Legal Definition of Sex: 4

This one covers three advocates for clarifying biological sex in law. Taken from the debate in Parliament in June 2023. You can find the rest of the series here:👇


Time to Kiss a Tory?

Peter Bottomley is a conservative MP. He has certainly done his homework and has raised this issue in the house before now. As a lifelong leftie I don’t know where we would be without the concerted pushback, from Conservatives. Not to disregard the women on the left speaking up but, for Rosie Duffield it has to have been a lonely experience. Peter begins by acknowledging his debt to the work of Helen Joyce, author of Trans: When Ideology meets reality and Kathleen Stock, author of Material Girls.

Liam Hackett

The MP took the opportunity to call out a vicious bully who labelled Kathleen Stock an extremist, Liam Hackett, who runs an anti-bullying charity called Ditch The Label. I remember this guy. He had a meltdown because he was not allowed in a female only area while having breast screening.

Here he is calling Stock out for being a dangerous extremist and juxtaposed with an illustration of his hypocrisy.

See also Hackett gleefully arranging for a delivery of a TShirt to Kathleen Stock. This man is a vicious bully and takes delight in it. There’s loads more of this stuff on twitter.

More Bullying

After dispatching Hackett Bottomley is unequivocal about the primacy of sex.

He ends with this example from Sport: 👇 and the right to the provision of care by the same sex if requested.

Rosie Duffield (Labour)

Duffield acknowledges the toxicity of the debate and the impact on women who speak on this issue. She recognises how important this is for ordinary women. These are just some of the reasons the law protects sex. 👇

Duffield raises the matter of safeguarding, single sex wards and female sports; all of which The Equality was intended to protect instead it is being interpreted as the right to compel belief.

She finishes with a pleas for clarity in law and a reiteration that she will continue to speak up p, death threats or not..

Nick Fletcher (Conservative)

Fletcher begins with a safeguarding concern and uses his experience in construction to make analogous comparisons with the growth of health and safety practices.

Legislation was enacted to avoid incidents like this and now the queer theorists obsession with disrupting social norms is creating a whole new area of “near misses”. Fletcher outlines the real risk that female sports will be destroyed by the increasing presence of men identifying into the female category. We are also putting women at risk of actual bodily harm.

On pronouns Fletcher illustrates the starting point, and end point, of this ideology. Our kids are being sold a lie and the rising rates of detransitioners tells its own sorry tale.

He finishes with the reality that those promoting this ideology won’t be there to pick up the pieces and will simply move on to the next grift. The government need to act.

You can read the full debate here: 👇


Or if you prefer you can watch it on parliament TV:

Parliament TV

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 have just had to pay ÂŁ109 for virus protection so anything to help.

My Substack

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


Leave a Reply