Apartheid of Sex 2 : Martine Rothblatt


Forgive the title, especially those of you with experience of actual apartheid. This is the title of a book by a heterosexual, married, trans-identified male : Martine Rothblatt.

I have written about Rothblatt before but, as of August 2022, he is now on the board of the Mayo Clinic, which among other things, provides “transgender medicine” ; hence he needs a further post (s). 👇

You can read my first post here.


Rothblatt’s Finest Hour.

Rothblatt is a remarkable person with an impressive list of achievements, some of which. seem laudable. For me, his finest hour was his actions when he discovered his daughter had a life limiting condition, pulmonary arterial hypertension. One source stated that this was expected to take her life within two years, though Rothblatt is quoted as saying within three months, in one article. Irrespective of any discrepancies about the time frame it was a life threatening condition, at that time.

Rothblatt threw himself into research to search for a cure. Of course, it helped that Rothblatt was a millionaire, but he does seems to have done the initial research himself. He is evidently a smart guy so I find this plausible.

His mission was successful: He found a scientist willing to help, at a price, and the results saved his daughter’s life.

It’s possible there are some distortions /exaggerations in these accounts, the money sure played a role but he was tenacious in his fight to save his daughter’s life and it seems churlish to try to diminish that achievement. Whether this success fuelled a “God complex” seems like a reasonable supposition based on his future activities.

Onto the more controversial stuff:

First off, Rothblatt was described as the highest paid “female” CEO. I wonder if Rothblatt’s ponders whether another man might take an award /post/ achievement away from his daughter? (source moneyinc.com).

He also has an interest in cyber technology, specifically constructing robots with an ambition to make them sentient. He created one, called BINA48, to which he uploaded information, about his wife, based on her digital footprint. Rather spookily the robot is called the same name as his wife, Bina, and the creation is referred to as a “gynoid” .

This takes us onto another of Rothblatt’s pet projects, not unconnected with the robot wife.

Rothblatt’s is a renowned transgender activist but he has the added twist of transhumanism.

👇 “One of <his> goals is to tear down walls and barriers that exist between the digital world and biological existence”

Before I do a full review of the book I refer you to these articles on Rothblatt. Their coverage is such that it would be superfluous to add more here.

First up from the women are human site. (Superb resource, well worth signing up).

Mad Architect of Gender Ideology

This gives you a flavour.

Next is part 1 of a series on the 11th Hour Blog. Worth reading the whole series which will give you an idea about how strategic this movement is. It took a lot of planning to spread this ideology, globally. U.K readers while find our own Stephen Whittle pops up.

Rothblatt: Transgender to Transhumanism

You can also find a thread about this book, by me, on twitter:

Apartheid of Sex

I will do a detailed review of the book, Apartheid of Sex, for this blog;for completeness. However, my thread 👆is quite comprehensive so I will postpone that until I have read and reviewed his other book. (Post script: I have now read the book, Transgender to Transhumanism, and it is a new edition of the Apartheid of Sex, so I will cover that and post on the differences, if it seems worthwhile).

My content is open access but donations help cover my costs and keep going. You can support my work here.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology, full-time to resist the colonisation of the female sex, the sterilising of gay and autistic kids and the bizarre anti-human nature of synthetic sex identities. (Jennifer Bilek).


Open Democracy?


This media outlet first came to my attention when one of their writers blocked me on social media, a good while ago. I guessed it was because of my “Gender Critical” stance but gave it little more thought. I did spot that they were very much proponents of Gender Identity Ideology,so, I had a cursory look at the usual suspects among the Charitable Foundations that fund heavily in this area. Then I forgot about them, till this. 👇

I was moved to have another look after this exchange was shared on twitter. This was sent to feminist policy analysts based in Scotland.

This is all very reminiscent of the long documents I covered in my Moral Panic series. Here various foundations banded together to delegitimise U.K. Feminists, in particular. They also talk of an “anti-gender” movement and attempt to associate U.K. Feminists with far right / Christian groups and even Viktor Orban, an authoritarian dictator who is not a fan of women’s rights or gay rights. You can find that series here 👇

Moral Panic?

Here is their reply. 👇

Not content with going after Murray, Black, McKenzie they also sent another, even more outrageous request to Forwomen Scotland.

Who funds Open Democracy?

Most of their income comes from grants.

Tracking the Backlash Project

This is the amount of funding they have had for a project called Tracking the Backlash Project. This is for 2021. 2.5 million to attack women’s rights organisations whilst, disingenuously, claiming this project is actually in defence of women’s rights.

I tracked all their 2021 grants as detailed on their website. Here they are, in full. I get the full figure to higher than 2.5.6 million.

Open Democracy

In fact this project is not about women’s rights but about the LGBTIQ+ agenda. Hence Open Democracy have targeted women’s organisations, who defend women’s , sex based, rights.

Attached is a record of all their funding between 2012 to 2020.

openDemocracy’s supporters (2012-2020) | openDemocracy

Here is a full record of 2021 donations

Open Democracy

Some of the organisations are familiar to me as they have been funding the LGBTIQ+ agenda. Once such is Barings Foundation. I wrote about them here:

Baring Foundation

Open Democracy have also received funding from Tides Foundation; who are a vehicle for donors to fund initiatives without revealing the identity of their Donors.

Here is what influence watch had to say about the Tides Foundation: Open Democracy anybody?

Here is a little bit more about the Open Democracy “journalist”, Adam Ramsey.

This is a ludicrous belief system, whatever this baby is being fed it is not breast milk.

You can support my work here. Don’t prioritise me above any current legal cases. My content will remain open.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and how it is being used against women’s rights, gay rights and harming children being taught they could be “born in the wrong body”


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.


How to spread Gender Ideology


Africa: Neo-Colonialism

This post should give you a flavour of a co-ordinated campaign to spread Gender Identity Ideology throughout continental Africa. The document below is the report of a gathering of trans activists, for which I am indebted to a twitter user you can follow here


This event was a feeder event for a conference designed to connect Trans Activist with each other and, crucially, with funding sources.. For those of you who read the work of Jennifer Bilek this will be familiar territory.

You can follow 11th hour blog here 👇

11th Hour twitter account

The conference is the brain child of the International Trans Fund. (ITF) They are backed by The Arcus Foundation, among others, which I wrote about here:


This is a summary of the amount if funding given to the International Trans Fund, since 2016

These are details of a couple of the grants.

This post will be based on this document 👇shared by a twitter user. . Attached below:


Changing Faces, Changing Spaces (CFCS)

The main conference is called Changing Faces, Changing Spaces and has been going since 2007. I have been unable to locate the conference report, but I have located the agenda and the report for the 2017 event.

The agenda is here with an excerpt highlighting the key role of Broden Giambarone.


The Ireland connection 

The keynote speaker is Broden Giambrone who played  role in getting the Irish Gender Recognition Act passed; which, controversially. allows self-identification of trans status. He talks about that here in a short YouTube for Open Society Foundations, who also fund this conference. Broden is the Director of ITF. 

Broden Giambrone

There is a further Irish connection since the treasurer for ITF is none other than Sara Phillips, of Ireland’s equivalent to Stonewall.

The pre-conference document sets out the priorities for trans-activists groups with some detail about their priorities and strategy. Most of the people with a “trans” identity have no access to what is described as ”gender affirming” care so this was a priority for the grass roots attendees.

Another key aim is to obtain legal recognition of the trans community with the clear implication that it should follow the Irish Model and be based on ”Self-ID” . This would be a disaster when it has long been recognised women face rape just trying to relieve themselves in the absence of safe toilet provision. Now any recent initiatives to provide facilities would end up mixed sex.

Of all the trans advocacy documents , I have read, this was also the most blatant in linking “trans” rights to engage in prostitution, which of course they call ”sex work”. The two issues are linked repeatedly in the document.

They are keen to raise awareness of ”trans” issues and, in particular, dispel the notion that it is connected to homosexuality, as below.

As I raised in this post promoting transgender ideology has had a negative impact on gay rights even in the Western context, how much more catastrophic could it be where homosexual rights are recent or non-existent? I wrote about this here :

Lesbian & Gay Rights in African countries.


The impact of Gender Identity Ideology on Gay men and Lesbians could be far worse in Africa.

Better a trans daughter than a gay son?

Another, particularly, chilling strategy is the use of social media to target the young. We are now witnessing a Tsunami of detransitioners who have woken up from their Tumblr induced, Trans, Trance. Imagine fostering this in countries without the same health services?


I have been told by African women that they don’t expect this to infect African society the same way as it has done in the U.K, North America and Australasia. I am not so sure. A generation of our kids have been brainwashed and the idea of #LadyPenis has emerged at breakneck speed. Puberty Blocker manufacturers have donated nearly 1.5 million to one political party, individual donors have given money to politicians who are now spouting queer their inspired garbage. I did not think this could happen here. I have long been of the opinion that I live in a very corrupt country (England) but that does not mean corruption is not also rife in Africa.

You can support my work here. My content is free and I work tirelessly but I can’t match the might of all these billionaire’s and their ”charitable” foundations without help.

Researching the neo-colonialism in exporting gender identity ideology, globally. Charting the impact on women’s and gay rights and hoping we are an effective fightback.


Manufacturing Moral Panic 2


Why is a network of Charitable funding bodies fuelling a backlash against women’s sex based rights? Why are organisations, set up to protect children’s rights, teaming up with organisations promoting Gender Identity Ideology?

For part one see below 👇. My previous post showed the links between these foundations and links to some of my earlier work examining the activities of *some* of these organisations. It also contains the link to the, 131 page, document endorsed by Global Philanthropy Project and Elevate Children’s Funders Group.

Manufacturing Moral Panic

In this post I want to cover the opening letter explaining why this coalition was established. I will also highlight some of the terminology they use in the glossary of terms. This is how they characterise women defending our sex-based rights. We are ”Gender Restrictive”. Heaven forfend we are simply called feminists because then it would be abundantly clear they attacking Women’s rights!


The coalition makes sense in one respect. Much of the opposition, to the spread of Gender Identity Ideology, raises concerns about the medical interventions perpetrated on children. By which I mean blocking puberty and introducing cross-sex hormones, all to cement a Transgender Identity; this despite the same ideologues arguing that “Gender can be fluid”. I have covered Puberty Blockers many times on this blog. For neophytes, or as a reminder; in the U.K we are giving Puberty Blockers to children as young as ten, on the NHS. They, almost, invariably progress to Cross Sex Hormones and as a result they will be sterile. It therefore a significant concern that a coalition of children’s charities have signed up to this document.

The authors recognise that childhood is defined as up to the age of 18 by the Children’s Rights Coalition (CRC). It nevertheless claims ”adulthood” is influenced by the social context in which the ”child” lives. As far as I am aware we don’t defend child marriage, or child labour, even where a child is based in a country, or culture, which normalises these practices. This blurring of the boundary between child/adult is necessary when arguing children have the right to bodily autonomy in respect of accessing “Gender Affirming” care. I believe this is why Children are being reframed across a myriad of public /campaigning bodies as mini-adults.


I am glad they reference brain maturity because credible research states that brain maturation continues up to the age of 25. One of the key battle grounds, for the promotion of Gender Identity Ideology, is to argue for the empowerment of children. This allows arguments, for children, especially teenagers, to access medical interventions to cement a trans-identity, without requiring parental consent.

Brain Maturation

Here’s the abstract for that research.


Just a reminder about UK Law on getting a tattoo. It is not legal even with parental consent.


Next up the document quotes the Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) again. Note that the document explicitly references sex but the author’s quote another document to claim that this also covers ”Gender Identity”. Once again, this is a common tactic a sleight of hand to claim the law is in your side, even when you are arguing for it to be changed. A good example is the public campaign to allow anyone to ”Self-Identify” as the opposite sex and the more covert campaign to abolish single sex spaces. When it appears these laws are not going to change (outside of Scotland) campaigners are simply lying about the law to get it built into policy. [Hence the twitter hashtag #StonewallLaw].


Note the small print on this which references the ”transsexual” child. 👇.


Heres another interesting aside. The rights of the child must take into account the child’s views. They also posit the view that the argument of “Best Interests” cannot be used to justify actions “inconsistent with child rights”. In the context of Gender Identity Ideology this is often deployed to argue children/adolescents have the right to bodily autonomy and to access ”Gender affirming” medical interventions. This takes us back to the notion of “transsexual children”; a description usually avoided.


Glossary of Terms

The glossary of terms at the beginning of the document are illustrative of the ideology under-pinning this document. It includes the newspeak of Cisgender, Transgender, Heteronormative, Assigned Sex at Birth etc. Intersex also makes an appearance despite this not being favoured terminology among those with Disorders of Sexual Development (DSDs). The term ”intersex” won’t be given up without a fight because the Transgender movement use people with DSDs to muddy the waters and suggest there are more than two sexes. (Humans are, in fact, Sexually Dimorphic).

I won’t treat you to the entire glossary but its worth including a couple of examples. Under Gender and Sexual Diversity can be found the definition of sex. This recognises biological sex only to claim it is randomly ”assigned” . They also claim sexual dimorphism is based on a common belief in a binary sex classifications. This equates scientific accuracy to a faith based position. In this section 👇 the author’s also feign allegiance with the interests of people with DSDs; who often campaign against unnecessary surgery on infants. Note that some surgeries are in fact medically necessary, DSD activists oppose only cosmetic interventions on those under age.

The section dealing with SEXual orientation is below. Of course they define it as a Genderal Orientation. And we must have a category for the oppressed asexuals or as I call them ”the shag anything that moves brigade”.


Whoever named Pansexual after a mythical, horny old goat at least had a sense of humour: 😂


So far, so predictable. Now we get to the definition of Gender Justice”. Note that the definition includes (cis) women’s rights. Yay, we actually get a category of our own! Don’t get too excited, it is prefixed with the insulting ”cis” and, read on sisters, they graciously deign to consider redressing the power imbalance between men and women “if necessary”! I think it is FUCKING necessary since you are re-defining us against our will.


Introductory Letter

Now we get to the letter accompanying the document which purports to explain why they felt it necessary to join forces to expose ”Gender-Restrictive” folks. This is newspeak for Witches, by the way. 👇


It is hard to credit the claims made in this document and the level of testeria fuelling the authors of this ”research”. For those of you familiar with DARVO (Deny, attack, reverse victim and offender) this is a classic of the genre. Apparently WE are distorting huMAN rights. Which is a bit rich coming from the Gender Ideology lobby who are all about the MAN in human.

We are also being accused of ”anti-democracy”. I cannot think of anything more anti-democratic than following a blue-print that encourages the passing of laws, by stealth and avoiding press-coverage. (See the Denton’s document. Blog below). More D.A.R.V.O.

That Denton’s Document

Gender Critical Women as an “Alarming Trend”


Women defending sex based rights, Lesbians refusing to accept males as sexual partners, mothers fighting to stop the medicalising of, among others, gay and autistic kids, are planning State Seizure! They actually sound crazy! Below they even claim women, fighting for sex based rights, are actually the ones attacking women’s rights.


Yes, there is a threat to children’s rights as activists are inculcating “Gender Dysphoria” in our kids and teens. Schools are teaching children a lack of adherence to sex stereotypes equals #BornInTheWrongBody. We are coaxing our gay youth into faux-straight, medicalised closets.

They also fear this Moral panic is effective. If it is effective this is because it is rooted in truth and (biological) reality. For the avoidance of doubt they do mean us! Here is a reference to ”So called ”gender critical” feminists. Nobody is arguing against human rights for trans identified people, in GC circles, we are fighting for sex based rights for women. No Conflict They Said. So, why does every fight for women’s rights garner an “anti-trans” label.

  • E6C465B5-ED72-4738-B95B-9E89F8C08EC2

Seriously they think we are well funded and have been planning this for 35 YEARS! I wonder why they didnt choose Terf Island (United Kingdom) for their country analysis? Could it be because it really doesn’t help their case? What with so many of us being Left-Wing, Trade Unionists.


The authors sound a warning to its disciples that they must unite to oppose the evil terfs and band together. Right side of history and all that.


I will leave this post with a list of the organisations that contributed to the document which includes Comic Relief whose funding is regularly used to promote bodily rejection.


I am going to do more on this document especially on the scurrilous attack on Womens Human Rights Coalition (W.H.R.C). I also have sisters from Bulgaria, Ghana and Peru looking at the country specific sections.

Finally those of you who are clearly sitting on the mounds of cash spare a bit for a sister! I seem to have missed out on the Swiss Bank account enrichment. 😂

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.


Manufacturing Moral Panic


This document, titled Manufacturing Moral Panic, claims feminists, indeed anybody opposed to Gender Identity Ideology, are aligned with sinister, anti-democratic forces. It claims we are well funded (😂), highly co-ordinated and involved in a global conspiracy dating back 35 years! It uses the technique of ”association fallacy” to spotlight right wing opponents of Gender Identity Ideology and imply /state that all opposition comes from the same ideological stance. The aim is to associate grassroots feminists with proponents of anti-abortion, anti-gay, authoritarian regimes.

The document was produced by organisations who are either actively promulgating, Gender Identity Ideology, or acquiescing in its dissemination. A coalition of hugely resourced, charitable foundations have banded together as the Global Philanthropy Project and joined forces with Elevate Children’s Funders Group; a coalition of charities focussed on children. It is particularly disturbing that an organisation representing children’s charities has been persuaded to endorse a document critical of the language of child safeguarding.

Recently more attention has been paid to the charitable foundations committed to spreading Transgender Ideology and exposing the huge corporate machinery promoting a medicalised “identity”. This document would appear to be a co-ordinated response to the Gender Critical resistance which has had some success, particularly in the United Kingdom.

You can read the full document below. Warning, it is very long and extremely repetitive. Also thin on evidence, which does not surprise me.


Gender Restrictive Ideology

It will take a few blogs to cover the different sections of the 131 page document. It purports to provide an overview of an ideology it labels ”Gender Restrictive”. It does not use the term ”Gender Critical Feminists” because it needs to smear us as biological essentialists who believe in traditional gender roles. This is ludicrous. Even a cursory analysis of the Gender Critical feminist analysis would conclude that they are critical of traditional sex stereotypes enfoced by the imposition of traditional gender roles. The authors cherry pick country case studies to set up an association fallacy claiming an alliance of authoritarian regimes and second wave /GC Feminists. They focus on countries which support their central thesis; which is that there is a sinister, anti-democratic, anti LGBTQ+, cabal driving opposition to Transgender Ideology. The entire thesis is a textbook example of D.A.R.V.O 👇

The normalisation of a rejection of our sexed bodies is no accident. It is driven by a hugely profitable industry which is mining our children’s bodies for profit. Biological sex denialism also has unintended (or intended?) consequences for women’s sex based rights. This is the root of my objection to Gender Identity Ideology. Philanthropic foundations drape their motivations under the “Charity” umbrella but are they really a beard for the Gender Industrial Complex?

I Intend to cover the report in three, further blogs, I also have women from Bulgaria, Ghana and Peru who have agreed to cover the country specific sections. It is significant, in my view, that the authors did not use the United Kingdom as a case study. The grassroots fight back in the U.K. originates largely on the political left which is an inconvenient fact for those calling us right wing, fascists.


Global Philanthropy Project

I think it is worth examining who is behind this document. First of all I want to look at who is behind the Global Philanthropy Project. Here is the call for proposals to map opposition to Gender Identity Ideology in the Caribbean on behalf of the Arcus Foundation.


Here is their website:

Global Philanthropy Project

This is what they are about


They have 22 members, who are listed below:


Many of the members were familiar to me and I have blogged on a few, or referenced them in my earlier work.

Barings Foundation 1

 Barings Foundation 2

Astraea Lesbian Foundation


I have also looked at Open Society Foundations who make significant grants to foundations involved in the dissemination of Transgender Ideology. Open Society Foundation, and other members of GPP, fund areas which, as a woman of a Left Wing persuasion, I heartily support. If you are neophyte this is important context; it can be disconcerting to find yourself criticising organisations which also do important, and worthwhile, work. However the spread of Gender Identity Ideology, and the promotion of a medicalised identity to a generation of kids, is doing real harm in our society while it has been promoted as a social good.

Many of the grant-making from these foundations demonstrate concern about the rise of Authoritarianism in countries such as Hungary, under Orban. I share that concern. The Hungarian administration is in opposition to Gender Identity Ideology, however the backlash is indiscriminate. This has resulted in legislation that harms Lesbians, Gay Males, Bisexuals and women’s rights. I do not support any legislation that hurts those who are in flight from their sex and identify as “Transgender” or “Transsexual”. My concern is to protect single SEX spaces for women and girls and to end the promotion of a medicalised identity to children, and teens. Historically, medical interventions were restricted to the most serious, intractable, cases of Gender Dysphoria. That is not the case in 2021.

The document is a result of a collaboration between the Global Philanthropy Project and Elevate Children’s Funders Group, a group I had NOT encountered before. I was especially concerned to see a coalition of children’s charities signed up to this document. Could it be that this organisation is being “forcedteamed to support an agenda? Do they appreciate what they are getting involved with? I don’t know.

This is the background to Elevate Children Funders Group:

The Elevate Children’s Funders Group 


Here is the history of Elevate Children’s Funders Group:

Here are the membership details for Elevate Children’s Funders Group. Common link seems to be the Oak Foundation and Open Society Foundations. {As an aside Comic Relief are deeply implicated in funding groups promoting Trans-Ideology}.


This group have clearly been persuaded that women, who are concerned about Gender Identity Ideology, have some unsavoury alliances with anti-democratic forces. Rather than see us as parents, with safeguarding concerns, they seek to paint us as the actual safeguarding risk. Here is a clip from the report which tells a collection of organisations, centred on children, to be wary of people using “child protection rhetoric”.


Here are some clips from Elevate Children’s Funders Group 2021 Strategic plan. This contains some familiar terminology such as intersectional and challenging norms.

C0603A7F-0CBF-4B7B-8A1C-BBBEA0099212The emphasis on children exercising their rights may be entirely innocuous but it immediately raises alarm bells for me. Based on everything I have read in the last five years it has echoes of campaigns for “bodily autonomy” for children with Gender Dysphoria.  Note the reference to “Gender Justice”. 

The reference to “intersectional” also sets off my spidey senses. The excellent work on intersectional feminism, by Kimberle Crenshaw, has been co-opted by proponents of trans-ideology. What was originally a plea for feminists to recognise the intersections between race, sex and class has now morphed into something quite different. Crenshaw’s work is now used, against women, to claim that female only spaces are akin to racial apartheid.

 “Sexual Apartheid” is even the title of a work by Martine Rothblatt. Rothblatt’s is a billionaire, trans-identified male who dreams of a world where we eradicate sex as a classification. I wrote about him in this post THE APARTHEID OF SEX: Rothblatt

The reference to challenging attitudes and norms also echoes Queer Theory idealogues who believe in smashing heteronormative culture and disrupting social norms. Some of those norms are indeed founded on prejudice but some, such as defending sex based rights and protecting children from making irreversible changes to their body ,are norms rooted in child protection. 

I hope they mean supporting “evidence based interventions” because currently they appear to be siding with an ideology with a poor evidence base. 

There is of course always the chance that I am reading too much into this, so I had a look at their publications and this was the first one I came across on “Looked After Kids” in the care sector. I have done a few posts on children in the care sector because they are over-represented in referrals to Gender Clinics. The language is steeped in the propaganda of Gender Identity Ideology.


So this is the background before I get to the meat of the document. There is a lot of money to be made in fostering unhappiness with your body. This is just a new branch of the self-commodification industry. Selling it as a Social Justice moment is genius. It is also a LIE.

As always any financial help would be much appreciated. I do this full time and have no income. This helps me purchase books and journal articles, where necessary, and to keep going.

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.




The Arcus Foundation is heavily invested in the dissemination of Transgender Ideology. To learn more about this you can do no better than reading Jennifer Bilek on this topic. This article here is a good summary.


Here is another one by Jennifer Bilek which is specifically focussed on the Arcus Foundation. 


The Arcus foundation has an online tool to check its grantees which you can find here:


Some foundations have a tool to extract the data to an excel spreadsheet which facilitates analysis. Unfortunately the Arcus Foundation don’t have an obvious way to do this so I manually populated 400 + lines of data, so I could pivot table and analyse where their Social Justice fund was allocated. I tracked from 2016 to April, 2021. I only looked at the Social Justice category but Arcus Foundation funds across many other areas. The scope of their largesse, arguably, means many organisations, who don’t propagate Gender Identity Ideology, may, nevertheless, be compromised by the financial benefits they derive from this association . (Bear in mind this is a live database so I noticed even historic descriptions of activities seemed to change. )

As you can see there was a total approaching $74 million dollars spent promoting Social Justice issues, during this period.  The majority had some aspect which promoted Gender Identity Ideology.  Where there was a focus 
2021-04-22 (7)on a particular region I noted it.  Where the project stated it’s aim was global I coded it to identify this ambition.  Where the project  identified international activity for specific regions I badged it “international” . I also noted the countries, identified as the focus, in the comments.  Note that many of the Arcus grantees  in turn, are also dispensing grants.  Thus, if a country you are interested in, does not appear to be a direct recipient it may, nevertheless, have received monies indirectly. 

For convenience I badged the funding as LGBTQ but, in reality, some of the grants omit the Q and others emphasise an I (for intersex). Some project detail is clearly focussed on sexual orientation but the project is still badged as variations of “LGBT”. I assume the Q is dropped, in some projects, because “queer” doesn’t have any currency in the countries where they are funelling funds.

Here is the spreadsheet.


A notable feature of the grants illustrates the tactic of forced teaming. This is where Trans Ideology proponents feign (?) alliances with established movements to establish “common cause” and piggy back on their reputations. The most obvious one is gay rights. Indeed Arcus donated $142,000 to Stonewall (Former Gay Rights Charity in the UK). This was just before Stonewall added the T to LGB and expanded their remit to cover Transgender issues. This was one grant. They also provided an additional $42,000 to support a project called “Rainbow Laces” to bring the LGBTQ into sport.

Arcus also gave Stonewall $75,000 to be involved in roundtable discussions to convince Business to back the LGBTQ because it was “good business strategy”. The aim was to “swing” these countries to their agenda.


At the time Stonewall changed direction it may have appeared, to their organisation, that the battles had been won in the United Kingdom.  I disagree.  The homophobia directed at our proto-gay youth has not gone away.  It may not have been as lucrative a cause but they could have done some good work in the U.K. They could also have campaigned to fight for the rights of Gay Men and Lesbians abroad.  They could have worked to stop the horrendous abuse of Gay men and Lesbians, in Iran, who were not accepted as homosexual but could have their surgery funded if they adopted a Trans-Identity.  Instead they opted for a more lucrative (?) path. 

It does not seem to have occurred to the bigwigs at Stonewall that the fight to defend same sex orientation depends on acknowledging that sex is a material reality. Transgender Ideology denies the reality of sex and therefore sex based attraction. That’s one of many conflicts between Trans rights and those of other groups.

But back to the Arcus Foundation:

Looking at the detail of these projects it was rare to find one that focussed on sexual orientation exclusively. Even where the project looked at same sex orientation the project was still labelled a variant of “LGBT” or “LGBTQ” to, effectively, join the causes together. By contrast there was a sizeable sum spent on exclusively “transgender” issues.

2021-04-21 (6)

9 million dollars allocated to exclusively Transgender causes. Interestingly if you search for the mention of “transmen” specific projects you will not find any. However some of the projects detailed do focus on “Transwomen” usually Transwomen of colour.

As I have noted before “transmen” tend to get deployed when they are pregnant or when it is easier to argue aganst the, sex based, rights of biological women. Their omission from any specific projects aimed at the needs of “transmen” screams good, old-fashioned, sexism to me!

It appears another tactic was to join with women Fighting for reproductive justice. This means that women’s fight to control their fertility is hijacked with trans organisations hitching their wagon to these long running campaigns. This grant is pretty transparent about its “strategic collaboration”.


2021-04-21 (1)

Another surprise, to me, is how much of a proportion is going to religious organisations including Evangelical Christians and Muslim organisations. Next time anyone tells you that you are in an alliance with religious groups heres a screenshot to share! Over $10 and a half million to religiouis organisations. These organisations were not simply those who you might have expected to hold liberal, progressive views on homosexuality or Gender Identity. Instead many in the United States were explicity Evangelical Christian Organisations deep in what we may have come to know as Trump supporting territory.

A couple of examples appear below from Atlanta, Georgia and Texas.

You will find similiar examples of “forced teaming” if you look at the grants focussed on racial justice or homelessness. There are also lots of grants to organisations looking at strategic litigation in the area of LGBTQ or exlusively “Transgender” organisations. A few projects are also engaged in educating/lobbying employees of the United Nations.

Many of the entries also talk of funding to “grow grassroots” activists. Somebody should explain that grassroots movements emerge organically. When you are targetting millions of dollars of funding to “grow” a movement you are engaged in Astro-turfing not grass roots activism.

The media narrative also comes in for some skilful manipulation. These are the organisations involved in journalism or documentary film-making who are taking the Arcus Cash. The explicit aim is to ensure media coverage is shaped by the Trans Lobby.

2021-04-22 (9)

This is an example of the way these grants are described: To “ensure that coverage is either neutral or positive”. Also to be organised to ensure a response to any negative media coverage. Journalism? or Advocacy?


As many of us are trying to point out to radical leftist groups who are screaming “transwomen are women” ,or other mindless mantras, mainly at feminists of the left, you are being manipulated by billionnaires. This is not a grass roots movement its an elite project and there is a lot of money to be made in fostering a bodily dissassociative condition that unmoors us from our sexed bodies.

If you can support my work it would be greatly appreciated. If you can’t please share.


Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income). All my content is open access so if you can’t speak publicly, and want to support those who can, only IF you have spare cash, this helps me keep going.


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 womansplaceuk.org.  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.