You can read part 1 here:
Lockwood is a married, heterosexual, father of two. He is a late “transitioner” and followed the well worn path from part-time cross-dresser to full-time cross-dresser who now cals himself a woman. No longer able to restrict his cross-dressing, to evenings and weekends, he sold his share of an IT business to allow him to be his authentic self. He subsequently set up a company, to provide training on how to be more “inclusive”. He joins a number of men who have made their fetish into a career. The company name is See Change Happen and is registered at companies house.
The directors are Lockwood and his wife, Marie Manley.
This is the blurb o his website: Predictably the focus is on “diversity”
As is my custom, I had a look at the company accounts to see if there was anything of interest. There was not.
Inclusion Bites.
Lockwood also has a podcast called inclusion bites which you can find on YouTube and apple podcasts.
There is a lot of content which may merit a detailed look but, for now, I chose just two episodes to look at. First up our Joanne is doling out legal advice which is, unsprisingly incorrect.
The Equality Act, 2010
Given the number of legal cases arising from, wilful, misinterpretations of the law, it seems H.R departments would be well advised to cease sub-contracting out to those with a vested interest. Here is Lockwood confidently giving false advice about the nine, legally, protected characteristics, under the Equality Act, 2010. Here is Joe’s version. alongside the correct guidance. You will see that Lockwood adds “gender” to sex; the only one he misrepresents.
The bullying of “Transwomen”!
Another episode focuses on the victimisation of men who demand to be accepted as women. He first emphasises a “born this way” narrative about his “transness”. As we will see, later, this is not quite the unvarnished truth. The entire episode is a master class in victimology.
He opens by saying he became aware that he was “different” aged three or four. He claimed his parents and other adults were corrective of his behaviour; whilst not specifying exactly what “behaviours”. We learn that he is left-handed which allows him to the, historical, misguided attempt at “conversion therapy” to make children right handed. As he explains left-handed people were demonised, persecuted and even killed though, needless to say, not in his lifetime. This allows Lockwood to claim further oppression points and also to claim his “transness” is hard-wired in much the same way as his left-handedness.
He elaborates on his feelings about his marginalised status. He feels excluded, marginalised and bullied. I think he his replying to the concerns of women, who want to maintain our single sex spaces. Joanne here makes it clear that the “women” we should be prioritising are the ones who put the man in woman.
For a group who seem to have the establishment in their pocket, changing laws and language to bend to their will, the level of paranoia is astonishing. Despite the over-representation of sex offenders, in prison, claiming a “trans” identity, the media do their level best to disguise this as crimes committed by women. Men are being allowed to compete against women, in sport, despite the blatant unfairness. We are being dehumanised by being renamed such language as “bleeeders” ; “cervix-havers” etc. This is aimed at MEN but also men who identify as women because all evidence points to sexual deviance which motivates these men.
Of course he would have gotten away with it were it not for those pesky gender critical women. It’s not Fair! Lockwood, to plagiarise Julie Burchill, is the Violet Elizabeth Bott of “transwomen”.. I would accuse him of persecutory delusions but we do indeed think he is unworthy of the moniker “woman”. We do want him excluded from single sex spaces. I would like also like him marginalised from any discussion on women’s rights just as we don’t want any man telling us what rights we are allowed to have,
Here is a link for you to watch it yourself 👇
Gloriously Unready!
It is his guest appearance on this podcast that is most revealing. It is hosted by a mum of two “transgender” kids (What are the chances?). This discussion is from a couple of years ago. I have covered many “trans narratives” and it is noticeable that males tend to furiously deny any sexual motivation for their “transition”. Many of the males are older so parents are either deceased or don’t have a platform to contradict tales from their childhood. The men tend to claim they have known they were really girls from a prepubertal age which serves to suggest its innate and definitely not sexual.
Time to familiarise yourself with “retconned narratives”.
This can also apply to females though the motivations are different. It is notable Stephen Whittle’s account of her childhood and parental attitude to her trans identity changed markedly after her parents were, presumably, not around to contradict her. This was all the more extraordinary because all her previous interviews are all in the public domain. Heres my series on Whittle
Lockwood is married, to Marie, and they have a son and a daughter. As a young man he joined the R.A.F but latterly he was a partner in an IT company, which was sold in 2017, prior to him coming out as “trans”. Elsewhere he describes subsequent financial difficulties which resulted in a voluntary agreement in order to satisfy his creditors. The selling of the family home is sometimes described as a financial necessity and at other times as a means to downsize to a dream, waterfront property. The other discrepancy is that he also talks about his expenses for his medical treatments which does not seem to square with someone in straitened financial circumstances.
Lockwood describes a long marriage that had its difficulties and during periods of turmoil both had sought solace elsewhere and he recounts many, alcohol fuelled, arguments. During one of these periods he blurted out a truth of which his wife was unaware; he had cross dressed, furtively, throughout their marriage.
Lockwood describes how maintaining his family unity was a key priority for him, I believe him, these men are desperate to remain in their marriages, for a ready supply of validation and because, by hell, do those transwidows shed an ugly light on their exes.
It was after this disclosure that the couple reconciled so the reunion was in the full knowledge of his proclivities. He describes acceptance of his cross-dressing as not exactly a “condition” but “in the deck”. Thereafter he begins to test the boundaries in the bedroom, whether he would “transition” and whether he would break his promise to keepmit from their children, family and social circle. He breaks everyone of these promises. Telling his son, his daughter and making a facebook announcement. Thereafter they began incorporating this into the marriage, though it is not known if Marie was enthusiastic about this or merely resigned. I am guessing the latter from the phrase “willing to go along with it”.
It maybe that she wearied of these extra conjugal duties because she soon began to drop him off at places where he could meet like minded people.
Lockwood then describes the escalation of his desire to cross dress. He had assured his wife he did not wish to “transition” ; this is a common deceit in these type of men. At the outset he was anxious when attending these events; worried about his outfits and make-up. Eventually he began, instead, to dread the return to his normal presentation and the balance began to shift. He does describe trying to get rid of this compulsion by growing a beard. He hoped the incongruity of the beard and a dress would enable him to put the genie back in the bottle. A lot of these men have cycles of binge and purge where they may get rid of their female clothing only to succumb and purchase them all over again. (Incidentally, many trans widows report a catastrophic impact on the family financial coffers )After attempting, and failing, to purge himself of the clothing, and the desire, he finally succumbed to his desire for a full time presentation as a “woman”.
I described some of Maria’s difficulties in part one at one point daring to call him selfish. Now, however, she works with her husband, counselling other women in the same situation and seems to have fully accepted that she now has a “wife”. From an outsider perspective it’s is clear to see, that Marie has been co-opted to serve as a sister wife to validate her husband in his fetish. There’s something really telling when he explains how his testosterone levels are very similar to women’s and his oestrogen levels are similar to women twenty or thirty years younger than his wife, who will be post menopausal. Debbie/David Hayton made a similar observation and I clocked it, immediately as a sly dig at his wife, a sort of “I am more woman than you”.
My jaw dropped when I heard him admit this. 👇 Of course he had belonged to a men only club and admits that he still supports single sex /gender spaces which would conveniently include him under “gender”. He seemed quite put out when he was initially not included,in his new guise, and then shows precisely what he thinks of women by the utterly male assumption about women’s chat. Jan Morris expressed similar views.
Apparently listening to women defend out sex based rights is “pandering to a vocal minority”. Of course this is D.A.R.V.O (Deny, Reverse,Victim and Offender). It is well worth listening to his dismissive tone when he talks about sport and the safety of women and girls. Yes, he is right it is predatory men that are the problem and how do we know you are not one of them when you are prepared to breach our boundaries.
You can listen for yourself here 👇
Confessions of a Cross-Dresser
Before I sign off I also found an interview Marie did about being on a “trans” journey with her husband. She echoes all of her husband’s account and berates herself for being selfish when he came out. Like a slowly boiled frog he seems to have broken down any resistance.
You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully receive and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute.
Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.
£10.00
