plenty of males who, feel at odds with their male sex who *still* use male spaces. The men who don’t respect female boundaries have a massive red flag over them.

You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute. (I will add other methods as soon as I have figured it out. 😉)

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00