NHS Trans Policy:Birmingham

A look at hospital policies around single sex wards, after the revelation this week that a woman was not only raped on an NHS ward, but then gaslit by the hospital. Imagine telling a victim “you were not raped because there were no men on the ward!”. There were. One of them was a rapist. If you are not aware of this incident I covered it here:

NHS Trans Policy

Spurred on by sheer fury, I will do a series on policies in NHS hospitals. Here is what you can expect in Birmingham.

SupportingTransgenderIndividuals

Here are some lowlights. Firstly it doesn’t just have a policy for people who identify as the opposite sex it is more wide-ranging /inclusive, for which read ”reckless” .

The policy is from 2019 and was signed off by the Chief Executive Advisory Group. I imagine there were very senior people involved in this nonsense. If you are in Birmingham, the policy is up for review in August 2022. Maybe send some feedback?

This is the first lie. The policy lists the legally protected characteristics and claims to uphold them all. The policy does not respect the protected characteristic of SEX. The clue is in the word “inclusive”. The problem with the word ”discrimination”, in the context of these policies, is that single sex wards are, by their very nature, discriminating. We exercised our judgement that women need safe spaces away from the sex class that does 99% of the sex offending mainly against females. We know some males represent a risk to females, so we sex segregate where women are likely to be vulnerable. Females who predate on males are vanishingly small, in number. Labelling excluding the opposite sex with a word, used as a pejorative, denies women’s right to withhold consent. I do not consent to share accommodation with a male, however he identifies, especially when I am at my most vulnerable.

The Trust, in their collective madness, sorry, wisdom, have decided to go beyond the law. Is this an attempt to curry favour with Stonewall, of whose scheme they are a paid up member? The language of ”assigned at birth” is Gender Identity New Speak to describe the process of recognising and recording biological sex. A process which is unproblematic in near a 100% of cases, despite propaganda to the contrary. The Trust also intend to recognise people who claim to be ”non-binary”, ”gender fluid” and ”non-gendered”. It also encompasses staff who demand compliance with their subjective sense of self. A polite fiction is not the same as enforced compliance and this policy demands adherence to the new religion. To which I say #NoThankYou .

The patient’s pronouns must be respected (wait till you see the list 😳). Here the respected medical professionals mean your BIOLOGICAL SEX may impact your treatment. Mother Nature doesn’t give a fig about your ”gender”.

These policies always contain an attack on families. I support my son, thank you very much, I affirm his sex and his sexual orientation and I do not approve of the NHS putting gay boys on the Turing Treatment. Here the Trust clearly intends to stoke family conflict by contradicting parents and other family members.

This section uses the obfuscatory techniques perfected by gender identity extremists. In one breath talking about ”same sex accommodation” but clearly elevating gender feelz above material reality. Heaven forfend the trans-identified person be offended by being offered a single room. No, they should be allowed to ride roughshed over issues of consent and be imposed on other patients. I do not consent to be a validation aid for someone who insists I recognise them as something they are not. Notice the pussyfooting around the new sacred caste.

This bit is bonkers. I am particularly irritated at the casual misuse of male and female. Bad enough the rest of the mangled language. A bearded man in an elevated state of anxiety, possibly with a sexual paraphilia, on a female ward! What could possibly go wrong?

People who are medicating with wrong sex hormones and following surgeries are at elevated risk of being hospitalised. There have already been cases of a heavily pregnant female, where pregnancy was not suspected because she was taking testosterone. She lost the baby because medical intervention was delayed.

Despite claiming to protect ”sex” the hospital allows men into female toilets and changing rooms. This policy also applies to the staff toilets and changing rooms.

Disciplinary procedures will be invoked against any staff member who complains. Patients and members of the public will also be dealt with. The Trust then have the temerity to suggest they abide by the duty to foster good relations between different protected characteristics. The wording below is misleading because everybody is covered by at least three of the protected characteristics. We all have a sex, a sexual orientation and we are all covered if we either have a religious belief or we do not. Not for the first time I don’t think the dversity disciples are sending their best people.

This is an important paragraph. Occupational requirements are how women (mainly) were able to carve out some female only spaces for women who had escaped domestic violence or were recovering from sexual assault. Some roles can be advertised for females only. The erosion of this right, in practice if not in law, is how we find ourselves with a man heading up a Rape Crisis centre, ostensibly for women, in Scotland. The naivete of top decision makers about male compulsion to violate women’s boundaries is so staggering it is criminally culpable.

Another mis-statement of the law appears below. Having failed to pass a law allowing self-identification into the rights of the opposite sex, the solution is to LIE. According to this hospital ”Gender Reassignment” legal protections cover some bloke with she in his email footer. The policy also states that the ”transgender” employee does not have to disclose their identity, which is the mess we got ourselves into with draconian penalties if privacy clauses are breached in the GRA. Allowing someone to conceal their sex was a big mistake.

There are some complicated instructions about how to make sure, when a sex marker is changed, the resulting, new, NHS number is populated with the previous medical history. It seems a reasonable supposition that all this complicates medical treatment in a highly pressurised environment. Blood results for many different conditions tell a different story for the different sexes. We are only in our infancy, for example, in looking at the way heart attack symptoms are different in females. Throw in the complications from taking cross-sex hormones and we are looking at a risky landscape. Many years ago an older male, who defined as transsexual, commented that there was a requirement to sign a document acknowledging SRS had not, literally, changed your sex. Imagine the uproar if this was the case in 2022.

I will leave you with a couple of clips from the glossary and some homework on the pronouns Birmingham hospital staff are expected to get to grips with. Why we are catering to this ridiculous, incoherent, contradictory ideology? I will never understand. It’s collective madness. Caligula would be proud.

Test at the end? My pronouns are F.O. Anyone with a pronoun app on their phone should be shunned.

You can support my work here. We need to dismantle this dangerous ideology one expose at a time.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology. Examining it’s impact on women’s rights and the health of our gay teens.

£10.00

The Howard League

The Howard League is a U.K. based Prison Reform charity who formed in 1866. The previous Chief Executive, Frances Crook, had made previous observations that suggested she was aware of the kind of issues which arise when males are held in the female estate or male crimes were recorded as if they were committed by females.

I was minded to revisit the issue after seeing these tweets by the new Legal director, Gemma Abbott, qwho joined the Howard League in March of this year.

I managed to get a look at her bio, before she blocked me, and there was a clue. For anyone not aware the Good Law Project is the vehicle for an erstwhile tax lawyer, Jolyon Maugham, who, for reasons unclear, has determined that his white knighting is needed in the “trans” debate. He is also known for boasting that he battered a fox to death; whilst wearing his wife’s kimono.

Turns out that Gemma is an ex employee of the Good Law Project.

She also managed to secure a place on a government task force, run by the Government Equality Office, looking at period poverty.

She also was the director of this organisation and she can’t even bring herself to say the sex of the “children” who are vulnerable due to their periods. She is still listed as a director of Period Poverty Limited but the companies has applied to be struck of the register (source: Companies House).

I decided to have a look at the accounts for The Howard League to see if there were any clues in the Trustees, other staff, or their funders. What jumped out at me was the funding from Esmee Fairburn Foundation who have cropped up many times on this blog.

Esmee Fairbarn Foundation also and work with the Paul Hamlyn Foundationi (PHF). Paul Hamlyn Foundation have a history of funding trans Lobby Groups like Mermaids and Gendered Intelligence. PHF also shared a trustee with The Scott Trust, who oversee the Guardian Media Group. The Guardian was my paper so I did some digging to find out why they were so woeful about women’s sex based rights and I discovered the link to PHF and, via Julian Vigo, also realised that they had also take money from Open Society Foundation to do a series on “trans” people. You can read that series here:

THE GUARDIAN MEDIA GROUP

Oakdale Trust is the foundation of the Cadbury family and have a wide portfolio of grants with one interest being in penal reform. The other trusts who have made small contributions also appear to make grants across a range of charities the usual gender identity lobby groups are not among the recipients.

Here are the trustees of The Howard League.

Professor Ben Bradford’s biography and research interests was easy to locate.

Here are details of some oof his research projects, you will see that one of them is funded by Open Society Foundations. I am told that the grants from Open Society Foundations are made in a decentralised way and it is perfectly possible that the OSF does not bring any pressure to organisations to conform to Transgender Identity Ideology but it does worry me when I see the same foundations recur and I wonder if this creates a chilling effect on staff in these charities.

Here are a couple more of his projects.

Adrian Briggs’ profile shows him to be involved with Amnesty International. Once again we cannot deduce, from this, that he endorses every position of that organisation but Amnesty International are certainly, now, on the Gender Ideologue side of the debate. I wrote about that here:

Amnesty U.K. What’s going on?

Professor McNeill appears to be a He/Him according to his University of Glasgow profile but, to be fair to him, it is Scotland so he/him may. ot have any choice in the matter.

On the other hand Lord Ken McDonald is one of the hosts of the Double Jeopardy podcast who has hosted Professor Kathleen Stock although he did, apparently, advocate for men in women’s prisons. (I did try to locate this episode but it’s not currently available).

In conclusion, it is concerning that a senior member of staff is so utterly captured. It may be that there is internal dissent and resistance to the imposition of males on female prisoners. On balance I don’t think the signs are looking too positive.They have a twitter presence and they did put out a report reflecting negatively on girls, held with boys, in youth offending units. Worth engaging with them to encourage positives and embolden any internal dissenters.

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

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

£10.00

Marci Bowers: W.P.A.T.H

Marci Bowers is a trans-identified male and also a surgeon who performs surgeries on people in flight from their sex which are described as “sexual reassignment surgeries” (SRS). Bowers is now the President of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (W.P.A.T.H). You may be familiar with Bowers who was one of the surgeons who worked on Jazz Jennings;once the poster child for the marketing of the “trans kid”.

Bowers came to my attention after making this statement 👇 which attracted some backlash from “trans” activists. I find it horrifying that we are still doing this to children despite this being in the public domain.

You can watch Bowers say this here.

Marci Bowers

Let us be reminded of an earlier statement which Susie Green, late of Mermaids, attributes to Marci Bowers:

This is a screen shot from that zoom call on which you can see at least some of the participants; Jo Elsson-Kennedy, Charlene Wong, Dane Whicker, Kiran Sundar, Deanna Adkins, Leigh Spivey-Rita.

Marci Bowersmarried, fathered three children and then went on to “transition” and subsequently began working on “gender affirming” surgeries. The fact Bowers went public with these concerns is a big deal. So, I decided to have a closer look and found a few YouTubes exploring Bower’s beliefs. I found some inconsistencies.

Long term follow up of post-operative “transsexuals” is bedevilled with loss to follow up and the extreme taboo surrounding detransitioners, or those who regret their surgeries. It is,however, perfectly possible Bowers believes this and it is borne out of their own experience. By all accounts Bowers is a skilful surgeon and is perhaps not aware of the wild west of surgeons operating out there, or the lack of gatekeeping. 

The current spike in children and teenagers identifying as “trans” and seeking body modification is unprecedented and a completely different demographic. Notably, in the U.K we have seen over a 4000% spike in girls which has completely inverted the a sex ratio to 75% female. It could take at least ten years before we see the scale of regret. 

Gender non-conformity: Debra Soh.

Is “trans” a trend 👈. You can watch this here. 

This clip is in response to neurobiologist, Debora Soh, who raised concerns about social contagion, high rates of referrals from autistic kids, same sex attracted and kids with previous trauma. Marci Bowers interrupted and tried to speak over Soh but she powered through. As well as accusing Soh of being anti-trans, Bowers pushed back with this statement. Spot the problem?

I don’t want my son to conform to “gender norms” gay boys/young men, are often variant in the way they express their masculinity. I would be heartbroken if he lopped off his long red hair, or stopped baking. I could do with a bit less Mariah Carey but that’s about it. Why does Marci think gender non-conformity demands lifelong dependence on hormones and surgeries? (Soh responds in a similar vein).

My life in “gender affirming” surgeries. 

Marci Bowers 👈 You can watch this here. 

Many of have noticed that trans-ideologues have begun to be more explicit that “transgender medicine” is a cure for “gender non conformity” after spending a long time repudiating this accusation. This despite the evidence of their own propaganda mapping a “gender” spectrum from G.I Joe to Barbie and asking children to choose their place on the scale. There does now seem to be a change of tack to admit this and Bowers says as much in another interview. This is one of Bower’s slides from two months ago. 

In this same presentation Bowers addresses the controversy over comments on puberty blockers, claiming, predictably, it has been “weaponised” by bad faith actors. 

Many of us having been saying , for years, that the use of puberty blockers has been a live experiment, on children. Many “trans” activists use the fact that these drugs were used for cases of precocious puberty to claim there has been fifty years of evidence. The use for the iatrogenic condition of “gender dysphoria” has limited evidence and, what there is, suggests an off label use, on healthy children, may turn out to be a medical atrocity. Here is Bowers using the same trick. 

Here is another quote from Bowers illustrating his perspective on evidence based medicine. The science is only there for a post-hoc justification; not to determine whether this is a good idea in the first place. 

Yet this contrasts with something else said in the same talk; demanding objectivity and repeating concerns about puberty blockers. 👇

It is a good thing that Bowers is speaking up. Speaking charitably, Bowers is not an endocrinologist, and it could be, he was unaware of the stunted genitalia he would be presented with on the operating table. This is one of the tragedies of the whole process. The endocrinologists believe the psychologists, the surgeons trust the endocrinologists all leaving opportunities to dodge responsibility. Then there are the parents who are being told to believe their children and then place their faith in “professionals”. 

My brief benefit of the doubt all but evaporated with this statement. No evaluation and surgeries under age 18! 😳

The question and answer portion was also quite revealing. Asked about regret Bowers had this to say. This is another switch that shows the “trans” ideologues know that there are detransitioners; I noticed about two years ago , this idea of “gender journeys” started to creep in. What happened to believe your kid when they tell you they are trans? It was always contradictory to claim “gender fluidity” was a feature but the “gender journey” seems to have emerged to sanitise regret and detransition. 

Asked about how he deals with the anti-trans backlash Bowers has this to say 👇.

Female Genital Mutilation 

In the same talk Bowers, talks about their work helping women with female genital mutilation. In addition to “transgender” surgeries Bowers also travels to Africa to do reconstructive surgeries for victims of FGM. These women have compromised sexual function too. Given how many lesbians are detransitioners one would think Bowers would make the connection. 👇

In FGM there are also issues of a lack of informed consent. 

Abigail Shrier Interview. 

Bowers also spoke to the author of this book. 

In their discussion Bower’s expressed some concerns about puberty blockers and at least listened to concerns about the rising rates of teenage girls identifying as “trans”. Following the backlash a statement was put out via his website. 

On Abigail Shrier 👈 You can read it here. 

Still expresses concern for the impact on male children which shows some integrity. 

They really do believe they have god on their side. 

If this is Marci Bowers on twitter I have interacted. 

I first published on Bowers when he was president elect of WPATH. I had hope that his presidency would see more caution. The latest statement from WPATH, which I will cover in a later blog, confirms my fear, they are not for turning.

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

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

£10.00

Let’s talk about Victor! (Part Two)

Victor Madrigal-Borloz works as a special rapporteur for the United Nations. He acts as an independent expert and his post is unpaid. He has however taken $100,000 from the Arcus Foundation in his official capacity.

Update 27/APR/2023> Thanks to a diligent reader I have also been alerted to this funding to Victor Madrigal-Borloz via Harvard University which also came from Arcus Foundation. Another $200,000. Thanks are due to the below. twitter account:

Recommended Follow

In part one I have a look at Victor and the United Nations.

Let’s talk about Victor!

For part two I want to cover a discussion he had with queer theorists on the law. I have watched a few of his YouTubes but I wondered if he would be more open in a discussion with fellow travellers. This was the title of the talk.


I looked at a few of his public pronouncements but I anticipated he may be more open when talking to self proclaimed “queer” activists. He appeared in this youtube with an Australian called Diane Otto. Here is her biography if you want to follow her up. I only focus on the contributions of Madrigal-Borloz but she was clearly in alignment with his perspective.

Madrigal-Borloz sets the context of the discussion by talking about the controversy surrounding his original appointment, as the UN rapporteur for Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and why he thinks this conversation is important. Notice ho central “Gender Identity” is to his role and, it would seem, his thinking.

I wonder if Victor knows, at a subconscious level, that he is engaged in dismantling the protections for the female sex? He does allude to the many legal instruments which were created based on a binary understanding of sex and how this legislation protected women and girls. At the same time he wants to look beyond the binary understanding of sex and claims he wants to find a path to do this without it having a negative impact on human rights. This looks to me like an admission that he may be involved in a project that is stripping away the human rights of women.

Here he absolves himself of any responsibility for unintended (?) consequences by claiming he is inviting the creation of “formulas” that don’t end up creating conditions which are contrary to human rights. Er, like the destruction of the rights of half of humanity, the female half?

He begins by explaining that he had over 600 submissions, to a call for evidence, and because of the huge volume of responses he decided his report to the United Nations should be in two parts. It should in fact be a binary process, ironically. The first part was what he called an “inclusionary” approach.

He labelled the alternative viewpoint as “exclusionary” which frames the rights of women to include only their own sex, in the definition of “woman” and all that follows, in a negative light. The creation of laws to protect “gender identity” is fiercely opposed by those women (and men) who object to compelled recognition of people, male and female, who claim to be the sex which they are not.This issue extends beyond the rights of the female sex, though we are in the frontline in terms of consequences, it is also a free speech issue and also challenges religious belief and the protected characteristic of sexual orientation.

It should come as no surprise that Victor favours the first approach and he accuses the exclusionary agenda of being ideologically motivated and designed to create a moral panic.

This language is not an accident I did a series on documents which claim fighting for sex based rights and biological reality are designed to create a moral panic. This is the equivalent of calling women “pearl clutchers” but has generated a number of reports claiming “gender critical” women are somehow aligned with, the Pope, Victor Orban / Christian Evangelicals in the United States and anti-abortionists. These reports also suggest that women are somehow bankrolled by shadowy funders. You can read that series here: 

Moral Panic 

I have waded through hundreds of pages of these claims and the only clip based on reality was this one which admitted they had been unable to establish any direct links between these disparate groups. What they have actually discovered is that different groups, with very different aims, believe that biological sex is real and that in some contexts this matters.

Madrigal-Borloz also accuses the opponents of this ideology of dreaming up a sinister agenda and even claims that inserting gender /gender identity into law is primarily aimed at protecting women and girls implying protecting “gender diverse” persons is an afterthought.

Madrigal-Borloz fiercely defends the “inclusionary” path which he justifies because of the fact it is replicated across the whole human rights field.He explains that, for him, it is the role of Human Rights law to redress injustices even those that previous generations didn’t know existed. They didn’t know, he explains, because the history was deliberately hidden. This is a neat explanation for the rise of “trans rights” which were barely on the radar 50 years ago but have been relentlessly propagandised over the last decade. This is part of the same process which scours history for anyone who you can plausibly, or more often implausibily, claim was “transgender”. ((Joan of Arc, Queen Elizabeth and even Jesus have all been retrospectively labelled “trans” by the historical revisionists among trans-activists.)

This is how he characterises those who follow an “exclusionary” path. This is a fancy way of saying wanting to exclude men from women’s spaces is akin to favouring apartheid. This is akin to the Martin (e) Rothblatt version of history.  If you have not heard of Martine Rothblatt you must learn about him. He is a key player in normalising all this.

Martine Rothblatt

Moral Panic! 

His belief system becomes quite testerical at this point and of course he blames the opposition for stoking violence. This is quite dangerous rhetoric and othering of women who are fighting to retain legal protections enshrined in existing law! I wonder if he has been paying attention to the ramping up of threats and actual violence committed by trans-activists and hasreflected on his role in creating this climate? Especially after New Zealand and the heightened threats and actual assault ts we are seeing against men and now, twice, against gay men.

Here 👇he seems to acknowledge that this radical social engineering is creating bewilderment, especially the dismantling of “binary structures”. His language is more obfuscating than illuminating but for “binary structures” I immediately substitute female only spaces and sports which are actually being dismantled as we speak.

In this next clip Victor claims that it isthe strategy of his opponents to argue that the aim of the trans-activist side is to eradicate sex and replace it with gender. He says this as if it is a ludicrous conspiracy theory even though,its abviously true. In the U.K., for example, the group Fairplay forWomen had to take out a legal challenge to force the Office For National Statistics (ONS) to stop them issuing guidance that would have made the sex question based on your self-identity.

The resistance? 

Yet, later on he says the work for the next generation is to stop conflating “gender” with women. It does, however, appear that Victor is getting pushback at the U.N. Some (probably fascists😳) are asking for legislation to making it clear the legislation needs to substitute “gender” with “equality between the sexes”.Sounds eminently sensible, to me.

The interview is very revealing, perhaps unintentionally. There are questions at the and about being explicit that his work is built on queer theory. He complains that opponents have some catchy slogans, like “Sex Matters” and “Leave Kids alone” that on the surface cannot be disagreed with but, he infers, both conceal more dangerous intent. Unbelievably he then states that his side doesn’t have slogans just evidenced based research. Quite some chutzpah for the “Trans Women are Women” brigade. 

Why does he need to emphasise he has a “clear conscience”? 

Diane Otto compliments Victor on how he has described his agenda and he thanks her and claims, in response that he has a clear conscience which seems to me, a revealing reply which perhaps betrays that he is uneasy that he maybe operating against the human rights of women and girls.

You can watch it here: Queer Jurisprudence

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. Please only give if you can afford.

My Substack

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

£10.00

Margaret Atwood: WTF!

Margaret Atwood is a Canadian author and I think I have read everything she has ever written. If ever I expected an author to be on the side of women it was the author of the Handmaids Tale. For anyone unfamiliar with this book, film, or the television adaptation here is a summary.

Written in 1985 the novel is set in a futuristic dystopian America now renamed Gilead. Gilead is a theocracy, women are subordinate to a new ruling class (new?) of males known as Commanders. There is a fertility crisis so fecund women are both prized but treated like breeding stock. The fertile women are assigned as surrogates to the commanders to provide offspring who will be taken from them to be delivered to the Commander’s wives.

Real Life 2023. Male rapists in female prison, the creation of a new “eunuch” class to infiltrate /police women’s space; ( Soon the eunuchs will be joined addition by the penis retention class). A certain class of women will give new meaning to the phrase “too posh to push”; by hiring surrogates to carry their babies; they will, almost invariably, be working class and legal contracts will use dehumanising language like “gestational surrogates”. In the public sphere women are called “breeder”;”gestator”;”uterus-havers”;”chestfeeders” or worse, One publication assigned men (wannabe women) ownership of the term “vagina” and described actual women’s vaginas as “front-holes”.

This is the living dystopia before we even get the sterilising of autistic, proto-gay and other vulnerable children at gender abbatoirs. 👇. Marci Bowers public statement while President Elect of the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH).

Handmaids tale.

These two images delineate the hierarchies in the fictional tale. Replace “Commendars” with “Trans Overlords” and it almost seems Atwood’s book could be the instruction manual.

The women are divided and allocated roles as handmaids, wives, domestic servants, brothel workers or women assigned to keep their sisters in-line. In real life the “Aunts” dominate the NGO Sector.

Atwood is I believe in her ninth decade, she is rich and successful and, you would think, uncancellable. However, she also lives in Canada. Recently she posted this about her beliefs on “trans” issues.

Margaret Atwood speaks

Here are a couple of clips: 

She begins with a reference to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine. Not much to disagree with there…but then

She makes an extraordinary leap to centre “trans” people. Of course, she propagates the mythical epidemic of trans murders. What is actually happening is that 68% of those deaths are males involved in prostitution and mainly in South America. I looked at this for the U.K. context and this demographic committed 12 murders while there were 9 victims. One of the victims was killled by another man who identifies as a “woman”. (Since I did this analysis there has been one more death but no details about whether this was related to their status as “trans)

TRANS MURDER MONITORING

Russia are laying claim to a territory they claim was always “theirs” much like men who claim they are “women” and here Atwood sides with the invading force. She ends with a mindless platitude.

Women didn’t vote for this. Most of the legislation was passed in stealth, tacked onto popular causes and activists warned to “avoid press coverage”. They needed to circumvent democracy to strip women of our sex based rights because they know forcing women to share intimate spaces with penis owners is unpopular, to say the least.

Well done Ms Atwood.

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

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

£10.00

Cece Telfer. Sport.

Trans lash media project

This is part of a series looking at a podcast run by a trans-identified male and funded by a “Charitable” foundation who aims to embed Gender Identity Ideology in life and law. You can read the series below.

Trans Lash Media Project.

Each of the episodes begins with this announcement 👇

The format then shares a segment on “trans joy” to highlight the work of trans activists and then it gets into the meat (and two veg) of a topic. This one is on “trans” athletes. This is the episode blurb.

CeceTelfer

Before I listened to the podcast I did a little research on Telfer and found this interview.

Interview on the Hill

Here are a couple of quotes. As you can see he uses emotional blackmail to demand access to female sport and is adamant that he is female, despite being male.

I found another interview which shows footage of him talking about the female opposition and the lack of interest from heterosexual men. We are telling these men a huge lie and doing them a disservice. In this interview Telfer talks about the lack of interest from heterosexual men and makes it clear they are only interested in straight men, which to them, proves they are really a straight female. What other group gets to express such a homophobic sentiment?

You can watch that interview here:

Cecelia Telfer

Here’s how the interview was trailed 👇

In his interview with Imara Jones he talks about how his family rejected his “feminine” behaviour and describes his family as controlling. He then describes his entry into the female sports category and claims that all the other women were supportive and welcoming. Following his success, however, the expectedbacklash begins which Telfer describes as a misogynist attack. He also describes the experience as humiliating and outing him which exposed him to the risk of being murdered perhaps by his own family. He also talks about how this negatively impacts on dating life as potential partners can’t find out his sex. Both the interviewer and interviewee also labels the attacks as based on race not sex. They sound utterly convinced of this!

They also claim support from a trans-identified female, Chris Mosier, who is white and talks about how she was afforded male privilege as a “white man” and this was not granted to black “trans women”. He goes on to talk,about wanting to compete in the 2021 Tokyo Olympics and says “we are not going anwhere and there is nothing you can do about it”. It’s hard to maintain sympathy for a same sex attracted guy who oscillates between a tragic tale, if true, about a lack of acceptance from his parents with the arrogance and bravado that comes through.

Chris Mosier

Cosier is a trans-identified female who begins by talking about being a sporty girl who was irritated by being told he could not run around with her shirt off. Mosier talked about how he abandoned team sports because he didn’t want to be on a female team. He played a key role behind the scenes.

Mosier is thrilled to support Cece Telfer in his quest to complete in female sports and claims to be baffled by the rampant transphobia. She ascribes this to a lack of humanity, racism, sexism and misogyny. 😳. Both describe sex separated sports and the quest for fair competition as a ban on allowing trans people to compete in sports. Mosier a,so says this :”Never limit your greatness to make other people feel comfortable”.

You can listen here:

Trans Lash episode on sports

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.

My Substack

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

£10.00

Kate Bornstein

This was part of a series, looking at Gendered Intelligence. Taken from the book Trans Britain. As part of that series I came across Kate Bornstein. I am minded to publish this as a stand alone piece because Miriam Grossman mentioned Bornstein in her excellent interview on Jordan Peterson’s podcast I can highly recommend that interview. Grossman has been resisting this ideology since at least 2009. She also gives the best overview of the lies of John Money.

Miriam Grossman interview

Jay Stewart, a trans-identified female, founded Gendered Intelligence, with her partner Christine McNamara. In the book, Trans Britain, Jay tells us, excitedly, that a conference on Sexuality and Gender, held in Manchester, which attracted scholars from all over the world.

Gendered Intelligence collaborated on a conference with an organisation called transfabulous. They were delighted Kate Bornstein and other notable trans luminaries were in attendance. This is how Bernstein showed up.

My Gender Workbook: 1998.

That name rang a bell so I took a detour to have a quick look. You can easily find a lot about Bornstein just from a cursory look at YouTube. Bornstein was a thrice married man who spent 11 years in the Cult of Scientology. He eventually decided to “transition” whilst a recovering alcoholic and cocaine user. He describes being welcomed by the gay community until he came out as a “Lesbian” where he was, understandably, less welcome. Here is one paragraph on his life: Had a female partner who then decided she was a man while Bornstein found his “slave girrl” side.

This quote was from this book 👇 written by Bornstein which is like Jackie Magazine meets queer theory. It’s from 1998!

Bornstein invokes the language of spirituality to describe their transformation. This deployment of language denoting a higher knowledge from the “trans” ideologues is a common occurrence in these narratives.

This is another diagram from Bornstein book which has an odd reference to the notion of consent.

Let us zone in on the sexual consent issue; “with or without consent”. 👇

You can support my work below or consider a paid subscription to my substack.

My Substack

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

£10.00

Rachel Levine: Trans Lash Media.

An interview with Dr Levine who is a “trans-identified man who is now assistant secretary of health for the Biden administration. This is part of a series looking at a podcast which received a large injection of cash. from Open Society Foundation.

The host is a “trans-identified” male. You can read about the foundations who bankrolled them in and some of their contributors in part one.

Translash Media Podcast.

This podcast certainly attracts some high profile interviewees. For anyone who may be unaware of Levine here is a bit of biographical information.

His personal life follows a predictable path for a late-transitioning male. Levine lived ina heterosexual marriage, fathered children and only adopted a “trans” identity very late in life, 2011 to be precise.

It was not long before he was gaining accolades for being the “first female”

He was also conferred the title of Woman of the Year in 2022.

The interview spends some time discussing Levine’s role during Covid, but it gets more interesting around the twelve minute mark. The interviewer, Imara Jones, asks about how Levine felt about his confirmation hearing and the line of questioning from another senator, Rand Paul. He does not pull his punches. You can watch it here:

Rand Paul v Dr Levine

Levine goes to some lengths to avoid asking a direct question about whether he supports medical interventions, such as puberty blockers, for minors. Rand repeats the question.

Rand Paul also points out that Levine is on record stating that he would accelerate the process for street kids; that is for homeless kids with no parents protecting them. Again Levine evades the question.

Imara Jones describes this as an aggressive line of questioning and commends Levine for his stoicism. He also points out, erroneously, that there has been forty or fifty years of research. This is not true. The only research covers the use of these drugs for kids with precocious puberty and even there we have lawsuits because of the negative consequences.

This article by Jennifer Bilek covers Levine who, like the elected representative in part one, was also backed by the LGBTQ Victory Institute.

Jennifer Bilek on Levine

Levine defends the care for “transgender youth” by quoting the Lobby group WPATH so now is a good time to remind ourselves of what Marci Bowers said about puberty blockers while he was president elect for WPATH.

Levine claims these are evidence led care standards and, sadly, he is able to back up his claims by listing how many organisations are using these medicines and how well supported they are by many, I would argue captured, organisations. He then proceeds to lambast bills which try to protect single sex sports and to limit these interventions on children. He also describes the treatment as “potentially life saving”. Imara Jones agrees that this is life saving treatment and is pleased that President Biden is promoting this intervention. Jones than also references a series he has done on the “Anti-Trans Hate machine”.

The interview continues with Levine talking about how proud he is to serve his country and how hopeful he is that he can educate people about “trans” people and help people overcome their fear of what they don’t understand. Jones then asks how Levine navigates being in such a high profile role as a “trans” person and how they coped with being misgendered. It ends with a paean to Levines leadership and role in the LGBTQ community. You can listen to the episode here:

Translash interview with Dr Levine

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. Only give if you can afford to do so.

My Substack

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

£10.00

Translash Media Podcast.

Interview with Zooey Zephr

Decided to have a digest the content on this podcast to see where more of the Trans Lobby Group money is going. This was after I was told that the founder,, Imara Jones, a trans-identified male, had been invited to the United Nations under the heading UN Women.

Turns out that Jones was given $200,000 by Open Society Foundations for his podcast.

The podcast focus is on what Jones calls “black trans women”. and details how this demographic are marginalised and oppressed. Jones would appear to be the exception having a quite high profile career and access to education at Columbia University and London School of Economics. He also attracted funding from fellowship programmmes and obtained a post at the White House under Bill Clinton. He then secured another post working for Bill Blasio, the mayor of New York.

Zooey Zephr

I have selected this episode which looks at the election of a trans-identified male, Zooey Zephr, to represent a district in Montana. This episode reveals the money ploughed into initiatives to get these men elected.

Zephr was supported by an initiative called Women To Win campaign. As you can guess it was not about women at all.

It transpires that Women to Win programme was funded by LGBTQ Victory Institute and was developed to promote LGBTQ women and encourage them to obtain public office. The organisation credit Ascend with funding the programme; who make it clear that their definition of “woman” is, let’s say elastic.

A quick check on the grants awarded by the Arcus Foundation revel that they have ploughed quite a bit of money into the LGBT Victory Institute to support the election of this demographic. This funding dates back to 2008.

Here is a selection of how those grants were described.

Zooey Zephr describes himself as a bisexual and appears to be in a relationship with another trans-identified male who is a content creator on “trans” issues.

This is how Erin describes their work.

He seems particularly proud of making sure gender confused folks can get access to synthetic hormones with no gatekeeping.

Zephr appears to have crowd funded for their castration and penis inversion.

Zephr’s legislative priorities are making sure men can compete in female sport and removing the defence of “trans or gay panic”. This is used as a defence /mitigation for people who commit violence against a sexual partner who obtained sex by deception by not disclosing their biological sex. I am not a fan of any violence but I do support criminalisation of obtaining sex by deception.

It also appears Zephr had a background in competitive sport; it’s not known whether he competed on female teams but it is clear he supports unfair sport for females.

I will probably visit this podcast again and do a series. For today I think this gives a flavour of what we are up against.

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. Sadly there are no billionaires sending me millions to track the social engineering aiming to destroy the rights of the female sex class. Please donate if you can.

My Substack

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

£10.00

Liberty:

Liberty are a purported human rights organisation who were formerly styled the National Council of Civil Liberties. You may remember the NCCL from its affiliation with the Paedophile Information Exchange back in the 1970’s.

Cur to the 2020’s and Liberty now openly campaign against women’s rights to single sex spaces under the guise of “trans” rights.

In the U.K. the Equality and Human Rights commission has just issued a letter to clarify that the protected characteristic of sex refers to biological sex. This has become necessary because “trans” lobby groups have been successful in persuading large swathes of our media and the charity sector that biological sex is on a spectrum and that society should be organised on the basis of someone’s purported “gender identity”. This has a disproportionate impact on women who fought for decades to get single sex spaces for anywhere we are vulnerable.

I had a look at Liberty and their funding and discovered that they are bankrolled by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation.

The Paul Hamlyn Fundation have also funded Mermaids.

They also funded another “trans” lobby group, Gendered Intelligence.

The connections don’t end there. A senior employee atLiberty, was formerly employed by the Equality and Human Rights commission (EHRC). Grey Collier is a he/they who self describes as queer and “trans” amd is also a trustee of the controversial charity Mermaids; a charity who is currently under investigation by the Charity Commission and who is currently trying to strip LGB Alliance of its charitable status. LGB Alliance is the only charity that campaigns on behalf of Gay and Bisexual people on the basis of their SEXual orientation.

Collier was not happy about the EHRC new guidance and over to fight it and made the case on twitter, obviously deciding to abandon the calm, dispassionate language of the lawyerly for rehashes transperbole. Notice Collier uses the example of a “trans” man taking a role reserved for females as in, for example rape crisis services. This is a common trick because it is a lot harder to argue that a male should be allowed to provide services to rape victims. (Although in Scotland a man does run a rape crisis service after lying about his biological sex to get the job.

Update from a twitter follower. Corey Staughton now appears to be working at the Legal Aid Society in New York.

More information about links to Stonewall.

You can read more about the Paul Hamlyn Foundation and their connection to the Guardian in this post.

Why are the Guardian suddenly so woeful on women’s rights?

You can read about the man who inveigled himself into the women’s aid sector here:

James Morton: Trans Britain (Part 16)

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. Please give if you are able.

My Substack

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

£10.00