The Guardian: Three


Puzzled by the Guardian embrace of Transgender Ideology and lack of concern for the impact on women’s rights, I decided to have a look. As a lifelong Guardian reader the piece that prompted me to have a look was a campaign to move a ”transgender” prisoner to the female estate.

Marie Dean & Tara Hudson

I wrote a piece on that here 👇 below is a clip detailing the sexual nature of the offences.

Cognitive Capture at the Guardian. The Marie Dean Case

Coverage of Tara Hudson was similarly misleading while a campaign was ongoing to move Tara to the female estate. 👇

The Scott Trust

Following the above coverage I started to have a look at the Guardian Group’s ownership and oversight. This led to the Scott Trust and a bit of digging into the trustees. 👇

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

The Scott Trust have oversight of the Guardian Group’s editorial policy in the event of any disagreement. They also have hiring and firing control over the Editor.

One of the Trustees also sits on the Paul Hamlyn Foundation. This foundation funds a number of trans-lobby groups including Mermaids.

Thompson Reuters Foundation

For those of you familiar with the Denton’s document you will be aware that the above foundation supported its production. The document is provides to strategic advice on how best to embed Gender Identity Ideology in institutions, the media and the political elite. I wrote about this here:

That Denton’s Document

So, let’s take another look at the People who are trustees for the Scott Trust. 👇

As you can see one of the Trustees, appointed in 2021, also sits on the Thompson Reuters Foundation. She also used to work for twitter.

Open Society Foundations

I am indebted to Julian Vigo for this next section. I had been looking at the funding handed out by the Open Society Foundation. The OS Foundation funds many initiatives which are pro-democracy and many that , at least at a superfical level, appear to be laudable. At the same time they funnel money to organisations which are pro-prostitution and Gender Identity Ideology. Their database, of grantees, is on-line and searchable. This is what came up when I searched the Guardian.

OS grantees

However this was not the end of the story, here is what Julian Vigo uncovered.

Link to Julian Vigo’s article below.

Julian Vigo:

Sure enough you can find an acknowledgment on the Guardian Website. (Link below).

Open Society Funding

It would be interested to know if anyone else think the Guardian coverage crossed a line in coversge of ”transgender” issues in the run up to the consultancy on the Gender Recognition Act.

Here are some other foundations funding content at the Guardian.

Revolving door in the Charity Sector.

Just as an aside the other way this ideology gets embedded is the revolving door between posts in the Charity Sector. This is Nancy Kelley’s CV; MIND, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Refugee Council and Barnados.

Also Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Stonewall Champion.

You can support my work here. Only if you have surplus. Don’t prioritise me over the legal cases.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s detriments.


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

Why is the Guardian so woeful on Women’s Rights these days when, arguably, we are facing the biggest attack on our sex based  rights in my lifetime? Coverage of Marie Dean was a low point

Marie Dean  (Article by Sarah Ditum)

It was this article which first confused and then outraged me.   (You can find more on this case on my blog here.) The Guardian campaigned to facilitate a move of a convicted, male,  burglar  to the female estate because he identified as a woman. However their coverage, until shamed by angry readers,  de-sexualised  the nature of the “burglary” and thus distorted the risk to the female prisoners.

It was this article that inspired me to do a bit of digging. The Guardian has a history of exposing #DarkMoney & labyrinthine ownership structures, which mask influence or hide money.  So this was where I started.

The Guardian itself reports that it has a unique ownership structure. Part of that structure is The Scott Trust. As you can see 👇 the Board of the Trust have ultimate editorial control & power to sack the editor


This is one of The Board members. He is also on the board of The Paul Hamlyn Foundation, which immediately looked familiar.


It was the Paul Hamlyn foundation that caught my eye because I had seen them referred to in the accounts of the Mermaids charity. The foundation have a search facility to see who they fund here  Paul Hamlyn Foundation Grants

Sure enough 👇


Here is another beneficiary of The Paul Hamlyn Foundation.  This is an organisation working with children as young as 11.  If I was in charge of their branding I would definitely recommend a name change.


Naturally the Map Youth Fund also advise on “Gender” and have an interesting book collection including  The Testosterone Files, Gender Outlaws, Transgender Voices. They have an entire section on Gender and this is not matched by other sections on the LGB.


The Paul Hamlyn Foundation also fund “Ditch The Label”. This is an anti-bullying charity whose CEO (Dr Liam Hackett) uses a misogynist slur (Terf) and who targeted a Lesbian, Feminist philosopher.  He has blocked a lot of women who raised concerns at what appeared to be bullying behaviour.  You might remember these.  A lack of understanding about women’s dignity and privacy at a Breast Cancer Screening, and targeted abuse.

Another beneficiary is Gendered Intelligence. They are another key player in the debate women were told was not allowed to happen. I have seen them frequently referenced in Hansard.  In particular as independent advisors on the management of trans prisoners


Here are a couple of those Hansard references.  “Independent” Advisors on managing risk and safeguarding for “all” prisoners.  Apparently , despite the lack of any representation from women, all stakeholders were consulted.  (Cough…Karen White, Paris Green)


Some of you may remember the sexual health booklet, produced by Gendered Intelligence, and aimed at “trans youth”.  Quote: “A woman is still a woman even if she enjoys getting blowjobs” .  A celebration of diverse sexual practices.  Remember no “kink-shaming” allowed.


This clip  is the submission, by Gendered Intelligence, to the Transgender Equality Inquiry, courtesy of  Marked up to make it clear their aim is the dismantle legal provisions which allow for same sex delivery of specific services.

Parliamentary Inquiries publish submissions and the ones to this inquiry are well worth a read. (You can find them here Hansard)


The Paul Hamlyn Foundation also fund another organisation “All About Trans” to enable them to employ a press officer and media trainer.   They train “media professionals” from a number of different organisations.   All About Trans website.  

It is well worth looking at the media guidance emanating from groups like these.  The definitions are highly contested and the re-shaping of language has significant implications for women and non-gender conforming children, of both sexes.  You can see the resources they provide and who they work with  here

After you look at the guidance it makes sense that they claim to have advised the BBC & Channel 4. Very noticeable increase in using “gender” where “sex” seems more appropriate.  Also “assigned female at birth” & reductive references to women as “cervixhavers” etc seem to have emerged. There seems to be an excessive sense that female biology is inherently transphobic or that referencing women’s sex based experience as insulting to the trans community.  This is, as an aside, not a good way to foster good relations between different protected characteristics. Further information below.


I first published this as a thread on twitter.  Courtesy of some sleuthing by some mumsnet warriors I was sent some information on the founder  of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation.  (No idea why it did not occur to me to start there!).  Here goes:

Quelle Surprise: Lord Hamlyn & Madam Lash

I don’t share that just as some titillating story. Anyone following this debate needs to understand how BDSM (Bondage and Sado Masochism) figures in the fetishizing of sex stereotypes. Queer theory relies on maintaining women’s subordinate status so as not to ruin kink for our overlords!  Well worth reading up on queer theory & Judith Butler,  in particular.  I recommend this. Dr Jane Clare Jones


So I singled out the Guardian because it was my daily paper for decades so the sense of betrayal runs deep.  They are not alone but they do appear to be significantly compromised on this issue.  (No disrespect to the women, working there, who are working to get women’s issues covered appropriately. I imagine it is not without some personal and professional cost).

Anyone watching Pink News coverage will be used to the lack of any balanced reporting from that outlet.  Here is the CEO and his husband. Trustee for Mermaids Gender.


Trustee of MERMAIDS

This does offer some clarity about why the media is out of step with the majority view by trying to erase biological reality. Women’s status in society is based on our sex.  It is the epitome of privilege to identify into a marginalised group and then tell, your unwilling hosts they are YOUR oppressors.  This is what women are being told when we are labelled “Cis” against our will and then told this means we have “cis-privilege”.   Not enough privilege to resist a male-imposed nomenclature though!


I am unwaged so, if you are constrained from speaking out you can still play a part by supporting those of us free to speak out.

Documenting the biggest attack on women’s rights in my lifetime. Also fighting for the rights of LGB people. Nobody is born in the wrong body.


Cognitive Capture at the Guardian. The Marie Dean Case

Full thread on the Guardian

Thread above details links between Guardian Trustees and the funding of Gender Identity Ideology.  Below is an expanded reflection on the first tweet. The Marie Dean case.


As a lifelong Guardian reader I expected it to be at the vanguard of fighting for women’s rights, instead it seems to be, wilfully, campaigning to disregard the privacy, dignity and safety, of the most vulnerable women in our midst.

One of the earliest warning signs, for me, was the coverage of the Marie Dean case.  This was a piece of campaign journalism highlighting the vulnerability of a trans prisoner, who had been housed in the male estate.  The article covered, a burglar, Marie Dean,  whose Hunger Strike was staged to obtain a move to the female estate.

Women, who engaged with the article, immediately  highlighted that the Burnley Local Press  had provided more accurate coverage.  The prisoner had broken into homes to engage in “sexual acts” involving the underwear of teenage girls. It total they had committed over 30 offences of voyeurism and violence. In addition they were found not guilty of a  previous charge related to indecent videos of children.  Only after a storm of protest was the article amended to include the sexual nature of the offences.  Even now these are located far down the article and only after parallels are drawn to Bobby Sands, an IRA  prisoner, who also went on Hunger Strike to secure concessions re his incarceration.

The revised article is here: Guardian Marie Dean

Sarah Ditum’s article, in The New Statesman, also asks pertinent questions about the nature of the Guardian piece and why it  was calling for someone convicted of  sexually motivated “burglaries” to be housed in the female estate. Marie Dean.

Here is  more Guardian coverage of another Trans prisoner Tara Hudson  

The article mentions that Tara had 6 years of reconstructive surgery but omits to detail that this did not involve any genital surgery.  In fact Tara Hudson worked as a “shemale” escort, servicing male clients with a “seven inch surprise”.  Tara Hudson has not applied for a Gender Recognition Certificate. This means they are not even entitled to the “legal fiction” that  allows, limited, application of women’s  sex based rights.  A petition to have Tara moved to a women’s prison garnered over 150,000 signatures.  Given the woeful coverage how many of those signatories knew the full context?

Tara’s case was also raised in the Houses of Parliament on a number of occasions.


Not one of them reflected on the danger, to women, of incarcerating a biological male, with a history of violence, in the female estate.  Do I think Marie Dean/Tara Hudson are at a higher risk , than other males, in the prison system? Yes.  Do I think the answer is to raise the risk for female prisoners?  No.  Clearly there are some specific vulnerabilities requiring due consideration by the Prison authorities.  Unfortunately, at present, we are witnessing a blatant disregard for females prisoners, some of the most vulnerable in our community, because “gender identity/expression” is being privileged above the rights of women. Sex is a protected characteristic for a reason and this is being cast aside for political expediency.

We had already seen the consequences of housing biological males in the female prison estate.  Here is another case which ended badly.  Guardian coverage foregrounds that this was someone who was “manipulative” and that the risk assessment was at fault.  Truth is that any policy, if it relies on a subjective sense of an internal identity,  is vulnerable to just this kind of manipulation. Karen White. 

I will leave you with these. First up a  submission from the British Association of Gender Identity Professionals. This was a submission to the Transgender Equality Inquiry.  It highlights the naivete of assuming nobody would take advantage of a policy which allows self-identified, male-bodied prisoners to access vulnerable women.

Our politicians were warned. Here is Francis Crook from the Howard League for Prison Reform:


And here is a BBC fact check of Fairplay For Women statistics which were based on an FOI request.08C5DD13-3574-4B3E-B4FA-72093A228B9E

Some prisons don’t keep records. Some of the crimes are, we now discover, male crimes recorded as female crimes. Is this about predatory males who are assuming a transgender identity, or a problematic rate of sexual offences committed by transgender individuals? Either way we have a problem. Women should not be acceptable collateral damage while we figure this out.

The Media seem to be terrified of this “debate” which women were told to “skip”.  The background to the Guardian Trustees gives us an insight into their stance.  How many more media organisations are cognitively captured by this ideology?

You can support my work here. Only if you have a surplus and don’t prioritise me over crowdfunders for important legal cases. 

Researching the spread of Gender Identity Ideology and the impact on women’s sex based rights as well as gay rights. Particularly concerned about the harm done to young kids and teenage Lesbians / Gay boys.