Transvestite to Transsexual to Trans: Trans Britain. (Part 9)


This chapter covers the move from transvestite to “trans” activism. This clever ploy to desexualise men who cross dress is why heterosexual men have been emboldened to demand to be called “Lesbians”; like a bad Bernard Manning joke. This chapter illustrates the tactics of the “trans” lobby, advance by stealth, strategically litigate, cultivate (groom?) people of influence.

This is how far out of the shadows (blatant) the author of Trans Britain is in 2012. He’s now claiming, not only the word woman, but lesbian and mum. Pride at this stage should be renamed (We have) “No Shame”.

You can watch him say that here: Worth watching for the exaggerated, high pitched, voice which sounds like no woman I know.

Burns is proud

They accomplished this by claiming to be a Human Rights movement. It much harder to sell transvestism to the public while ever there was a recognised paraphilia called “transvestic fetishism”. The general public would never be persuaded if it was admitted, openly, that cross-dressing, for at least some involves masturbating into women’s underwear. Beaumont Society, let me remind you, was formed by transvestites and expressly banned homosexual men lest, they claim, a whiff of “gay” occasioned reputational damage.

In reality this movement is an attack on the human rights of women, by entitled men. They wish to be validated as the sex they are not and strip the rights of women to exclude fetishistic males from our spaces and our activism. The fact they achieved so much is because women’s rights are always precarious, in a society predicated on the idea that men are the default human. This is why Rachael Dolezal was pilloried for identifying into another racial group but men can call themselves “women” and our political and media elites trip over themselves in the rush to accommodate their demands.

One of the tactics has been to claim to be a vulnerable, marginalised, minority hence the testerical claims about an epidemic of murders within the “trans” community. I debunk those claims here:


What began with an uneasy alliance between those who acknowledged their transvestism and those who adopted the identity of a “transsexual” led to a transsexual rights movement. The split led to the formation of the superbly named “SHAFT”.

{However this, in turn, to led to the modern LGBTQ+ rights activism which includes “cross-dressers” once again and heterosexual people who practice BDSM and claim the label “queer”}.

Judy Cousins.

Cousins was a major in the British army and later a sculptor. He was a married man with children. This did not stop him from faking his own death.

He resurfaced in a woman’s magazine. According to this source this new female persona came as a surprise to his family.

As usual he had a history of secret cross-dressing. He also described how he selected his girlfriends more because he wanted to be like them; which must have thrilled his wife. Jan Morris (U.K “Transsexual”) said something similar in his book Conundrum.

It’s a compulsion and once you have it…

”Judy” was traced and appears to have returned to the family. He switched to the ladies golf tournament (of course he did) and rose to the high ranks of amateur Ladies competitions.

SHAFT eventually changed its name but then fell apart but, according to Burns, it pointed to the vital need for a group more focused on “transsexual” people.

Alice Parnall

Alice Parnall is another “trans” activist credited with setting up the Gendys conference.

The first conference happened in the 1990’s and thereafter was held in alternate years. “Trans” people now had a coherent narrative and could hold clinicians to account.

The conference ceased in 2004 but there is an archive and some of the papers are reproduced in full.

Gendys Archive

Alice has a rather sad back story which likely had an impact on his rejection of his sex. Sexual abuse and his parent’s messy divorce during his teens. By age 15 he had invented a female persona.

Although under the care of a gender clinic he refrained from surgery, married his lover and fathered children; an option not available to the children sterilised at “gender” clinics.

He deferred surgery until the breakdown of his relationship and trained as a nurse. He also became involved in the European chapter of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH); a lobby group that seems to have a stranglehold on guidelines for dealing with “Gender Dysphoria”.

Corbett v Corbett

Next we move on to some of the legal cases in this area. The Corbett case was in respect of the late April Ashley. April was a trans-identified male and the case related to a divorce settlement from the man he married. Ashley lost the case, the implications of which, according to Burn’s perspective, were catastrophic. Here Burn’s makes it clear his interests are diametrically opposed to women’s because we DO want the law to act in circumstances where sex matters. Housing men in women’s prisons is one of those circumstances.

Burn’s lists the disadvantages accruing to men who wish to lie about their sex. Notice he switches to reference “gender” in this section about unequal marriage legislation. Same sex attracted people still could not marry but heterosexual marriage was an option for heterosexual men who claim to be “lesbians”.

He makes an interesting observation about the prevalence of heterosexual men hiding in the LGBTQ+ movement. This is why the T is in conflict with the Gay rights movement and Lesbians, in particular, as well as the actual class of women that they seek to usurp.

Notice the cocky way he claims women for himself and uses (non-trans) as a qualifier for actual women. The misogyny drips off him however much helium he uses for his baritone.

Mark Rees.

Rees is an FTM who took a case to the European Court of Human Rights to allow marriage to their female partner. It was not a successful case but Burns acknowledges that there is an ability to weigh the rights of the many against the few. 51% of the population agree and we would like Burns to stop appropriating women’s rights.

This statement is provably false. This entire movement demands “special privileges” to force us all to validate a delusion; even one driven by a sexual fetish and directly encroaching on women’s right to privacy, dignity and safety.

Denton’s Strategy.

This is perhaps the most revealing statement so far. Below Burns reveals the strategy deployed by trans activists to get their own way. The truth is the “trans” community needed to accomplish legal changes by stealth because the majority of the public oppose their extremism once they know what it entails. TRAs have groomed politicians for decades, behind closed doors and used the strong arm of the law when it suits them.

Here they are influencing senior politicians and the wife of Tony Blair, then Prime Minister.

The claim they use “facts” to educate people is laughable when the entire movement is an elaborate con trick.

In 1999 they had a significant win thanks to their successful infiltration into the Civil Service. (I covered this in part 8, with a link to the relevant law).

The 2000 report on “transsexual” people I cover in this piece. All the usual “trans” lobby groups were consulted but it seemingly never occurred to politicians that women might have thoughts on being redefined by men.

GRA: Transsexual Working Group

Then in 2004 the disastrous Gender Recognition Act was passed. Again working by stealth, men plotted with other men, and a useful handmaiden, to strip women of their basic human rights.

Part ten will cover legal strategy. I am following the way Burn’s structured his book.

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

My substack

I appreciate times are difficult but all donations are gratefully received. My content will remain open for those who are not able to fund my work.

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


Rev Christine Beardsley: Trans Britain. (Part 8)


Rev Christine Beardsley

Beardsley is a gay male who is in a long-standing relationship but came out as “trans” in his forties. Regular readers will know that I am generally more able to find empathy with homosexuals who claim a “trans” identity. Sometimes this may lead to less objectivity and I think my reaction to Beardsley is somewhat conflicted because of my own love, for my son. Bear this in mind while reading.

As a young boy he explains that he was a very effeminate boy. I prefer to use the phrase “variant in how he expressed his masculinity” because “camp” behaviour bears little relationship to how most women behave. Women are not a “drag” costume. We exist.

Where I can express sympathy is for the little boy who knew he had disappointed his father.

Clearly this would have been distressing for a little boy shamed by crushing expectations of conformity with male sex stereotypes and then compounded by a growing awareness he was homosexual. At some point he clearly internalised that his natural inclinations were at odds with societal expectations but he also internalised the sex stereotypes as “real” which then emerges as a cross-sex identification. This is in direct conflict with a feminist project to dismantle expectations based on sex (sexism). An early history of cross dressing, in secret, must have placed intolerable pressure on him as a young boy.

I have slightly less sympathy for an adult man who refuses to look at the harm being done to the female sex. This is something I struggle with in respect of my son. I know that part of his condition began with horror at the negative experiences of women and girls, at the hands of men. However, as the impact of this ideology, on women, unfolds where is the empathy for the sex he identifies “as”? Beardsley was forty-six when his “gender identity” issues became overwhelming. He had already entered the priest hood; in a time when women were barred. This was prior to the impact on women, girls and our gay boys that we see today. At what point is it reasonable to expect someone to disassociate themselves from this harm? I think now would be a good time because every day that passes implicates any man, who claims to be women, in the harms being caused to the female sex and the children being sterilised in the name of this new religion.

His long term husband is, reportedly, supportive of his “transition”, though we don’t have his direct testimony. Having already been with him for 25 years. It is not clear if he had always been aware of his partner’s inner turmoil. The language of “true” self always raises alarms for me because it sounds quite cult like. I also find men who do this in later years, who seem overly invested in childhood medical interventions, a tad problematic. I wonder also how much his religious sensibilities play in his flight from his sex.

He takes on a tour of his growing awareness of “trans” as a boy. Virginia Prince was an early activist who remains a controversial figure in the LGBTQ community as he is on record as against “sex reassignment surgery”. April Ashley figures as does Julia Grant. He also shares a book, subsequently made into a film, I had not heard of before. Superb title: I want what I want.

As I write this film is available on YouTube. Link below. 👇

I want what I want

What Beardsley wanted to see were images of ordinary “transsexuals” and he makes an extraordinary statement about what attracted him to the priesthood. Conflating priests with women because they don’t “go out to work” and have “soft hands” and some had “high pitched voices”. 😳. The deployment of these, rather sexist stereotypes a very old fashioned and undermine the feminist project to break down these expectations on the female sex. At the same time did a small boy internalise these beliefs in such a way that he has never been able to break free? And if that is true do women have any responsibility to accommodate these males at a cost to ourselves? The answer is no.

Beardsley claims the Church of England used to be a less hostile place for gay, male, priest until the late 1970’s. At that time a more Christian Evangelical group were committed to purging gay priests from the Church of England. For Beardsley he was keeping another secret in how he perceived himself.

Eventually he had an epiphany about God’s love which lead him to come out to his congregation. He was both “coming out” and remaining in the closet as he makes clear below. Notice he also describes his experience, at a dance class, 👇 as being with “other women”.

Following changes in the law and the support of Press For Change, Liberty and a Christian organisation Sybil, Beardsley came out as “transgender”.

You can read the Gender Reassignment Regulations (1999) here:

Gender Reassignment Regulations (1999)

I am not legally trained but, whilst the intention may have been to protect occupation requirements that only a natal woman can perform certain roles I imagine some of the wording can be used to argue the opposite. As we have seen women’s rights to be able to reject a trans-identifying man in their spaces have been eroded following this shift and the 2004 Gender Recognition Act.

As an aside the Clare Project remains in operation to this day and has obtained funding from the National Lottery, local council the NHS as well as LGBT organisations.

As you would expect, from a Reverend there is a lot of discussion in respect of the position of the Church of England to a “transition” and other Vicars who have taken the same route are named along the way. I won’t detain you with the details but if you are interested in this you can listen to this discussion.

Christina Beardsley & Preston Sprinkle

The only comments I will make on this podcast relate to Beardsley’s faith, misplaced in my view, in the World Professional Association on Transgender Health (WPATH) and the NHS on the treatment of Gender Dysphoria in the modern era. This discussion predates the closure of the Tavistock and the interim Cass report. At the same time coverage of the impact of Puberty Blockers predates this interview. Beardsley is also skeptical about the phenomenon of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, denies that young people are being rushed into transition and is in favour of a bill that would ban therapeutic approaches to gender dysphoria. There is also a good discussion about how it looks like gender medicine is over reliant on old fashioned sexist stereotypes. Preston Sprinkle seems to have considered the situation quite deeply and is aware of the rising rates of detransitioners. Beardsley also thinks concern about a lack of caution in transitioning our kids is a fantasy. It’s fair to say that no consensus was reached but it was a calm and compassionate exchange. I think as the medical scandal unfolds Beardsley will regret this stance. I did reach out to Tina for comment on this view.

The next chapter looks at landmarks in trans-activism.

You can support my work below at my paypal 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.


Kate Hutchinson : Trans Britain. (Part 7)


Kate Hutchinson

Kate is a trans activist based in Wales and active in a number of different “Trans” organisations. He has also played bass guitar in a number of bands.

Hutchinson’s narrative is familiar. He claims he “knew” at age 5 that he was different because he wanted to play hopscotch with the girls. He says he was told to leave the girls alone and play with the boys. Interesting use of “tingling” in this account, an odd word choice.

During his teenage years he claims he had to suppress his feminine persona and try to perform “boy mode” by joining the army cadets and playing rugby. This is a common way that men explain away their background of hyper-masculine pursuits. Turns out he is also a gamer. These facts are in danger of undermining the narrative so must be described as ,societally imposed, repression.

He only “came out” a decade ago after finally seeing more positive coverage in 2012. He makes an unverifiable claim that he had tried to present his “authentic self” earlier but transphobia made him retreat into the closet.

Hutchinson says he became aware of “trans” people with the eighties documentary on Julia Grant, Jan Morris and Christine Jorgensen. He credits Paris Lees with giving the courage to present his true self to the world, sometimes, at other times, it’s a prostituted “trans” character from Paddington Green.

His interest in music led him to adopt various styles of music that allowed him to play around within his “gender” in socially acceptable ways that provided camouflage.

He takes us on a tour of various musicians that challenged “gender stereotypes” in movements like the New Romantics, Goths and glam rock. The eighties were a time for playing around with and rejecting the straight jacket of sex stereotypes. Hutchinson saw it as an opportunity to “hide in plain sight” .

Unfortunately, he tells us, that era ended and he could no longer do this publicly and was reduced to (cross) “dressing” in the safety of his own home.

He names a few artists who have come out as “trans” and is particularly delighted that one stole an award meant for a female artist.

His public pronouncements are evidenced on his social media account and on some of the presentations available on YouTube. This one was given to an organisation purported to be about conservation. He is introduced by a staff member who has pronouns in her bio on her linkedin. You can find it here:

Kate Hutchinson

In this presentation Hutchinson makes liberal use of the discredited suicide and murder statistics; which make a regular appearance to propagate the idea this is a persecuted minority. He rattles off a list of people who come under the “trans” umbrella which includes, cross-dressers (transvestic fetishists, in old money), bigender, non-binary, gender fluid etc. He also talks about transphobia and shares some, alleged, incidents from his own life. I am extremely skeptical about this because I have seen this recur in “trans-narratives” and it comes off as a sexual fantasy.

He also talks about how he met with BBC staff to promote better coverage of “trans” people. The BBC figure frequently in the promotion of trans ideology, with a complete disregard for the safeguarding implications, despite their own shameful history in allowing predators in their midst.

In common with lots of “trans” activists they make sure to get the police on their side.

Lots of his work also involves going into schools to educate (indoctrinate)children. This is one of the major failings of the Conservative Government who are allowing our children to be manipulated, funded by tax payers. He appears to do this across the U.K.

He also appears on this Pride Wales YouTube alongside a person who appears to be female, with a beard, claims not to be “trans” and has a gay husband with whom, I presume, she has had the children she refers to…#Confused. Below are some images from the trailer. Men dressed in fetish gear and a captured police force.

Rhonnda Pride

The host appears to introduce herself as Minus DaCock with Tammy Paxton. Here they are:

In this video we learn that Hutchinson is, surprise, surprise, a gamer in a relationship with a woman. He spouts a lot of, scientifically illiterate guff about the reversibility of puberty blockers and claims his rights are under attack by the Conservative government. The “rights” in question turn out to mean he might lose access to the female toilets. That would be cruel wouldn’t ? To force a woman to share toilets with men?

Hutchinson’s twitter timeline is full of opposition to “terfs”. He has particular beef with Germaine Greer and Julie Bindel. He also doesn’t like the idea of an exclusively gay rights focused charity; so retweets attacks on LGB Alliance.

This is from a piece he wrote for Diversity Role Models listing all the things he feels are under threat from these terf /bigots. The arrogant incursion into single sex spaces by cross-dressing males is the new colonialism. Here he is openly opposing EXISTING LAW to protect women and girls from sexual predators/men with fetishes.

You can also find him crowing about Lesbians being ejected from Pride Cymru. Yet he appears to be a heterosexual man!

Next up is a transgender Vicar. Working within a religious setting to advance “trans” rights.

You can support my work here. I appreciate every penny! 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.


Mermaids: Trans Britain (Part 6)



Chapter 4 covers the controversial charity, Mermaids. Using a pseudonym, a mum who “transitioned” her son speaks. At the time “Margaret Griffiths” was in her seventies so Her child will be in their forties, at least, by the time of the (2018) publication of Trans Britain.

The mother explains her route into becoming an advocate for her “daughter” while she was a stay at home mum. These two things may not be unconnected. She ended up with a role at Mermaids, on the committee, dealing with a lot of press enquiries given her availability.

Like a lot of these children “Lisa” had a history of being bullied and not fitting in at school and was also highly intelligent.

She is at pains to dispel any notion that she was unhappy about her child’s sex and claims that if she had expressed a preference it would have been for a boy as she had fond memories of the younger brother, who was ten years younger. The issue of “Lisa’s” gender identity came to a head when her son was fourteen years old and refusing to go to school.

Lisa is described as not “notably effeminate” and she “hid her problem well” . He also had not expressed any issues as a young child. What she had was a gentle son who did not like rough and tumble and who may have been a gay boy.

It is not clear what her /her husband’s attitude to having a gay son was, unlike Susie Green of modern day mermaids who made this statement in her Ted Talk.

“Margaret” sought for explanations for her son refusing to go to school and runs through a check list of issues. Again this is someone looking back in 2018 but the story bears additional scrutiny. She has just told us her son was getting bullied in the same chapter but here she says she asked him about that and she seems to have accepted his denial. He also denied being gay.

We are then told that they happened to see the story of Caroline Cossey (a “transsexual” and model who was outed by the press). She describes her reaction as one of pity for the experience Cossey was undergoing. Learning about Cossey, as she tells us, inspired her to ask her son if this was the problem.

”Lisa” was asked if he was happy being a boy and, as she describes it, his mum immediately accepted this and promised to fight for the way to deal with this problem.

This is a familiar trajectory in the parents I have covered. An immediate acceptance that this is the issue and a switch to activist mode. It maybe also be significant that she was a reader of Family Circle; which is quite a conservative publication sparking a backlash when it featured a gay couple as late as 2014.

She discovers an organisation set up by a therapist, Fran Springfield, and is disconcerted by the deep voice of the “transsexual” who answered the phone.

Things move pretty fast, from an outside perspective. We have already switched to a new name and referrals to the Childhood and Adolescent Mental Health Services end in frustration as her son is fixated on “gender reassignment”.

Soon both the G.P. and the mother are demanding action and this results in a referral to the Gender Identity Services, led by Domenico Di Ceglie.

You can read more about Di Ceglie in my series on him, below. 👇

Domenico Di Ceglie: Tavistock

“Lisa” is soon on puberty blocking drugs and the mum seems quite keen to point out her son was one of the first to be given puberty blockers, maybe even the first. Lisa seems to have embarked on this course of treatment age 14/15. (Since 2011 the Tavistock have been giving PBs to children from as young as aged ten).

Griffiths argues that the treatment is safe (and reversible) because the drugs have been used for decades in children with precocious puberty. This is a common argument and there are a few problems with it. In experiments on Sheep it was shown to lower IQ. Most of the research is on females. Girls put on lupron, in the U.S, for precocious puberty have taken legal action over the consequences. Given that Griffith’s first came across a quite beautiful model, in Caroline Cossey, and then a “transsexual” with a deep voice it seems that she is in a race against time to make sure her son “passes”.

To Griffith’s this preserves her son’s option and he will be better able to fit in. She goes on to say that allowing a natural puberty is not a neutral act.

This clip confirms the close relationship between Mermaids and the Tavistock. Griffith’s describes their relationship as one of mutual dependence.

Apparently adult “trans-identified” males were involved from the start. Given the link between computer specialists and a “trans” identity it is no surprise one of them was able to set up their website. I cannot find any information about Pamela Crossland but there is some public information about Krystyna Haywood.

Krystyna has stood for public office, for two different political parties in true trans fashion.

Haywood was also a social worker and remains on the register.

Here is a clip from an article about Haywood. The main thrust of the article was Haywood complaining that “sexual reassignment surgery” was delayed on the NHS. This is also not the first “trans” identified person who talks of the loss of a twin.

There follows a bit of a discussion about how one of the children chose the name Mermaids. Below it is made clear that the Beaumont Society were donating money. Beaumont Society started out as a support group for adult, male, transvestites. Press for Change was the organisation set up by Chris Burns and Stephen Whittle, among others. The donation from Pete Burns was a surprise to me.

Pete Burns was a pop star from Liverpool who was married for 25 years, to a woman, and then married a man, before his death at 57. Along the way he had series of extreme plastic surgeries and remedial procedures. This is Pete Burn’s speaking in his final interview which makes sense of his support for Mermaids.

The mum claims it all worked out well but Lisa still has “issues”. This is how parents justify a razor focus on “gender” to sort that out before worrying about any other issues. The other justification is that if you don’t do this your kids will commit suicide. That’s just a lie.

There is plenty more to come from this book. It seems worth it to document the links between these groups and the same names cropping up. Someone suggested I do a Spider diagram which I may do, once I figure out what one is. 😂.

You can support my work here. Thank you to those who do. You can send donations in a variety of ways. You could consider a paid subscription to my substack. I will link a Stripe and Donor box for the boycott paypal people as soon as I figure out how to do it.

My Substack


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


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”.


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.


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

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


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.


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

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


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

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


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:


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

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


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.


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


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

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


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.

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