Author: womangendercritical

Carol Steele: Trans Britain (Part 5)

Who is Carol Steele?

Steele is another trans-identified male who Burns includes in his book. Remember these are selected as positive ambassadors for the “trans” movement. Steele got some coverage in the Times because he trains the Devon constabulary.

Steele and the police

In the article it highlights that Steele had weighed in on a violent assault on a woman in her sixties by a man in his twenties. (In the same article it was revealed that “Kellie” Maloney had also trained Devonshire police despite being on the record about committing violence against his ex wife).

Steele’s biography offered the usual backstory about having always known he was meant to be a girl, formulated a plan to run away to Italy having read about “Castratos”, attempted suicide… and so on. I am sure I appear dismissive in this section but I have read so many of these narratives I am afraid they all appear to me to be retconned. By which I mean established retroactively to explain a current state. There’s always a claim of childhood onset to cover up any sexual motive. That could be autogynephilia or internalised homophobia /an attraction to straight men.

Not many of these men openly admit it began by masturbating into a female relative’s, often a mum/sister, underwear. Yet we know this is the origin story for many of these men. Burns makes a slight reference to man who cross-dress for relaxation/pleasure but omits the form this “pleasure” takes.

None of this is to say Steele followed this path. On face value he appears to a homosexual male who was subject to homophobic bullying and eventually this led to internalised homophobia and the repudiation of his sex/sexuality.

I am inclined to be sympathetic, perhaps overly so, for this group of men, for reasons that should be obvious. {As a mum of this type of man my judgment may well be clouded so you should bear this in mind}. Burns explicitly rejects this framing.

Here is another quote from Steele about discovering he was attracted to boys. We learn that Steele’s father took a very dim view about “transsexuals” but not whether he had a disease for homosexuals.

He also relates a tale of violent assault from a male partner on revealing his biological sex. He does not go into as much detail in Burn’s book but he is more elaborate on his own website.

Steele’s blog

Nobody deserves any form of violence but neither is it ethical to conceal something so fundamental about yourself.

Steele was employed by the chemical industry who funded his degree and PhD. When he began hormone treatment his employer, we are told, terminated his employment. This led to Steele relocating to Devon where, we are told, he lived in stealth (lied about his sex) and ran a hair salon and had a photography business, filming children.

Steele also set up a “trans” lobby group and boasts of having trained the police and NHS staff. The NHS are also listening to his charity on the issue of “transgender children”.

Samaritans

Steele also volunteers with the Samaritans and is also a member of the Independent Advisory Group for the police.

The Samaritans link is interesting because I did a bit of digging on the Samaritans; because of their failure to call out the egregious use of suicide threats by the “trans” lobby. You can read that piece here: 👇

Samaritans: It is time to talk

What I had not understood was how deep the links with the Samaritans go. Burns was involved with the Beaumont Society which also set up the Beaumont Trust. Apparently the trust was set up with the Samaritans as key members and they remain so to this day.

Beaumont Society

The Beaumont society was set up for heterosexual males who cross dressed. They explicitly excluded any homosexuals, so eventually Steele parted ways with the group. Burns explains this away as not being “anti-gay” but simply wanting to distance themselves because of the prevailing attitudes to homosexuality. Quite how cross-dressing men came to take over all the Gay Lobby groups is a PhD thesis in waiting.

Transfigurations

Feeling unwelcome at the BS was what promoted Steele to set up their own support groups. Steele describes their time there as a “nightmare” which suggests the BS were really rather unfriendly to homosexuals.

This led to the birth of transfigurations. You can watch Steele talk about this in an interview done by the local health authority.

Carol Steele

Transfigurations has a twitter account which is not very active at the moment.

Trans Devon

A quick scan of the account shows Steele to be a defender of Mermaids, in general, and Susie Green in particular. He was very keen on “trans” children being able to access puberty blockers and also to get a Gender Recognition Certificate.

He also likes to attack “Terfs”. This was an article about a man who was trans-identified and took up a post at a women’s aid refuge.

He is particularly enraged about the work of Transgender Trend.

This is turning into quite a lengthy series but there is much more to cover. I will be back with part 6. If you can support my work here is one way to do so. Or considered a paid subscription to my substack. There are trans-identified men getting paid to write about this stuff but less opportunity for those of us who call a man a man.

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

A third Sex? : Trans Britain. (Part 4)

This piece will cover the way trans activists have appropriated people with disorders of sexual development and anthropologist’s work on the way other societies recognise people as “third genders”. In both cases the intent is to undermine facts about sexual dimorphism (there are only two sexes) and to claim “trans” people have always been with us. As is often the case the claims have a factual basis but, once appropriated by trans activists the facts are re-purposed to serve the agenda of men trapped in men’s bodies.

Third Genders

It starts off reasonably enough by accepting that labelling historical figures as “transgender” is a dangerous business. The term was only invented in the twentieth century. However, it is imperative that people believe that “trans people” have always been with us so DSDs and cultures who accept “third gender” are pressed into service. After a promising start, Burns soon veers off into magical thinking.

What people like Burns need is a script to explain who they are and, naturally enough, the labels of transvestic fetishist /autogynephile are shunned. For those who are afflicted with these paraphilia the shame causes narcissistic injury should anyone use accurate labels. More palatable explanations are, arguably, a psychological necessity and this is where “third genders” and people with DSDs come in. The different ways other cultures accommodated, mainly homosexual, men are seized upon.

The examples are real enough.

It is true that many societies found a way to accommodate homosexual men by introducing the concept of a different kind of man (it was mainly men). In some cases this may have been a more benign way of recognising gay men; though this is not to ignore the subtext that gay men are “not real men”. The story of the hjjra seems, however, to have a somewhat darker underbelly as covered by Vaishnavi Sundar in this piece.

Hijra

and this one 👇 

Abduction and Castration

It seems that, in this instance, this may have always been, or has become, a way to press boys into sexual slavery to accommodate the peccadilloes (perversions) of men with an appetite for young boys.

It is noticeable that there are less examples of accommodations for females who don’t fit the sex stereotypes of their age/culture. The examples I have found allowed widows, or only daughters, to become the “man” of the house and therefore be socially sanctioned to work to support their families/inherit land. One example is the Albanian Burrneshas or “sworn virgins”.

Females have long been barred from inheritance or certain occupations and to, publicly, embark on relationships with other women. This would seem to explain the examples of women, masquerading as men, put forward by Burns. In fact he does acknowledge that, in the examples from the U.K, there were more women than men, identifying out of their sex. Burns found this “interesting”. He cannot probe further or it will topple the house of cards he is building.

There does not appear to have been negative coverage of these women, when discovered and this is surely because it is a tale of two sexes. Just as in 2022 there is less concern about females “invading” male spaces because they simple have less propensity for sexual violence and less able to overpower a man.

Burns acknowledges that in claiming women who disguised themselves to access male professions, like “James Barry”, the trans activists are appropriating women’s, often Lesbian heroines. (James Barry was female and adopted a male persona to gain access to the medical profession. Something not possible, as a woman).

Disorders of Sexual Development (DSDs).

It is often claimed that people who have a DSD, undermine the fact that we are a sexually dimorphic species. This is one of the more shameful of appropriations, because some of these conditions are life-threatening and many come with an inability to reproduce. Not only that but some of them are girls who would have had an oestrogen fuelled puberty, and have no idea they are chromosomally male until their teenage years. Having a condition called CAIS ( Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome) means a total inability to process testosterone. They will mainly be socialised as females and may only discover their predicament when menstruation doesn’t occur.

Most children with CAIS are raised as females. They usually have their testes surgically removed because undescended testes can become cancerous later on. They may need treatment to develop the vagina. They develop breasts but do not have menstrual periods and may have very little pubic and/or underarm hair. They may also need to take estrogen, a female hormone, for the rest of their lives.

Since gender identity ideology is essentially a parasitic movement the experiences of “intersex” people have been weaponised to advance the argument that trans-identified males are another kind of “intersex”. Some TRAs publicly claim to be intersex, with little evidence, and Burn’s covers the most egregious imposter, Roberta Cowell.

Cowell was an ex spitfire pilot, a motor racing, heterosexual, father of two. To access medical treatment he claimed to be “intersex”. In order to persuade his doctor he had to repudiate his children and, publicly, accuse his wife of infidelity. Something which must have earned her opprobrium in the aftermath of World War 2. He walked out on his daughters in 1948 and would never see them again. He died alone and impoverished, at the age of 93, his daughters would not find out about his death until two years later.

Burns makes some acknowledgment of this when describing the Jewish acknowledgment of 6 genders and concedes this was likely a description of DSDs:

A woman who was born with a condition called MRKH wrote about a “transsexual” who encourage the “trans” community to identify as intersex. Unfortunately the linked article appears to have been removed.

Why do TRAs claim to be intersex?

Here are the alleged contents of O’Keefe’s essay.

Lies, half truths and obfuscation

In conclusion the attempts to claim a long history of “trans people” are based on half truths and outright lies. William Shakespeare said it best:

Where there’s smoke there’s mirrors.

You can support my work here. All donations gratefully received. I know paypal has alienated many people so you could consider a paid subscription to my substack. I do this full time and there are no billionaires beating a path to my door. 😂

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

Political Ambitions: Trans Britain. (Part 3)

Political ambitions.

There’s an interesting insert in this chapter which highlights that trans-activists work has been going on for decades and only now being noticed. Maybe this is because of the strategy outlined in The Denton’s Document: “Avoid press coverage”.

Many trans-activists got involved in various political parties to advance their agenda. I am trying not to be cynical about motivations but some of the party-hopping trans-activists suggests they are not conviction politicians, in the traditional sense.

Mark Lees

Mark Lees is a trans-identified female who held a council seat for the Liberal Democrats. Lees has quite a sad story about how he came to repudiate his sex.

Lee first came to prominence in 1986 when he took a case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Lees is a Christian who had also tried to be ordained but denied because females were precluded from ordained ministry. This is what prompted the legal fight. After this case Lees was contacted by a prominent Liberal Democrat and encouraged to pursue political office. Lees organised a meeting at the House of Commons and was involved in setting up the organisation Press For Change.

Lees does not appear to be promoting extremes and so I include only because many of the females caught up in this are in flight from their sex for complicated reasons. Some, as here, seem to be rooted in grief. Still others are autistic some struggle to accept their same sex attraction and still others reject their sexed body because of childhood sexual abuse. There are victims as well as perpetrators and even then these labels are not mutually exclusive. Blameless children can move between the two. It is also, ironically enough, very much a tale of two sexes.

Nikki Sinclaire

Sinclaire was a U.K.I.P Member of the European Parliament who was investigated over fraudulent expense claims but subsequently acquitted. Sinclaire was, allegedly, only “outed” after his period of office which lasted from 2009 to 2015.

Aimee Challenor

Aimee Challenor was a candidate for the Greens who had a previous conviction , as a minor, of threatening terrorist activity. Trans Crime cover his earlier charges (subsequently dropped) here:👇 Challenor was also a member of Stonewall’s (S.T.A.G) Trans Advisory Group.

Aimee Challenor

Challenor was investigated further when it emerged his father had been charged for the rape of a 10 year old girl, while acting as Challenor’s election agent. A crime for which he was subsequently convicted. Following an investigation, Challenor left the Green Party only to resurface in the Liberal Democrats. He was suspended from both parties. He subsequently married Nathan Knight and moved to the United States. It then turned out that his husband wrote pornographic fiction involving minors and incest. Here is how Pink News reported it:

In fact Nathan Knight had admitted he wrote this fiction. As covered by Feminist Current:

Aimee Challenor/Knight

Challenor /Knight then became a moderator on a Reddit forum, one of which was accessed by minors. He was finally removed after a protest by Reddit Users.

Challenor is an example of a kid who never stood a chance and I can feel pity for his earlier self. I dread to think what he was exposed to in the house he shared with his parents. Tragically the cycle of predatory behaviour can echo down the generations.

Sophie Cook

I have written about Sophie Cook before. Cook has the same pattern of standing for office and then standing as an independent, undermining the vote for his original party. Cook was ineligible for candidacy, second time around, because of an undeclared bankruptcy.

Sophie Cook: TRAs behind the scenes

Sophie took a place on the Women into Leadership scheme set up by U.K. Labour to redress the under-representation of women. He was not alone in doing this.

Cook was also recently announced as a “Speak Out” Champion for the Crown Prosecution Services.

Helen Belcher

Belcher has stood, unsuccessfully, for the Liberal Democrats, as an M.P twice but is a sitting Liberal Democrat Councillor. Belcher is a co-founder of Trans Media Watch. This organisation appeared in part two because Jane Fae is one of the trustees. Belcher doesn’t appear on the list of trustees and recently supported Mermaids, who are trying to strip the U.Ks only exclusively LGB charity (LGB Alliance) of its Charitable status. In that press statement Belcher does so in the name of an organisation called Trans Actual. Both Belcher and Fae are listed as Directors of Trans Actual at Companies House.

Here Liberal Democrat M.P., Layla Moran, describes Belcher as a friend. Sourced from Hansard, the official record of proceedings in the House of Commons.

Belcher also boasts of support from Ed Vaizey, a Conservative M.P.

Belcher is a heterosexual, married, father of two and was, formerly, a Christian Evangelical. It was his leadership role in the Church that inhibited him from cross-dressing at Church. Eventually he was driven to leave the Church and his wife, subsequently left the Church. You can hear Belcher talk about this in this podcast.

In this interview he claims his parents know he was “trans” from age 5 but also he became estranged from his father. His mother had died before he married. He also details his career in computing, not an unfamiliar story in trans identified males.

Helen Belcher

In this interview Belcher states that his first foray into activism was to oppose the “Spousal Exit Clause”; which allows a wife to divorce her husband if he wishes to “transition”. It is often misrepresented as a “Spousal Veto”, which is deliberate terminology designed to imply the wife can stop any change of “identity” or physical change. All she can do is exit the marriage before she is officially recorded as married to a “legal woman”.

Belcher also argues that even if “trans women” are more dangerous it is a form of apartheid to deny males access to female spaces. He claims that groups fighting for single sex spaces are waging a hate campaign and aim to eliminate “trans” people. He also says no “trans woman” will use male facilities because “Why would we put ourselves in danger?” Also this. 👇

Here are a few more statements from Belcher: This is reminiscent of Martine Rothblatt.

Absolutely no concern for the detransitioners and the harm wreaked upon Keira Bell and the nearly 40,000 young people on the detrans subreddit.

More transperbole: 👇

The above picture is a clip from one of Belcher towering over Jo Swinson, then leader of the Liberal Democrats. Worth remembering the Liberal Democrats have taken £1.4 million from the makers of puberty blockers.

Liberal Democrats & Big Pharma

Belcher also lost a complaint against The Times who he claimed were responsible for child suicides due to an article by Janice Turner. Details below: 👇

Failed Ipso Complaint

Belcher has a full chapter and perhaps in that I will find out exactly what Belcher is working on in Parliament as he mentions in the above interview. It is suggested he is an advisor to a Baroness in the House of Lords.

Heather Peto

Heather Peto seems to struggle with basic facts about his previous name, age and whether or not he took up a place at the Jo Cox, Women into leadership programme. I will just include a few images and you can read more on Glinner’s substack.

There is quite a lot of information 😳 on Heather Peto in sources I am not going to link to, in this piece. You can read more here:

Heather Peto


In part four I will look at the evidence put forward to claim “trans” people have existed across time and the globe as well as some of the “role models” who our children have been taught about in schools.

You can support my work below or consider a paid subscription to my substack. All contributions are gratefully received.

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

The Lobby Groups and Key Influencers: Trans Britain (Part 2)

Working my way through this book by Christine Burns. Subtitle is “Out of the Shadows” so I think it only right that we expose the organisations /individuals working to undermine Women’s rights, gay rights and children’s safeguarding.

You can read part one here:

C.Burns: Trans Britain

All About Trans

The book documents how we have reached saturation point with “trans” characters appearing in all the main soap operas beginning with Hayley Cropper, in Coronation Street. All About Trans is the lobby group behind much of the media capture.

You can find their website here: 👇

All About Trans

This is how they describe their work:

On their website they also quote an endorsement from Evan Davis, a journalist who formerly worked for Newsnight (a role he left in 2008) and is now a presenter on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme.

One of the people acting as a consultant is Ugla Stefania, who is a trans-identified male and in a heterosexual relationship Fox Fisher. Both featured in part one. Ugla wrote the introduction to the Denton’s document which laid bare the strategy to embed Gender Identity Ideology throughout society. If you have not read my piece on The Denton’s Document, it’s well worth a look. Full document linked if you want to go to the primary source.

All About Trans is part of an umbrella organisation On Road Media who boast relationships with a wide range of media organisations, including the BBC. They also boast an impressive list of financial supporters among charitable foundations. The NHS, National Union of Journalists, National Lottery are amongst those listed as partners. One of the charitable foundations listed in The Paul Hamlyn Foundation which appeared in my series on The Guardian. PHF shared a trustee with the Trust that oversaw the Guardian Media Group and they have funded an array of trans lobby groups, including Mermaids.

You can find that series here:

THE GUARDIAN MEDIA GROUP

On reading the Annual Report for 2o20 I also came across a familiar face.

This is Megan Key who gave evidence to the House of Commons about “Transgender” prisoners. He works for the Prison service and thinks a man who has committed sexual offences, against women, can nevertheless be housed in the female estate. I covered him in these two pieces.

Megan Key: Probation Services

Megan Key: Update.

Another collaborator is Ayla Holdum. Ayla talks about how he re-educated Sun readers who had covered his “transition” in sensationalist style. Ayla managed to get the article removed.

Holdom is a trustee of Stonewall and a Patron of Mermaids. He is married, to a woman, and describes himself as a “mum”.

Here he is confirming that he is a heterosexual man.

Next up Rebecca Root and Kellie Maloney (who we met in part one).

This was on BBC Two but was promoted as “love across the age gap”. It is no longer available on BBC iPlayer.

Root is also in a relationship with a woman and has quite a few film credits. He played a nurse in The Danish Girl and also made an appearance in The Queens Gambit in 2020. This is the case with a lot of netflix shows who try to sneak “trans” characters in on a regular basis. This serves as product placement for the Gender Industrial Complex.

Here he is celebrating feeling “sexy” as a woman and how getting “chatted up” feels like an achievement.

Finally we can’t leave out Annie Wallace. Wallace is also a patron of Mermaids and i plays a character in Hollyoaks. This soap included an episode where Wallace was incarcerated, in a women’s prison and HE was portrayed as a victim of bullying.

He also advised Coronation Street on the character of Hayley Cropper which was organised by Burns. Wallace also claims to have “transitioned” in his twenties and he hid his biological sex until he was in his fifties. Like many feminists I am blocked from Wallace’s twitter feed but he makes a habit of attacking women fighting for sex based rights and enjoys calling us “hysterical”, like a good old fashioned sexist.

I am not very far through this book and Wallace gets a chapter all of his own. Doubtless there will be more to say about his contribution.

For the next piece I will cover the trans-activists who have tried, some succeeded, to gain political office.

You can support my work here, if you can afford it. Contrary to the rumours all the money is being directed to support this misogynist ideology. Women fighting this do so on a shoe string. You can give via paypal or consider a paid subscription to my substack.

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

C.Burns: Introduction: Trans Britain (Part 1)

Now seems as good a time as ever to cover more of Burn’s work, especially because this book is dedicated to Mermaids.

Introduction:

Here is the dedication to Mermaids 👇. controversial

Mermaids is a charity which promotes the idea children can be born in the wrong body and need to be prevented from going through a natural puberty / prepared for a life of surgeries. Older (trans-identified) men are especially keen to promote “transgender” children because it desexualises the motives that direct many older male “transsexuals” It is also feeds a fantasy of “passing” better as the sex they wish they were; a kind of retrospective wish fulfilment.

The foreword is written by Dr Aaron Devor who is a Canadian “trans” activist who occupies the worlds first Chair of Transgender Studies at the University of Victoria in British Columbia. The post was funded by a donation of $1 million from the Tawani Foundation run by a trans-identified male called “Jennifer” Pritzker. You can read more about Pritzker here:

Who is bankrolling “Transgender” Ideology

The book opens with a glossary to educate the readers in the “new speak” of “transgender” ideology, and makes it clear the definition of “trans” includes cross-dressers. Burns explains cross-dressers in this clip 👇 but omits the way the man obtains his “relaxation” and “pleasure”; which is by masturbating while wearing clothing associated with the female sex. The goal is to distance themselves from any link to transvestic fetishism. Women can’t be allowed to know that some of the men, now claiming access to spaces, formerly reserved for women and girls, do so because they are sexually motivated.

Burns opens the book by celebrating the way in which this rampant mysogyny has taken hold, in the preceding decades. One notable example is the celebration of Caitlin (Bruce) Jenner as woman of the year. Burns can’t quite repress his 1950’s version of sexism here and describes Caitlin as “head of the Kardashian family”.

At the other end of the age range Burns includes Jazz Jennings. Jenning was first sponsored by a pharmaceutical company and progressed to a TV series documenting his life from puberty blockers, followed by cross sex hormones, castration and ,finally, penis inversion. Jennings, sadly, appears to have lost any ability to achieve orgasm, infamously asking if an orgasm was “like a sneeze”? The penis growth was so stunted, by the pubertal suppression, he needed multiple surgeries to create a faux vagina using experimental techniques. Jazz is one of the victims of this ideology but, to Burns, he is to be paraded as a celebrity. Burns nails it with the acknowledgment of the role of “corporates” in peddling this ideology to minors. Jazz is a brand ambassador but he will soon be cast aside because his sexual dysfunction and massive weight gain are not quite the image the Gender Industrial Complex had in mind.

Burns takes us on a whistle stop tour of “trans” celebrities, almost all of them male, before moving onto “transgender” people in politics (again most of them male). First we learn about Georgina Beyer who became an MP In New Zealand having first been a prostituted male and drag queen. You can watch an interview with Beyer here at the Cambridge Union. Beyer talks of his role in passing legislation to decriminalise male sex buyers and mentions, in passing, his invitation to the U.K. House of Lords by Michael Cashman. He also references the opposition to the Gender Recognition Act reforms by British radical feminists. Beyer finishes by boasting about being included in the celebrations for the anniversary of women’s suffrage in New Zealand. He is delighted he has been accepted “as a woman” but, bizarrely, adds that we should be grateful for the men that voted for female suffrage.

Georgina Beyer

Backlash.

All this visibility, Burns argues, led to an inevitable backlash. Burns attributes this to the right wing and fundamental Christians. It remains to be seen whether Burns acknowledges the opposition from left wing feminists and the homosexual community.

Without a trace of irony he argues that the focus on “bathroom” bills is designed to bar “trans” people from public life, nicely ignoring the urinary leash women operated under prior to the provision of female only facilities.

In fact we know that making female facilities mixed sex increases the risk of sexual assault but Chris doesn’t care about anything else but his own validation as something he is not.

In the next section Burns details the increased visibility of “trans” people in the U.K. He begins with reference to a 2010 serialisation of a “transition” journey by Juliet Jacques.

Jacques publicly admits that his cross dressing started at 10 and had a sexual element to it in this talk.

Juliet Jacques

Trans media watch: Jane Fae

Burns then covers the organisation Trans Media Watch which worked hard to increase transgender visibility a kid of product placement, if you will.

Here is the press release put out by Channel 4 at the time.

Channel 4. Trans Media Watch

One of the trustees for Trans Media Watch is a man called Jane Fae. A late transitioning male who is a defender of extreme porn.

Jane Fae on laws about porn

Fae also defends BDSM and “consensual slavery” . This is from an article he wrote for the Guardian in 2011.

He also began as a cross-dresser:

I see this Trans Media Watch as a men’s sexual rights organisation intended to carefully curate their image, in effect to sanitise their “gender identity” to make it more palatable to the general public. This allows the public parading of a fetish and simultaneously forcing women to participate; which gives an added frisson to the undercover brothers.

Fox Fisher

Next up Burns references another trans activist: Fox Fisher.

Fox Fisher is a trans-identified female who first came to prominence in the above documentary and is now in a heterosexual relationship with a trans-identified male. The male in question is Ugly Stefania who you may be familiar with. Ugly is a trans-activist who wrote the foreward to the infamous Denton’s document. The Denton’s document is a must read if you want to see how trans-activism strategised how to socially engineer society to bow to their demands. I cover it here : 👇

That Denton’s Document

Ten years on from that documentary Fox has the tell tale voice of a woman on testosterone is post double mastectomy and is, as I write, recovering from Metoidioplasty: a surgery to create the approximation of a penis. Even before Fox went under the knife he didn’t rule out a future phallioplasty if the operation didn’t bring enough “euphoria” down below.

Fox is charge of Brighton Pride despite being in a heterosexual relationship and despite this comment made at a Mermaids summer camp.

Fox Fisher has frequently been platformed by Childline which is run by the N.S.P.C.C (National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children). The N.S.P.C.C is the only charity which has statutory powers to remove children from their parents. Childline relentlessly push transgender content at your kids. I covered this here:

Queering the NSPCC? FINAL

Paris Lees

Next up is Paris Lees. Another trans-identified male given prominence over the last decade. Lees was formerly incarcerated for a robbery that, eventually, resulted in a man’s death. He also has a background as a prostituted male.

Here is Paris talking about his background as a male prostitute and robbing a client.

Here are a few more contributions from Paris Lees.

Here is Paris defending the charity Mermaids which I include because the Charity Commission are about to investigate the Charity.

Frank /Kellie Maloney

Next up we celebrate the boxing promoter who came out as “Kellie”.

Here’s “Kellie” talking about the time he tried to strangle his wife.

Here Tracy talks about their marriage. Frank had been keeping a secret flat and he only revealed his secret life, as a cross-dresser when the press threatened to expose him.

He tried to blame his wife for the many rows.

When he initiated divorce proceedings he allowed people to think it was his wife who had abandoned him.

These are the brand ambassadors selected by Burns. In the next I will have a look at the Soap stars used to promote gender identity ideology and “trans” identified people who have attempted to gain political office in the U.K.

If you appreciate my work you can support me here or consider a paid subscription to my substack. All donations gratefully received.

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

WPATH on Children

World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).

Version 8 of the WPATH guidelines (2022). Let’s have a gander at what it says about treating children who we have decided are born in the wrong body. Before we get into the detail meet Amy Tishelman. She authored this chapter and explicitly said it was written in such a way to minimise legal consequences for practitioners. 👇

You can watch this here:

Amy Tishelman

It is also important to listen to Marci Bowers; trans-identified male and a surgeon who performs “gender affirming” operations. Bowers is also the President elect of WPATH. Link below 👇 . Children (males) who have their puberty blocked will have a micro penis and will be unlikely to ever have an orgasm, when they are adults. Bearing in mind puberty can start from age 9, we are expecting these kids to know what they are giving up. Marci still signed off these guidelines.

Marci Bowers

These two contributions set the scene for the guidance on treating children who have been “diagnosed” as “transgender”. WPATH have to make sure that health insurance covers the procedures for which they advocate. At the same time they are keen not to expose practitioners, working in this field, to any legal consequences; particularly in the light of rising rates of detransitioners and the beginning of the first law suits.

This chapter outlines “guidance” for the treatment of pre-pubertal children. In order to legitimise this practice society needs to believe that childhood “gender diversity” has always been a feature of human development. They also need to facilitate access to medical intervention whilst simultaneously de-pathologising it and denying it is a mental illness. Claiming this is a “natural” variation in humans which, only sometimes, requires access to synthetic hormones and surgeries, takes some mental gymnastics. As we will see the author’s of the WPATH guidelines are up to the task.

At the same time WPATH also argue that “diverse gender expression” need not be a sign that someone is “transgender” or even that they are “gender incongruent”.

Any attempt to explore whether “diverse gender expression” is indicative of a “transgender” identity is labelled conversion therapy. It is perfectly clear that the best resolution for any child would be to reconcile to their biological sex/homosexuality and thus avoid a lifetimes dependence on hormones /surgeries. For this “condition” ,and only this condition, the medical profession is exhorted not to attempt curative treatments which, by the way, cuts off a profitable income stream for the pharmaceutical industry. They also assume that any attempts to reconcile a child with their natal sex would comprise “forcing” the child to behave in line with socially mandated expectations for their sex. In fact any decent therapist would explain that it is perfectly possible to be a girl who likes football or a boy who loves The Little Mermaid and would know there is a high chance that, if left alone, a significant proportion would grow up to be healthy gay adults.

This chapter also recognises the high rates of autism in kids who present with “gender dysphoria”. Given the difficulty autistic kids have in picking up social cues and fitting in with social norms, isn’t it more likely that they struggle to fit in with the expectations for their sex because “gendered” behaviour is, to a large degree learned?

The guidelines repeatedly assure parents that the children who thrive are the ones allowed to express their “identity” and that this may mean a social / medical approach. A social “transition” would allow the child to masquerade as the opposite sex amongst their peers, with or without their knowledge. The authors believe that a “gender” identity can emerge even in pre-school children; an assumption which seems to be made on the basis that two/three year olds learn the difference between men and women as well as the socially encouraged /proscribed behaviours for boys/girls.

Social Transition.

The consequences of social transition are dealt with in this article 👇

A childhood cannot be reversed

This seems a workable solution when a child is very young but when puberty arrives the fact that they are not like the other boys/girls becomes distressingly apparent. Making the path to puberty blockers more likely. Joseph/Joanna has not spent these years learning there is no right or wrong way to be a girl/boy but, instead, has spent them denying biological reality.

Practitioners working in this field are encouraged to discuss the advantages, and disadvantages, of a social “transition” but there is no discussion of the issues raised in the above article. In general it is promoted as having a positive impact on mental health. It has also expanded to cover “non-binary” whatever that means.

In this section they do acknowledge the potential impact on sexual function, though it merits much more detail than provided. Practitioners are advised to cover all these issues 👇

Gender Identity Ideologues are keen to warn against using the idea of “gender fluidity” to demure from socially “transitioning” your child.

Pharma funded, Jack Turban, also warns of the harms that may accrue to a child who does not “socially transition”. The non-conforming child may be ostracised or bullied ….so let’s sterilise them! This is so, so, regressive.

Social transition can, they advise, include any of the below actions. Whether or not this is revealed to other pupils/parents is depicted as a matter of choice for the “trans” child which means other children are having their consent, to share mixed sex facilities, overridden. The implications for females are also disregarded; in terms of participation in sport against biological males.

Detransition

As with the adolescent section WPATH can no longer deny cases of regret and detransition. The reddit detransition page is no approaching 40,000 and when I first starting looking at it there were less than 10,000. Commentators on that forum are openly skeptical about the repeated statistic of a 1% rate of detransition; which WPATH repeat in this section. The points they raise are the unwillingness to notify the clinic who harmed you and also the changing nature of the demographic due to lower/removal of gate keeping.

The figure of 8% is what one study, in the U.K. found even though the way they measured it seemed also destined to underestimate the numbers. I covered that study here.

Detransition: Cambridge Study (2)

Here is a clip from my piece on that study; which raises some of the difficulties with studies in this area. The definition of a “detransitioner” can be narrowed to exclude someone who may have ceased medical intervention but remains in “social role”. This maybe to remain in their “community”, it maybe that a man who is post-operative declines to reintroduce testosterone into his body and therefore remains, technically, a medical “transitioner”. ( I know of one man in this position).

Human Rights /Activism.

The Gender Industrial complex has been very successful at persuading erstwhile Human Rights Organisation to embrace “Transgender Ideology” as if it were a Civil Rights issue. Amnesty International has shown itself willing to be co-opted, as has the ACLU, Liberty and GLAAD and, of course Stonewall. Some adopt a name which suggests they are campaigners for Human Rights when they are anything but 👇. The HRC is the largest LGBTQ+ lobby group.

As this document makes clear Health Care Practitioners are also expected to be (trans) advocates with parents, schools, and the larger community.

Furthermore they are encouraged to get involved politics, education and legally and in the media. Challenging laws and social norms. This is an activists charter and sadly many of our health care “professionals” have responded to this rallying call.

In conclusion WPATH are going full steam ahead irrespective of the increasing research about the harms they are inflicting on our kids. This is a dark time for Gay Rights, Women’s Rights and will be a dark stain on the medical profession.

You can support my work here. All contributions gratefully received. Or consider a paid subscription to my substack.

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

Are gay people better off without Stonewall?

I have been meaning to cover this discussion for ages. It was hosted by Tortoise Media and had voices from across the “debate”.

You can watch it here:

Are gay people better off without Stonewall?

The host (referee) is a bit nervous about this discussion and recognises that the topic can be very divisive. She also states that she is a Lesbian so has skin in the game.

Jan Gooding

First introduction goes to Jan Gooding, ex Trustee of Stonewall. Here’s a bit of background on Jan. Main background is in marketing and I did have a wry chuckle at “Brand Reputation Specialist!

It was during Gooding’s time that Stonewall reviewed all their successes, legislatively and looked at their future direction. They had already achieved the repeal of Section 28 and sexual orientation was legal as well as same sex marriage. Seems they needed a new agenda.

Jan did not mention the $100,000 they took from the Arcus Foundation, specifically for them to add the T to their lobbying.

You can learn more about Gooding from her Stonewall review for 2018. #NoDebate

Jan Gooding: 2018

Targeting the Pink Pound.

During Gooding’s time at Stonewall that made many lucrative partnerships and this is one did start to look as if wooing the private sector was a key strategic priority. This is one of Stonewall’s partners; who are salivating at all the £££.

She talks about the history of Stonewall and how it was set up to oppose Section 28 legislation. For readers outside the U.K this was brought in by a conservative govt and banned the “promotion of homosexuality” in schools. Jan is then asked about Stonewall revenue schemes and she makes a couple of interesting comments. Apparently Ben Summerskill of Stonewall was against taking government money but all that changed and the government actively wanted a partnership with Stonewall.

The irony of her next statement was not lost on me given the fact that Stonewall has been misrepresenting the Equality Act consistently and accused of promoting not the law but the law as they would wish it to be. (Source: Akua Reindorf)

Specifically Stonewall set out their aim to undermine the protected characteristic of “sex”; specifically the right to legally protected female only spaces. This is an excerpt from their Vision For Change document.

The presenter then takes a question from an ex volunteer, for Stonewall, in the chat. He describes how he worked in Equality and Diversity but had been put off by the “hard sell” from Stonewall employees exhorting him to join the diversity scheme. He also had grave misgivings about the way Stonewall had embraced “trans” rights in choosing to adopt an extreme version which pushed for “Gender Identity” to be affirmed in all circumstances. Additionally, he also felt Stonewall’s choice to adopt a #NoDebate strategy and refusing to discuss the genuine conflict of rights this raised was a “lethal combination”.

The next commentator (Jonny Best) was again a long term supporter of Stonewall, and a gay man, who took issue with Stonewall’s condemnation of Lesbians who protested Pride in 2018. The group Get The L Out were protesting the Lesbian erasure and the insistence that same sex attraction is inherently transphobic because the women don’t accept trans-identifying males as partners. From his perspective Stonewall is now a Gender Identity Activism organisation who have redefined same sex attraction as problematic and, in so doing, reintroduced a kind of “gay shame”. Asked for a solution he says Stonewall has done so much damage it is now unsalvageable and should disband. Another gay man (Hassan Mandani) concurs and says Stonewall have tried to redefine his same sex attraction as “same gender” attracted thereby erasing the experience of gay men who are same sex attracted.

Christine Burns

After those questions, from the gay men, the presenter decides it is a good time to bring Christine Burns into the discussion. Burns is a trans-identified male and founder of a trans lobby group Press for Change, he also advises Stonewall. He explains that Press For Change was set up as a “trans” lobby group determined to establish their rights through strategic litigation. After outlining successive legal victories obtained by Press for Change the presenter then asks why they had not continued on their own? The answer from Burns is that Stonewall operated on a bigger scale and had money. Burns also reveals they had been working with the NHS after 2007 and also the Press Complaints Commission. Burns also reveals he worked closely with Ruth Hunt at the Department of Health. In addition Burns claims that same sex attracted people are discriminated against because of their perceived gender non-conformity and therefore they should work together.

Bev Jackson: Kate Harris

The presenter now brings in Bev Jackson of LGB Alliance. Bev explains that she and others had tried very hard to get Stonewall to engage over many years and it was only in the face of their intransigence that a decision was made to set up a new organisation. Stonewall’s strategy of #NoDebate had left them with no alternative. Bev also explains that people disagree and calling people “bigots” because they disagree is not helpful.

Christine Burns (Again)

After this brief segment Burns interrupts to state that the “nastiness” had only started in 2017 when Theresa May proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act. Burns had worked on the GRA and claims that many compromises were made to get it passed. The delay, Burns argues, had left a vacuum into which many bad faith actors had entered. 👇(Worth saying, at this point, that significantly more time has been allocated to pro-Stonewall voices at this point).

It is not clear whether this accusation is levelled at the previous speakers but Burns clarifies that he is not talking about people in this conversation but, nevertheless, the people on this call “seem to have the same mindset”. CB also makes it clear that Stonewall are right in their #NoDebate stance because there should be no negotiation about the rights he has enjoyed “quietly and politely” for the last decades. Finally Burn’s recommends reading his book to get educated. This is good advice. You can read an excerpt below about how they strategised to force mixed sex spaces on women; by experimenting on female prisoners.

The presenter seems conscious of the inequity in the time allocates so now brings in Kate Harris.

Kate Harris: LGB Alliance.

Kate says what we were all thinking. “Christine you have been speaking far too much”. 😂. Then she directs a comment to Jan Gooding; pointing out that she and others spent nearly three years trying to get dialogue with herself and Ruth Hunt including a petition signed by 10,000 people. Not going to lie, I had to break off during Kate’s contribution which was deeply moving.

Kate continues to explain that her life being ruined is not as much of a concern as the young people who have been impacted by Stonewall adopting Gender Identity Ideology in its new incarnation.

Kate continues to outline to focus of LGB Alliance who are in the business of telling the truth and having fact based dialogue and telling Lesbians you do not have to cut off your breasts and pretend you are a boy to be a Lesbian. Kate makes it clear she blames Stonewall for this (so do I) and also for men in women’s sports and for propagating the lies that Gender Identity Ideology is built upon. Finally Kate points out that the fastest growing demographic of supporters of LGB Alliance are “transsexuals”. At the end she asks Benjamin Cohen, of Pink News to stop lying about LGB Alliance. He doesn’t of course because he is in deep. Husband is /was a Trustee of Mermaids.

I don’t know who the next contributor is but he makes an excellent point about organisations that become part of the establishment, eventually, and because they feel they have succeeded in their earlier missions they look for new areas and this is when they can take mis-steps. He refers to the new direction as “mission creep” which has confused lots of natural allies. He also refers to recent homophobic attacks which shows Stonewall still have lots to do on their original mission. He finishes by saying that he hopes the conflict between “trans” people and LGB people can be resolved.

Christine Burns interjects (Again).

He tries to go on but the presenter cuts him off, very politely and brings in a young bisexual who has a boyfriend but has dated women and been publicly harassed for doing so. She explains that she is finding the whole discussion really distressing. She finds the prospect of losing Stonewall scary and references recent draconian, anti-gay legislation in Hungary.

Next up is a straight woman, Ruth Kennedy, who is grateful for the debate and says Stonewall has done great work but is now pushing a version of “trans” rights which is coming into conflict with other protected characteristics and that is a problem and in some contexts, sex matters and it should not be controversial to articulate this. Turns out she is an ex-premier ship Rugby player and is clear that sex matters in sport.

Next up is a woman who is disappointed at the amount of spats and personal point scoring going on. We then move on to the co-founder of Tortoise Media, who are hosting this debate. James Harding makes the point that this event has shown there is a need for this discussion and also how we generally hope a debate ends with consensual agreement but the nature of some debates is this is not always the outcome.

Jonny Best is now invited to share his thoughts about how the LGB could include the T. First of all Stonewall should not compel belief in Gender Identity Theory. He is also critical of Stonewall’s definition of “transphobia” which was a “totalitarian step” because it does demand acceptance of the belief system of “gender identity”. He knows this would not have satisfied many “trans” identified people who find it painful that people are allowed to disbelieve a fundamental belief about your identity. At the same time it was enforcing this ideology which, in his view, was where Stonewall went wrong.

Back to Jan Gooding.

Jan feels some of the accusations levelled at Stonewall misrepresent the organisation. She explains that it is not true they don’t debate and they are in dialogue all the time. That said Stonewall starts from a position of acceptance and here is Jan explaining why there can be #NoDebate

She continues to outline what follows from this premise. We have to accept people are who they say they are, they need to live their lives without shame, with dignity and able to use the loos, alongside people, without insults and without being “misgendered” They need the possibility of playing sport.

She finishes with her belief that the majority of “sensible” people accept Stonewall’s stance and calls “trans” people our siblings in the “queer” community who need to live lives of dignity and respect free from violence. So, basically, has not shifted her stance at all or answered the questions put to her by other people on the call and, in particular, from Kate Harris.

The End.

You can support my work here. If you have intended to do it before, now might be a good time since paypal are banning gender critical voices and I have just put my head above the parapet by formally complaining.

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

WPATH: Guidelines V 8 {1}

World Professional Ass. for Transgender Health.

WPATH set the treatment protocols for “Transgender” health that guide organisations the world over. You can download the full guidance here: 👇

Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People Version 8

The new guidance, published in 2022, adds a section for Eunuchs who are now to be included under the, ever expanding, transgender umbrella.

This organisation is listened to by the U.K. NHS. Those endorsing this guidance include Marci Bowers, President Elect of WPATH, who I wrote about here:

Marci Bowers

This is a reminder of a public statement made by Bowers about the impact of puberty blockers on sexual pleasure. Bowers still signed off this document.

Also signing this off was Diane Ehrensaft. She is infamous for telling parents how pre-verbal babies can signal their “gender”. It might be a girl who tears barrettes out of her hair to tell you she is a boy. Or this example 👇 of a boy who signalled his discomfort with his sex, she claims, by unsnapping his onesie.

Diane Ehrensaft was also associated with the discredited accusations of ritual, satanic abuse back in the 1980’s/1990’s. You can find a lot of her presentations on YouTube. This is another example of her magical thinking. This woman is taken seriously. 😳.

In the U.K the guidance is endorsed by the Nottingham “Transgender” clinic and the local University, Medical school.

Chapter 1 covers terminology and settles on “Transgender” and “Gender Diverse” but makes it clear these were not uncontroversial choices and notes that other cultures may use different terms; a theme expanded on in Chapter 2. Estimates of the “transgender” population are covered in the third Chapter recognising there are higher numbers selecting a “gender diverse” identity in the younger population; hardly a surprise since they have had gender identity ideology rammed down their throats for up to a decade. Chapter 4 is a long winded reminder to #EducateYourself in which they exhort govt. bodies, healthcare providers etc to learn about the “transgender population”.

Adolescents

I am going to skip over what they have to say about assessing adults and go straight to Chapter 6 and assessment of adolescents. They note the spike in teenage referrals and the over-representation of females and they are still describing puberty blockers as “fully reversible”

At the same time they are keen to point out that a natural puberty is “irreversible” leaving lasting changes to the body. One of those changes, for male children, is penile growth, those who have puberty blocked will have stunted genitalia and, as a result, operations to mimic female genitalia will be much more problematic.

WPATH contradict themselves numerous times in this chapter. Here 👇 they talk of the dangers of “extended” pubertal suppression and potential impact on neurodevelopment. This calls into question WPATH’s own claim that they are “fully reversible”. They recommend against prolonged useage. Predictably, they use this “danger” to argue for the earlier introduction of cross sex hormones.

They also recognise that brain maturation continues into the mid 20’s ; which concerns those of us who have children who embarked on these drugs in their late teens.

It is worth quoting the factors, listed below, in teenagers who embark on irreversible changes to their bodies. Increased risk taking, a sense of urgency, peer pressure all raised as potential influences with adolescents embarking on “gender affirming” treatments.

The authors do at least reference Lisa Littman’s research on Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria but cast doubt on its validity for these reasons: 👇. A biased sample drawn from parents skeptical about “affirmation” as a protocol.

Detransition

Littman also undertook some work on detransition which I cover below: 👇

Littman and Detransition

WPATH admit there is a dearth of follow up studies on youth transitioners especially any that track them up until adulthood. 👇 A systematic review is therefore not possible. Remember we have been doing this for 25 years!

They then quote the “only” study to follow into children into adulthood but note this is only from 13 to 20 years old, right before brain maturation, which is expected to continue to around age 25. This is a study 👇 is from 2014. We are now in 2022!

They also cover another study and the author has accused them, publicly, of misrepresented their work. He believes that detransition is underestimated, contrary to the claims made by WPATH.

Because the phenomenon is now undeniable they do cover detransition. In this survey 25% had detransitioned before age 25.

You can read my series on detransition here 👇

Detransition

Despite concern that there is a social contagion element to kids identifying as “gender diverse” the authors continue to push for promotion of “transgender” identities as a simple variation in nature that has existed since the beginning of civilisation. Certainly there have always been people who struggled to live within, rigidly enforced, sex stereotypes, many of whom were simply gay/lesbian. Claiming there have always been “trans” people on the back of gender non-conforming homosexuals is blatant propaganda. The existence of synthetic sex identities emerged only in the last century.

Plus ca Change.

This is the long list of demands WPATH issue which are all likely to continue the “social contagion” by promoting the idea that “gender identity” is real and a more meaningful category than biological sex. All this will do is continue to encourage excessive rumination and a search for meaning under the ever expanding list of “gender identities”.

Number 11 is an instruction to make toilets mixed sex, once again disregarding the need, especially for females, for sex separated facilities. A major impediment to the spread of this ideology would be the removal of any such incentives. It cannot be good for your mental health to hand your sense of self over to other people’s presumed perception of you as male or female. This need for validation of your identity drives ever more authoritarian moves to force society to collude with this most basic of untruths. This creates a false of reality and a danger of it all crashing down when the compulsion to believe your “gender identity” is non-existent.

Emotional Blackmail of parents.

They continue with a long list of adverse consequences, including suicide, for parents who don’t express 100% support for the synthetic sex identity. Parents are to be force-teamed into agreeing with the medicalisation of their children and even used to justify earlier surgeries on the grounds they can help with “post-operative” care. This is also used to justify earlier surgeries.

And heaven forfend you suggest that reconciling to your biological sex /sexuality is the healthier outcome. That would be “Conversion Therapy”. 👇 I cannot think of any other “condition” where doctors are actively discouraged from trying to avoid a life times dependence on drugs.

Breast binding and Tucking.

Instead WPATH recommend the promotion of breast binding and tucking male genitalia, despite the health risks.

Here is a list of side effects from using breast binders:

For tucking a significant risk is testicular torsion. 👇 Sounds a bit grim.

Recommendations

There is clearly no appetite for addressing the concerns raised by rising rates of detransitioners and WPATH have opted to include these surgeries for under 18’s. Here are their recommendations. They list includes orchiectomy, vaginaplasty, hysterectomy, facial feminisation surgery and phalloplasty.

Phalloplasty is included even though, elsewhere, they recommend against it, for under 18’s because of the high rate of complications.

There is some quoted research on orgasmic potential for those undertaking a “vaginaplasty” which claims 84% will be able to achieve orgasm. Which means 16% will not and, crucially, they do not include figures on what point the males had their puberty suppressed. This means they are not presenting any data allowing us to extrapolate orgasmic potential for those who have had puberty suppressed from a young age.

Despite this the document pushes for earlier “Gender Affirming Health Care” (GAHT) for under 16’s including double mastectomies for minors.

Human Rights Groups

We must never forget that all of this is advocated by, formerly respected, human rights organisations. Amnesty International is one such and they are also quoted in this document. This Mengele medicine would never have reached this stage without putative claims this is a new Civil Rights cause.

I will do a series and cover the other chapters. Next up the section on children.

You can support my work here if you want to tip the balance away from the billionaires driving “transgenderism”.

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

Martine Rothblatt: Transgender to Transhumanism. Chapter 8

This is the final in this series on Rothblatt’s book. You can read the rest of the series here:

TRANSGENDER TO TRANSHUMAN

The final Chapter covers

Unfortunately, for me, Rothblatt, like a lot of men, doesn’t know when to stop so he follows up this chapter with both an epilogue and an afterward. Sigh.

He’s quite triumphalist in this chapter. Once again he located the origins of women’s oppression of women in acknowledging the reality of sex. In his world if we eradicate single sex spaces and open all female only spaces, to men, we will eradicate sexism and women will be liberated. He is astonishingly naive (disingenuous?) in this belief. He has a recurrent theme that abolishing sex based boundaries is being accomplished and “nothing horrible happened”. At the same time evidence is building to demonstrate that horrible things are happening: now on an almost daily basis. Whether this is women being incarcerated with male rapists or a fetishistic teacher parading his sexual paraphilia in a school. This is the brave new world of Rothblatt. Where this man can force school children to participate in his gross sexual fetish, because it is protected by Canadian law.

School spokesperson had this to say:

Rothblatt twists the history of female oppression to serve his own purposes. He misrepresents the achievements of campaigners for same sex marriage calling it “gender blind” marriage. The truth is , in fact, it is legislation to allow same sex marriage. He celebrates the decline of “sexual apartheid” because it is a victory over “cultural fascism”; equating women’s rights with Nazis is the new #FemiNazi. A label beloved by all the MRAs (Men’s Rights Activists) that preceded Martin.

Those who opposed same sex marriage campaigned on the basis of religion because they knew they would lose if it became a question of “civil rights”. That lesson was not lost on transgender identity ideologues who have managed to convince political elites that a man’s right to parade his fetish is the new frontier of civil rights.

Not content with forcing society to accept that men can be women the next frontier is transhumanism; 👇

In Rothblatt’s vision we will become hybrids of humans and computers and gain access to immortality. He wants to eradicate death.

He drops the names of the proponents of transhumanism should you wish to pursue your studies further. Julius Huxley, Ray Kurzweill and a man called FM 2030; who has had his head cryonically suspended in the quest to be revived. I did actually watch a documentary on FM 2030 which you can find here:

FM 2030

Theres also a website which Rothblatt promoted which now appears to be called Humanity Plus and has a YouTube channel. I am more concerned with the immediate impact of this ideology but clearly there are already developments to integrate humans with technology even if we may remain skeptical about the eradication of death itself.

Rothblatt clearly thinks this will be a reality in his lifetime so is laying the groundwork for laws to recognise legal personhood for his afterlife.

He justifies this by, once again, comparing a lack of recognition of post human computers to apartheid and sexism.

I destroy my enemy by making him my friend.

Rothblatt claims the victories of transgenderism are because they have followed a well trod path of advancement which includes the end of apartheid, slavery and the end of the oppression of women. At the same time he uses a revealing quote for his epilogue which reveals what he is really doing. He is forced teaming women and gay rights proponents to further his own aims. He is the enemy of groups he proclaims as “friends”.

No longer is there a war between the sexes, in Rothblatt’s world, instead it is a battle of technology and his preoccupation with separating women from childbearing emerges, again. He has a bad case of womb envy.

It is clear that he thinks he has won the battle over reality and we no longer believe there are two sexes. As always he misrepresents the arguments over sex by inferring, sometimes stating, that those of us arguing sex matters want to enforce sex based stereotypes and a belief in #LadyBrain. The people with the penises do in fact thinks differently which is why they are 99% of sex offenders.

How he squares this with his own statements is anyone’s guess. There is no such thing as male or female but Martine still claims he has the “soul of a woman”, uttered with all the confidence of a man.

Yet, like Eddie Izzard, he wants it both ways. He’s not quite ready to jettison that male privilege.

In conclusion.

Martine Rothblatt is no friend to women or homosexuals. He thinks he can be a bridge builder and “transgenderism” is a stepping stone to “transhumanism”; with a detour to destroy women’s rights to male free spaces. He wants the end of the idea of sexual orientation which would destroy gay rights to assemble only with the same sex. This is why Lesbians in Tasmania have lost the legal right to exclude trans-identifying males from Lesbian only events. Just to be clear, Rothblatt, thinks he has morphed from heterosexual male to be a “Lesbian”. This is from the afterword. 👇

#LesbianStrength2022

This is a placard of one of the trans activists who were there to challenge Lesbians marching in defence of same sex attraction at #LesbianStrength2022

Undaunted some young lesbians were there, fighting back. #LesbianStrength2022

You can support my work here if you want to oppose the billionaires driving “transgenderism”.

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

Martine Rothblatt: Transgender to Transhumanism. Chapter 7

We are on the home stretch. This is the penultimate chapter.

This is the new edition of a book originally entitled the Apartheid of Sex. The author is a “trans-identified”, heterosexual male. He is married and fathered three children. He is also a transhumanist who believes we can live on as “cyber-conscious” beings after our flesh suits have degraded. You might think this would render him an outcast but, in fact, he is currently a trustee sitting of Mayo Clinic, who are a large hospital charity; sometimes described as foremost in the world.

You can catch up with the series here:

TRANSGENDER TO TRANSHUMAN

Beyond gay or straight.

If chapter 6 has not convinced you that Gender Identity Ideology is an existential threat to gay rights this ought to do it. Rothblatt wants any acknowledgment that sex is real, and that we are a sexually dimorphic species, eradicated. He wants to purge references to male and female from language or repurpose them to mean your subjective sense of self. This is all to validate the author who believes himself to have a female soul. Lest it is not immediately apparent what the consequences are for the L, G and B here are his thoughts.

Heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual lose all meaning in a world where sex isn’t real and enough people have been sold a “synthetic sexual identity”. Note that Rothblatt does not insist on any hormonal/surgical treatment to justify claiming to be the opposite sex.

He is insistent, consistent and persistent with this messaging. He really wants it to sink in.

This is where the conflation with racism seeps in. He returns to this theme repeatedly to generate feelings of shame.

You would think bisexuals would get a free pass but, no, they fall foul of the “bi” which acknowledges two sexes. They have to be redefined as “multi sexual” so they don’t leave out anyone who doesn’t identify with the binary. Now he performs faux perplexity about the dating choices of Butch lesbians. The short answer is that same sex relationships do depend on sex organs. A Butch Lesbian who dates a “femme” lesbian would not be similarly attracted to a “femme” gay male because of his sex!

Multisexuality

After sex has been abolished and we have all been recategorised according to colours (really! see chapter 6) this is how Rothblatt imagines the future. Notice how he cannot imagine a partnership that does not depend on “mount or be mounted”! Does he seriously think people don’t exchange roles in sex already? All he seems to imagine is a binary of passive v dominant which is the same old binary thinking.

Of course Rothblatt believes your identity is valid no matter your hormone/surgical status but he also normalises irreversible body modifications. 👇 Note the casual reference to “hysterectomy” to eliminate “her” period”. This is a serious surgery that will trigger early menopause and heighten the risk for early onset dementia. Also he is pretending to assume the use of a dildo changes someone sex. There is no point at which two females, who are in a sexual relationship, become a heterosexual couple even if one of them takes synthetic sex hormones has surgeries or uses a dildo.

He begins this paragraph saying there are no valid answers but proceeds to argue that it is valid that one “feels” male more than if they have surgeries. 👇

Notice he first says there is no valid answers, then gives this “valid” answer then undercuts himself again.

He digresses at this point to talk about laws against sodomy and gay marriage. Interestingly he claims that marriage was performed between two people based on their appearance. I suspect this may not be wholly accurate. The problem, he argues, only arises if they separate and one of them wishes to annul the marriage, perhaps to avoid spousal support.

Same sex marriage now exists, in U.K law and, in fact, most of the opposition to the Gender Recognition Act came because the opposition were largely opposed to same sex marriage. The bizarre consequence of the GRA (in the U.K) was that, initially, for people who obtained a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) who were in a heterosexual marriage had to end; this affected women, predominantly because most GRC applications were from men. However, two people of the same sex could marry if one of them had a different legal sex. In effect parliament legalised same sex marriage for this special category of men and made it illegal for some women to remain in their marriage.

He then spends some time talking about the multiple ways in which children could be produced in these relationships. Get your head around this? 👇 “If one of the women was a sterile man” . He is going for the terms “mother” and “father”.

This is also quite revealing. My other half is more nurturing than I. I still carried and gave birth to my two sons and I will always be their mum, just as their dad is their dad and nothing about being male should preclude him from being the primary carer, which he was. This 👇 is like something out of the 1950’s.

Cybersex.

We have not, as a society, fully appreciated what happens to the human mind when they can cos play in cyber space. I remember being nonplussed by my son playing animal crossing. It was all perfectly innocent stuff but I wonder now how much living a “virtual life” impacts on the brain. Rothblatt is, naturally, celebratory about the experience of living a different identity on line. Are we fostering this disassociative state on line?

Are our kids performing their “gender” on line, receiving “affirmation” and never engaging with the reality of how they are perceived outside their bubble? Rothblatt seems to have a negative view of real life interactions because they reinforce sexist stereotypes. 😳 I am no fan of the “real life” tests as a gatekeeping tool of sex conformity clinics but now our kids are “affirmed” with only on-line reactions to judge acceptance rates, by we are setting them up for rejection. Are male “lesbians” getting “affirmed” on line and believing the propaganda? Dr Az Hakeem said his most “contented” patients were those with autism because take it all on face value; they took polite pronoun use as evidence they “passed” and were therefore accepted in female spaces.

Rothblatt laments the lack of sensation available in cyber spaces but hails the new technological developments which will allow cyber suits where the subject will be able to feel touch in the virtual sphere.

Doing this in the virtual sphere has no lasting harm written on your body, at least. The effect on the brain, given neuro-plasticity is probably under-researched though I did find one paper.

Disorders from problematic game use

Rothblatt mentions none of this. 👇.

Trouble is when you have taken synthetic hormones, removed your breasts had a hysterectomy or been castrated /had your penis inverted logging off is no longer an option.

Transhuman joy without orgasm.

There follows a section about living a post flesh existence with no ability to erotic function. He believes there will be “killer orgasms” in a future decades away. In my darker moments I wonder if he is watching the deliberate creation of a new inorgasmic breed of males and seeing how it plays out. Nothing suprised me anymore.

He concludes by singing the praises of all the joys of life that are to be had outside of sexual pleasure. Reading, conversation and witnessing the diversity of life with friends and family. If this doesn’t convince you he speculates on the future ability to grow humans, to adult size, in a man-made faux womb. He thinks market forces will make it happen.

If you want to tip the balance against these crazy billionaires you can support me here:

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