Tag: Gender Dysphoria

Tavistock: Domenico Di Ceglio 2

Domenico Di Ceglio set up the childhood and adolescent services at the Gender Identity Development Service (G.I.Ds) at the Tavistock. This is part two on a talk he gave at a conference on “Transgender” issues. You can find the rest of my series, on the Tavistock, below.

Tavistock 

You can watch the talk on YouTube, below. 👇

Domenico Di Ceglie

Part one is here

Tavistock: Domenico Di Ceglio

This is the title of that talk. Transgender , Gender and Psychoanalysis, with this subtitle.

In part one Di Ceglie covers his motivation for setting up the children and adolescent service at G.I.Ds; the astronomic growth of referrals and the tensions between staff who wished to provide only therapeutic support, to children, and those who advocated for the administration of puberty blockers. As suggested by the title he uses metaphors to convey his role in managing these tensions. A psychoanalyst might suggest that this allows him to distance himself from the choices he made during his tenure.

We pick up at around the 30 minute mark. Di Ceglie is using the myth of Scylla and Charibdys, from Ulysses, to convey his position at the Tavistock. Both Scylla and Charibdys pose a risk to Ullyses and his sailors but only Charbdys can sink the ship. Ullysses, therefore, steers close to Scylla even though he knows she will snatch some of his sailors and crush them with her grip, before swallowing them. Di Ceglie clearly feels the service is under threat so he needs to balance these risks and sacrifices will have to be made.

Di Ceglie then reflects that it was the more valiant of Ulysses’ sailors who fell victim to Scylla and offers an explanation with reference to G.I.Ds staff calling them ”crusaders,” , which is very revealing.

He explains that the Tavistock tries to steer a middle way neither neglecting the mind nor the body. He claims that they work to break the cycle of secrecy and shame involved in an atypical gender identity. He further argues that the foster uncertainty about the outcomes for any child. I don’t see how this is compatible with this statement: If we are allowing a social transition and puberty blockers there is near certainty (98%) of progression to cross sex hormones. They will be sterile and, as we saw in part one, they will have near zero chance of any orgasmic capacity.

He is also keen to dispel any suggestion that they practice ”reparative” therapy i.e that they seek to reconcile the child with their sex/sexuality. I imagine this is motivated by the wish to avoid the fate of the Canadian Gender Clinic which he mentions more than once during the talk. (Ken Zucker’s clinic was accused of practicing conversion therapy on gender confused kids and his clinic shut down. He won a legal case but was not restored to his post)

He does share a case study of a natal male who adopted a female identity, following the death of his grandmother. After giving him some help to articulate his grief he reconciled to his sex and desisted.

He further claims that clinics who are rigid in their approach to these children run the risk of embedding the cross gender identity even further. He may be correct in this but, again, it does not square with the medical treatments. He does, thankfully, recognise an 80% desistance rate if allowed to go through a natural puberty; shame he does not include how many end up good old-fashioned homosexuals.

Clearly the clinic are making judgements that some children are unlikely to change their minds. This clip suggests early onset gender dysphoria is believed to be more intractable.

He next speculates that gender dysphoria is more intractable with those with paranoid schizophrenic tendencies and even those who have been subject to traumatic events in childhood. This is starting to echo the criteria used to dish out lobotomies or Electric Shock treatment.

Empathising versus Systematising.

This looks at the work of Simon Baron-Cohen who conducted research into children with atypical ”gender ” development and seems to be driven by defining certain behaviours more ”male” / “female” and, presumably, looking for evidence of “true trans“. Unsurprisingly females scored higher on empathy and men on systems. Between a likely biological predisposition and female socialisation women’s scores are , to me, unremarkable. What did surprise me was the scores for trans-identifying males. While they did score lower on “systemising”, than the control of males who were not identifying as ”transgender”, they also had lower scores for empathy. Curiously although Di Ceglie talks of the value of further research into identifying potential desisters this does not appear to have been a research area of interest to the staff at the Tavistock.

Di Ceglie claims it is possible to identify good candidates for early intervention. Not on e does he refer to detransitioners but they may not have been as significant a phenomenon when this conference took place. The YouTube video was uploaded two years ago but it may have pre-dated the Kiera Bell case. It would be interesting to know if he is paying attention to the rising rates of regret.

At the end of the conference Di Ceglie rushes through his final slides so I had to slow down the speed to take screen grabs. He has two slides on the benefits of early transition quoting research papers from 2006 i.e before the current surge in transgender kids /youth. He also claims that puberty blockers are ”considered to be fully reversible“ on one slide but look at the next slide, it directly contradicts this statement.

What are the risks?

It is unclear what the long term impact is on bone development, height, sex organ development it may affect brain development, and it may even lock in the Gender Dysphoria.

Those are some big risks!

Now we have a growing number of detransitioners the chickens may be comimg home to roost. Currently there are 35,000 members on the reddit detrans forum. It is growing at an alarming rate.

In part three I will cover the question and answer session.

You can support my work here. Every donation helps because we are up against billionaires funding this ideology, globally. Contrary to the propaganda I am not funded by Evangelical Christians, the Far Right or Viktor Orban. I rely on donations to cover my costs but do not donate if you are on a limited income.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on our gay /autistic youth, kids in care as well as the sex based rights of women and adult homosexuals, especially Lesbians.

£10.00

Tavistock: Domenico Di Ceglio 1

Domenico Di Ceglio set up the childhood and adolescent services at the Gender Identity Development Service (G.I.Ds) at the Tavistock. You can find the rest of my series, on the Tavistock, below.

Tavistock 

To provide some background to a piece on the David Taylor report, into G.I.Ds, I did some research into the man who set up the children’s service. Domenico Di Ceglie can be seen on this YouTube of a conference contribution he made. 👇

Domenico Di Ceglie

This is the title of that talk. Transgender , Gender and Psychoanalysis, with this subtitle.

First he provides his motivation for setting up the service, he admits it was a new area for him until he encountered a teenage girl, who had attempted suicide three times and believed she should have been male. According to Di Ceglie she went on to identify as Ian and was suicidal no more. It was this patient, who wished her parents could have seen someone when she was five, that prompted the setting up of the service. Not everyone accepted this idea without question and someone raised the law of unintended consequences. In the retelling Di Ceglie seemed to think this an amusing moment. (I wonder if he is still laughing as we see more and more post ”transition” regret.)

This reminded me of a conversation I had with an adult male, who self-describes as a ”transsexual”; he observed that the Tavistock provided a solution that created the phenomenon. Or to use a phrase from the business world used in the Kevin Costner film, Field of Dreams:

”If you build it they will come”.

He then uses two Freud quotes and proceeds to talk about the impact of the ”uncertainty principle” in this field. This principle is actually derived from physics but it has acquired a more general use in terms of the difficulty in predicting human behaviour, or their development trajectories. I am sure there are some sound arguments for accepting this ability to tolerate ambiguity, in a therapeutic setting, but it does rather the beg the question about subjecting children as young as 10 on irreversible, medicalised, pathways. We used to accept the certainty we would grow up to be Adult Human Females or Males, needless to say this is still true.

He then introduces Pablo Neruda, the poet, from the Film, The Postman, explaining metaphors to a Greek Postman. Again, it is a perfectly charming clip, but this seems strangely whimsical when you are actually discussing serious medical interventions, in children.

John Money and Robert Stoller

Next we learn about two pioneers working in this field. John Money, for those of you who are unaware, was a pioneer in this field. He is infamous for intervening in the life of a child who had suffered a medical accident which removed his penis. David Rheimer was a twin which provided the perfect experiment in bringing him up as a, putative, girl. As, it turns out the two boys afforded access to children for Money who was subsequently outed as a paedophile. Both boys committed suicide. There is no explicit acknowledgement of the allegations against Money, only a reference to him being a ”controversial figure at the end of his life”.
Both Stoller and Money sensed the revolutionary impact of the concept of a “Gender Identity” or ”Role” which is at odds with your physical embodiment. Stoller puts it clearest here: 👇 The replacing of a subjective, sense of self, a ”gendered soul”; irrespective of your sexed body.

Money, talking in 1992, prophesied the societal revolution we are witnessing in 2022, with a reorganisation of society which is disregarding sex based rights. The obscured word at the end of this quote is ”principles”

Di Ceglie acknowledges that the ascendance of this idea has had huge, societal ramifications but, of course, there is no space to address the disproportionate impact on the female sex. He also seems quite excited about this social revolution comparing it to Copernicus who discovered that the earth rotated around the son and not the other way around. I should add that Copernicus made a discovery of fact he did not invent an unprovable theory of innate gender identity.

Brain sex #LadyBrain

In this section Di Ceglie concedes that attempts to prove a biological basis for ”gender identity’ have foundered.

At the same time he makes this astonishing claim which needs to be highlighted. He does not think we will ever have incontrovertible evidence because this is “beyond human”. The problem is we are not dealing with post-human society he is dealing with human beings. This statement looks like a nod to ”transhumanism”.

In this next section he covers the steep rise in referrals to G.I.Ds between 1989 to 2015. Most of you will be familiar with the fact we have had a 4000% increase in female patients; a complete inversion of the sex ratio as well as a dramatic lowering of the age profile. Same sex attracted youth are over-represented and not singled out for specific mention, neither is the prevalence of referrals of teenage girls with no concomitant rise of referrals of middle aged women. Surely if this was a product of more social acceptance we would see a surge in late transitioning females? Thankfully, whilst Di Ceglie shows little curiosity about this phenomenon we do have the words of his colleague, Bernadette Wren.

Cutting edge of a social revolution

Unfortunately, for us, you are literally cutting into the bodies of our children as part of this ”revolution”. Teenage girls with extreme body hatred is not new phenomenon as Wren knows very well.

Di Ceglie also uses a number of metaphors to explore his feelings about operating on the edge in terms of the Tavistock’s practices. If I were a psychoanalyst I might suggest that using metaphors, rather than grounded language conceals what he is actually enabling, perhaps even from himself. In plainer language he explains there is a fear of both action and inaction in relation to these children . There are pressures from within and without the clinic to begin prescribing puberty blockers, to children as young as 11. Some within the service wanted to limit their role to therapy, while others were keen to prescribe puberty blockers, early, in what was known as the Dutch protocol. As we now know, the latter group prevailed. Di Ceglie explores this debate by reference to Greek myths rather than saying, in plain language, the cost benefit analysis means we will sometimes treat the ”wrong” children. The correct number of children to be medicalised, for me, is zero. No child should be sterilised and have zero capacity to orgasm. You may be skeptical of this claim so I will share the words of Marci Bowers. Bowers is a surgeon and also a “trans” identified male. He performed surgery on Jazz Jennings. These children are being robbed of their sexual pleasure.

Autism

Later he will acknowledge the high number of autistic referrals and reference a theory that links this to atypical levels of testosterone in utero leading to ”masculine” brain type. My own theory, while I don’t wholly dismiss some, sex specific, biological imprint on male and female brains, is that *some* autistic girls are not as efficient at absorbing female socialisation. Conversely, I have also seen female socialisation as an explanation for why *some* autistic girls become adept at ”masking” /mimicking their peers so are often diagnosed late in life. (I will come back to Autism in a the next piece because it is a complex area. )

I will cover the rest of this YouTube in a further blog because there was more on autism and one person pushed him on the issue of high rates of referrals with same sexual orientation. I will leave you with Bob’s excellent question.

Questions

Bob Withers.

Bob asked an excellent question which goes to the heart of the matter. I have done a series on Bob’s work. (Link below).

Bob Withers: Series.

Now we have a growing number of detransitioners the chickens may be comimg home to roost. Currently there are 35,000 members on the reddit detrans forum. It is growing at an alarming rate.

You can support my work here. Every donation helps because we are up against billionaires funding this ideology, globally. Contrary to the propaganda I am not funded by Evangelical Christians, the Far Right or Viktor Orban. I rely on donations to cover my costs but do not donate if you are on a limited income.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on our gay /autistic youth, kids in care as well as the sex based rights of women and adult homosexuals, especially Lesbians.

£10.00

Tavistock: Taylor Report

This is a report raising concerns about the Tavistock from way back in 2005. The report was released following a Freedom of Information request in 2020. Concerns are still being raised, approaching 25 years later. This is part of a series on the Tavistock. You can find the rest on this page:

Tavistock Series

Taylor Report: Link below

FOI_20-21117_2005_David_Taylor_Report

The report is intended for an internal audience so the language may be somewhat impenetrable, for the lay person. What it tells us is that, as far back as 2005, there were disagreements within the clinical team. This conflict had major implications for the treatment of children referred to the Tavistock. Since the clinic began referring children for Puberty Blockers, in 2011, it seems those who believed some children would not respond to therapeutic interventions, won the day.

To provide some background I did some research into the man who set up the children’s service. Domenico Di Ceglie can be seen on this YouTube talk.

Domenico Di Cegile

Domenico Di Ceglie

This is something he stated in this presentation. He seemed to think this was an amusing movement. I wonder if he is still laughing.

It would be worthwhile covering this presentation in a separate blog but these were the key things that stood out for me. Di Ceglie concedes there is no confirmation that the condition has a biological origin; he repeats the argument that puberty blockers are reversible (they are not); he acknowledges the high rates of autism in referrals but but not the high rates of referrals with same sex attraction. It is left to an audience member to ask him about this and his answer mirrors that of trans activists by his response that some males can be ”Lesbians”. As this is a childhood and adolescent service no mention is made of autogynephilia but this is a mistake since average age of first porn exposure is 9 years old; we may be seeing sexual fetishes at an earlier age.

Bob Withers.

Bob asked an excellent question which goes to the heart of the matter.

From this presentation it is clear that De Ceglie believes his service provides a ”third way” somewhere which is part affirmative and partially exploratory. He is keen to dispel any accusations of “Conversion Therapy” and it is clear the organisation was coming under a great deal of pressure from the referrals, their parents and Trans Lobby groups. At one point he uses a Frankenstein reference and I wonder if, deep down, he knows he created a monster?

Back to David Taylor

Taylor’s report makes it clear there were real tensions at the Tavistock. In part these were due to external pressures, from Trans Lobby groups, who were pushing for earlier interventions. There were also internal schisms between staff, at least one of whom is a trans-identified male. Other staff, who are amongst those who would leave the Tavistock, were gay and felt that same sex attracted youth were at risk of, unnecessary, medical intervention; ”Transing The Gay Away”. The kernel of the issue is summed up by this quote:

The professional differences of opinion were between those who sought to address gender dysphoria by exploring “psychic reality” versus those who sought to validate the wished for identity. Even in 2005 it seems it would be seen as inflammmatory to say ”biological reality”. Taylor outlines three approaches practices by different clinicians.

Psychological model

See’s the development of Gender Dysphoria as multi-factorial and considers issues such as same sex attraction, unstable identity, due to a disrupted childhood, perhaps including bereavement. Therapeutic approaches are prioritised and biological reality is affirmed.

Psychsocial Model.

Gender Identity is a preference for a particular social role and therapeutic approaches are more geared to facilitate ”gender transition”.

Genetic or neuro-genetic model.

In this model there is a belief that the origins of Gender Dysphoria has a biological cause. As we have seen there is no strong evidence for this but lots of theories. The proponents of this model tend towards what Taylor calls ”therapeutic pessimism”. For these clinicians any attempt to reconcile a patient to their sex is akin to conversion therapy.

You can see why the conflict arose. Gay members of staff thinking they are presiding over Gay Conversion therapy and trans identified staff thinking this is Trans Conversion Therapy.

Patient / Parental Pressure.

The rise of the Mermaids (Activist) parent who wants early intervention is already a factir as early as 2005.👇

Puberty Blockers

The formal launch of the experiment of giving puberty blockers did not commence until 2011 but it was this demand that was clearly exacerbating tensions. At this time clinicians were still describing them as facilitating a “delay” but, in fact, at least 98% progress to cross sex hormones and an irreversible path to sterility.

The report makes it clear that there was a dearth of research in this area: 👇

What actually happened was that the Tavistock began to treat children as young as 10 with puberty blockers. This was under the guise of a research project which was refused ethical approval at the first attempt. This was clearly to appease the “therapeutic pessimists” from the genetic /neuro-genetic camp.

Michael Biggs did excellent analysis of this, purported, research project. I covered it here:

TAVISTOCK 4 : Michael Biggs

Now we have a growing number of detransitioners the chickens may be comimg home to roost. Currently there are 35,000 members on the reddit detrans forum. It is growing at an alarming rate. I have done a few pieces on detransitioners. Link below.

Detransition: Series Summary

You can support my work here. Every donation helps because we are up against billionaires funding this ideology, globally. Contrary to the propaganda I am not funded by Evangelical Christians, the Far Right or Viktor Orban.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on our gay /autistic youth, kids in care as well as the sex based rights of women and adult homosexuals, especially Lesbians.

£10.00

Dr Ann Lawrence: Interview

To finish of this series I decided to listen to the interview with Stella O’Malley and Sasha Ayad for the Gender: A wider Lens series. It is undoubtedly a coup to be granted a rare interview with Dr Ann Lawrence. You can listen here:

Dr Ann Lawrence interview

For those of you unfamiliar with the series, Lawrence identifies as a Male ”Transsexual” and is open about his motivation to ”transition”; namely Autogynephilia, a sexual paraphilia. Definition below.

O’Malley is a psychotherapists and Ayad is a Licenced adolescent therapist both deal with young, clients who present with Gender Dysphoria. Needless to say I am not privvy to their client list but it seems reasonable to suppose some of their clients must appear to fall into the AGP category. I have seen at least one YouTuber describing his sexual motivation to identify as female even though it is usually a paraphilia associated with older males. We, perhaps, have the near ubiquity of porn to thank for this phenomenon.

Lawrence writes a lot about adult, AGP males and their tendency to reconstruct their childhood memories to deemphasise the sexual motivations for their ”transition” so I always listen with a degree of skepticism about AGP narratives. Lawrence is a controversial figure among what is called the “Trans” community for being willing to acknowledge autogynephilia. This probably makes him more honest than most but very early in the interview he makes a claim that even children can present with autogynephilia. I am immediately uncomfortable with this framing. I will become more uncomfortable when he talks about documented cases, in sexology literature, of penile erections in toddlers when allowed to play with female clothing. I have not located these sources but I am immediately concerned about the veracity of these claims or, if the research exists, the ethics of any research into the erections of three year olds. One of the central tenets of queer theory involves the rejection of social norms and many activists seem to get a perverse kick in exploring the darker side of human impulses, paedophilia and zoophilia being two.

Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria

Asked about this phenomenon it is clear that Lawrence has not encountered the work of Lisa Littman who coined the term (ROGD). On the one hand Lawrence says his own parents would have seen his case as Rapid Onset gender Dysphoria but he is also keen that his work is out there so AGP males have an explanation of their ”condition”. On social contagion he concedes that it is very difficult to be female in this society so, in the age of the internet, rising numbers of females in flight from their sex don’t surprise him. I wonder if Lawrence is self-aware enough to know that one of the difficulties women and girls face is the hyper-sexualisation of of our bodies. Autogynephilic men are literally projecting their sexist notions of what makes a woman onto their own bodies but also, by extension onto the bodies of all women. They associate being female with feeling sexually aroused which is inherently sexist. I don’t think Lawrence understands his role in the discomfort girls feel about their bodies once puberty hits, he laments the fact that women and girls are disrespected by broader society but lacks self-awareness of his own contribution to the treatment of women.

On the role of the internet Lawrence says had he had access to the internet he would likely have ”transitioned” earlier. As it was he left it till he was in his forties, at the time of the interview he was 71.

Narcissistic Rage

Lawrence is good in this segment as he talks about how many AGP males deal with their shame by projecting anger and exhibit entitlement with a lack of empathy. I covered his paper on this topic earlier in the series: 👇

Autogynephilia & Narcissistic Rage

Transwidows

Asked about transwidows, Lawrence expresses sympathy for both wives and children of ”transitioned” fathers. Lawrence says entering a marriage with severe autogynephilia to be cautious about entering marriage, especially if they are embarking on marriage as a ”cure”; especially if your erotic urges are entirely self-directed. Stella brings up the stories of AGP husbands who are abusive. Lawrence does not really address the abuse but concedes it can be very harmful to have an AGP family member.

Final thoughts.

Lawrence ends with his thoughts on teenage males who exhibit autogynephilia. He imagines a past where he would have had himself castrated to avoid any masculinisation. He makes the case for AGP as a sexual orientation which is immutable. He believes there are intelligent boys who know their own mind at thirteen or fourteen and these boys should be allowed to obtain medical intervention. As an aside he references the practice of castrating boys to create singers with a better voice range (Castratos). He is mainly concerned about better cosmetic outcomes.

He finishes with a debt of acknowledgement to Ray Blanchard.

I doubt Lawrence would have agreed to a more challenging interview format and the fact that Stella and Sasha are both therapists, and possibly also because they are female, may have prompted Lawrence to agree to speak. Any attempt to legitimise autogynephilia as a sexual orientation should, in my view, be fiercely resisted. Similarly agreeing medical intervention at 13 or 14 for any male is a dangerous suggestion. Lawrence focuses on the ability of the adult male to better pass and suggests there is a route back for males who take this path. Naturally occurring sex hormones play a pivotal role in pubertal development; which continues up to age 25. Blocking puberty does not just stop the developing of genitalia but also has an impact on brain development which is poorly understood. Lawrence is projecting his own, adult, wish fulfilment onto adolescent boys.

If you can donate to help with costs for this blog you can do so here:

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching gender identity ideology and it’s impact on women’s rights as well as the impact on gay rights.

£10.00

Dating while transgender 1

This will be a series looking at the experience of people, with a trans-identity, who are embarking on dating lives. I will look first at this research.

Transgender+Exclusion+-+Blair+&+Hoskin+2018CV

Here is the abstract. As you can see they express surprise that Lesbians exclude biological males! 😳. That should give you your first clue.

Funded by Federal Government.

Please not that this is funded via a Research Council which attracts Federal Funding. So this is no longer a fringe ideology. This has State backing.

More on the funding body.

Background

Things you are expected to believe before you begin. Sex is an arbitrary classification system. Someone’s proclaimed ”gender identity” takes precedence over biological sex. Excluding trans-identified people from your dating pool is akin to racism. By not dating this group you are denying trans-people vital, social support. Sexual orientation is “fluid” so you cannot hide behind a Lesbian/Gay identity. Data that includes both men and women in the opposite sex category makes sense.

The research begins with a whistle-stop tour of dating history covering the, relatively new, emergence of dating based on personal preferences. Marrying for love is a new social norm. They proceed to cover the fact that inter-racial marriage and marrying across class boundaries has, historically, been frowned upon. Many of these unions were seen as immoral and even disgusting. They even have the cheek to point out how recent the acceptance of same sex relationships is; whilst simultaneously problematising Lesbians, who exclude males who identify as “transgender women”.

They proceed to make up words to imply choosing your partner, based on their biological sex is a new form of societal prejudice, to be overcome.

Reality Check!

I was moved to add a series on this topic because these arguments, intended to unmoor us from our sex bodies, are gaining traction, in elite discourse. They are now also taught to our children /youth.

I have had personal DM’s from young females who now identify as gay men. What sort of dating future awaits these vulnerable females? This is one outcome: 👇

Here a gay man defends his sexual boundaries:

Here Ray Blanchard points out that these females are in for a rude awakening.

Back to Phallus in Wonderland

This research attempted to assess how ”trans-inclusive are modern dating patterns. They asked 960 people to indicate if they would date a trans-identified person. (Sample dropped to 958 because two were not interested in sexual relationships.) This is a graph of the responses.

People were categorised by their sexual orientation and whether they were a ”man”, ”woman” or in one of the variously labelled “queer” categories. It is quite confusing because the categories are based on how you identify, until they disaggregate the data by natal sex (which they call “cisgender”.) They don’t provide graphs which display ”cisgender” choices because this would invalidate the trans-identified people. Of course it doesn’t make sense without referencing ”cisgender“ dating preferences so you can find it if you read carefully.

What this means is that even when including people with a trans-identity, as if they were their desired sex, patterns of exclusion still remain high. There does not appear to be a graph showing participants by their natal sex, even in the, published, supplementary data. They do state that patters of exclusion were higher in ”cisgender” people. Only 13% of people, who acknowledge their biological sex, say they would be open to dating someone who wishes to be treated as the opposite sex/claim another ”trans” label.

The authors offer a number of explanations for this strange phenomenon; which has evolved over millennia to further the survival of the species. The idea that sexual attraction can be dismissed as a societal prejudice is ludicrous. There are many theories about why homosexuality evolved but the existence of same sex attraction is now being widely dismissed by trans-activists. It is even more egregious when you consider the fight for same sex attraction to be accepted. Heterosexuals have not had to fight for our rights so it is interesting that the most trans-inclusive demographic (Lesbians), outside of the ”queer” identified, come in for the most criticism.

Where did the Lesbian’s go “wrong”.

Apparently it is not enough to accept trans-identified people in your dating pool. You have to be inclusive in the correct way. In order to expose trans-inclusive Lesbians the author invented the idea of ”congruent” dating. By this logic it is argued that Lesbians are attracted to ”women” and thus, theoretically, should be open to dating women and men who identify as women. In news that should surprise nobody the trans-inclusive Lesbians are only accepting of “transmen” i.e. persons of the same sex. This is variously described as “misgendering” and evidence of biological determinism.

Other explanations

Different suggestions for the exclusionary/ incongruent dating practices were advanced.

Perhaps some were confused by the definitions? 🤔

Cis-sexism/Cisgenderism. People *still* don’t see trans-bodies as ”natural”. Perhaps they are hyper-focused on genitals?

Another argument was put forward about the higher rates of exclusion of trans-identified males. This was ascribed to “masculine privilege”. The author’s argue that society privileges the ”masculine presenting” which means feminine-expressing males are subject to an extra layer of prejudice. Thus, in clownfish world, the normal hierarchy of the male sex in a position of dominance has been inverted in clownfish world.

Can you be overly-inclusive?

Turns out you can! Some people displayed incongruent dating patterns by including gender identities they are not supposed to be attracted to. So, if a trans-man, who identifies as gay, include a (female) Lesbian and a trans-man they are being untrue to their same gender attraction. Any combination that deviates from the gender rules risks undermining core tenets of the religious texts. Turns out some trans-identifying people are having sex like gender apostates!

Can you be transphobic and ”trans”?

Yep! Turns out some ”trans-men” who are ”heterosexual” only want to date “cisgender” women. This is put down to an excessive need for validation. By excluding males, who identify as women they are behaving like a cisgender supremacist.

Turns out even those with a transgender identity can be guilty of believing in sexual dimorphism and be guilty of being a trans person in the tweets and a Terf between the sheets.

Turns out the heretics are inside the house! We did not even get into enbyphobia!

Turns out it is not so easy to socially engineer a new reality denying ideology. Finally, after all the rape-adjacent rhetoric the authors claim they are not denying bodily autonomy and free choice about our sexual partners.

No! We just want you to examine your prejudice.

There was a lot to unpack in this paper so I may revisit it.

You can support my work here: All donations are welcome, but only if you have spare cash and want to amplify dissenting voices, and offset the billions funding the dissemination of Gender Identity Ideology.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on women’s rights, gay rights and healthy, young bodies.

£10.00

NHS: Court Case: Surgery

The following Court Case was referenced in an NHS policy, from 2007, which would appear to have been written by Transgender Lobby groups.

I covered that policy in this piece:

NHS Trans Policy

The court transcript if you wish to read, in full, is linked below: 👇

North West Lancashire Health Authority v A & Ors [1999] EWCA Civ 2022 (29 July 1999)

The original case was taken by three trans-identified males who had been refused NHS funding for their ”sexual reassignment surgery”. The case hinged on whether Health Authority was operating a blanket ban on the surgeries or, as they claimed, taking each case on it’s merits. The particular context was a more restrictive policy, adopted in 1995, which focused expenditure on cases with an ”overriding clinical need”.

The details of the original appellants were as follows: All male but all claiming a ”female sexual identity”. Each, we are told, had been ”living as a woman” ; which begs the question how is a woman supposed to live? It is on this subjective, sexist, notion the foundations of the Gender Industrial Complex rest. 😳

In this case the apellant is the Health Authority who are appealing an earlier decision, by Judge Hidden, that declared their policy unlawful. The three trans-identified males claim the policy is irrational because they are ill and in need of the surgery. The Authority counter that the have limited financial resources, they are required to prioritise and ”transsexualism” is, rightly, they argue, deemed low priority. As an aside, the cost of this surgery, in 1995, was £8000. The judgement also highlights that the condition was understood as a mental disorder at that time. 👇

Medical Procedures of no proven benefit!

The Authority set out it’s thinking about the surgical procedures deemed to yield little benefit.

”Gender Reassignment” was identified, along with cosmetic surgery, as one area where they would no longer purchase the medical intervention. The exception made was where a substantial body of medical opinion attested to it’s effectiveness. The document added the following:

The Authority categorised ”Gender Reassignment as a procedure not backed by “carefully conducted, scientific, research” and expressed the view that it is uncertain whether the surgery was ”effective, ineffective or harmful”.

The policy did allow for an exception if an overriding clinical need could be established but a diagnosis of ”Gender Identity Disorder” was not deemed sufficient by itself. The post-holder, tasked with making these decisions, was the Director of Public Health and Public Policy. The trans-identified males’ cases were all examined in 1996/97 and surgery was refused. One of the men claimed the refusal had triggered their epilepsy. No evidence was produced to either substantiate the epilepsy or that transsexualism had any link to the development of epilepsy.

Dr Suddell was the post holder tasked with justifying these decisions which were, he argued, based on competing priorities, cost effectiveness and also the efficacy of the treatment. He set out his arguments below: 👇

Dr Suddell argued there was uncertainty about the benefits, pointed out it was the only condition that involved destroying healthy body parts and he expressed the view it was more beneficial for the patient to reconcile to their biology. He also cast doubt on the medical literature which claimed an 88% success rate, pointed out the lack of controlled, randomised trials, lack of research into long-term outcomes and bias on behalf of those producing the literature. All points which continue to be raised, to this day.

Those acting for the patients advanced the following to rebut these claims. All of those named are involved in the Gender Industrial Complex. They argue that the fact that the body parts are healthy overlooks the Transsexual’s ill health; which will persist until the offending body parts are removed. They also argue any attempt to reconcile a patient to their biology is ineffective and unethical.

Dr Russell Reid

At this point it is worth taking a closer looking at one of the people providing expert testimony: Dr Russell Reid.

Dr Russell Reid was found guilty of serious professional misconduct. His case was covered in the Guardian. He was accused of rushing five patients into sex changing treatments

One of his patients was in the grip of manic depression and only narrowly avoided an unnecessary double mastectomy.

Another was a convicted paedophile who was given the surgery and now regrets it.

A further patient, who you may know from twitter 👇 was disgusted that he was not struck off and was involved in further litigation against Reid.

Claudia McClean

Back to the Judgement

This case was heralded as a victory by Transgender Lobby Groups. It is true that the Authority were taken to task for claiming they did not operate a blanket ban on these procedures and their policy was deemed unlawful. They were not, however, required to provide automatic surgery based on the arguments put forward; which were based on arguments about interference with their Human Rights. The Judges were critical of the use of the European Court of Human Rights, by those acting for the respondents, and spent quite a long time explaining why.

The final decision was a recognition that the Authority can have regard to resource allocation but, in this case, they have acknowledged “transsexualism” as an illness and their policy is not clear about how they determine “overriding clinical need”. Activists may trumpet these victories but the creation of a medically dependent ”Transgender” class is a victory for predatory capitalism.

YOU ARE THE PRODUCT!

If you are able to support my work you can do so here.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on women’s rights, gay rights and the health of vulnerable children funnelled to Gender Clinics.

£10.00

Sex by deception: 2

This is part two looking at the issue of sex by deception. Part 1 looked at a court case involving a female who was prosecuted for engaging in sexual activity with another female who believed she was male. The post includes the judicial transcript for her appeal and some links to legal commentary. You may be surprised to find there are legal opinions that seek to abolish the offence, of obtaining sex by ”Gender Identity Fraud”. You can read that post here: 👇

Sex by deception: 1

This post looks at a short BBC documentary asking the question:

The interviews are mainly conducted with people who identify as ”transgender” although one female was interviewed who did not claim a transgender identity. The documentary also included a survey asking the same question to a wider population. They then presenting the findings to show responses split for age demographics.

You can watch the documentary, available for a further 11 months, here: 👇

Should I disclose?

The presenter introduces his trans-identified friends to canvas opinion. The question hinges on the idea of whether it is the business of a sexual partner, potential or actual, to know your biological sex. The Gender Recognition Act builds in certain privacy protections for those who hold a Gender Recognition Certificate and, it is argued by some, these, potentially extend, to anyone with a ”transgender” identity. However, as shown in the previous post, this does not extend to lying to intimate partners and doing so has resulted in successful prosecutions.

We first meet Maya who talks about hiding their identity from parents; leaving the house as a boy and, with the help of clothes and a wig, going to work as a ”girl”. They then talk about their fears about “transition”. The idea this is a life and death decision is often deployed on this topic.

Next up we hear from Noah who is in a same sex relationship with another female. Noah was the only girl in five siblings. Disclosure is theoretical for Noah as she was with her girlfriend before coming out. It’s still a worry about whether her girlfriend still thinks she is kissing “Nicola” not ”Noah”. Same sex attracted girls are, as already covered, over-represented in those identifying as ”male”.

Zac appears to be another same sex attracted female with a tell tale testosterone voice. Zac has had people leave ”him” because they wanted to be a Lesbian and who now is identifying as a heterosexual female. Like many of those interviewed Zac cannot predict the reactions of those he is ”getting” with, it could be a slap or a hug.

Harry is another same sex attracted female. Harry thinks you should disclose but the prospect is daunting. Even casual flings mean the person will have intimate information (I assume about your sex) about you.

Next Jax interviews Tyra who went viral, on TikTok for a post about not disclosing they were male on nights out. Tyra thinks it is nobody else’s business.

Tyra’s argument begins with the notion that they have had all the hormones and surgeries so, in their eyes, they have met the standard to regard themselves as a ”woman”.

Tyra says she is honest in their Tinder bio and when sexual intimacy is on the table but does not feel disclosure is required when kissing men on a night out. Tyra advances the safety argument for concealing this information. However, it is notable that trans-activists, also oppose any defence deployed when violence follows the discovery of deception about sex. This is known as a gay/trans panic defence and this is now outlawed in many states.

This is where the forced-teaming of gay with the T becomes problematic. In one of these there is no deceit and a man is using the ”gay panic” defence to legitimise homophobic violence. This may also be internalised homophobia if sexual activity has taken place, knowing this was a male. In neither case should violence be legitimised but only one of these involves deceit. The gay/trans panic defence is now outlawed in a number of U.S states.

I am not aware if these states, therefore, deny any redress for those who have been victims of sex by deception. It seems likely that sexual orientation and a free, and informed, choice about your sexual partner has been downgraded in favour of validation of a ”gender identity”.

Tyra is audibly frustrated by the notion that lying about your sex could be considered ”sexual assault” on being asked the question this is the response. 👇 Tyra puts this reaction to people being uneducated about ”trans” people and the problem is their expectations.

Jax then turns to a trans-identified male based in New York. They share a similar perspective to Tyra. They too have had ”all the surgeries” and feel they have left their ”trans” status behind. The arguments here are similar to those deployed by Alex Sharpe and other legal commentators in my previous blog. The argument goes, we all lie, about many things to get laid. Why single out biological sex when talking about having sex?

The documentary then reveals the result of a survey which reveals nearly 60% think you should disclose your ”trans” status/ your biological sex.

Split by age the figure was 61% thought you should disclose in the over 55’s but even in the younger demographic 41% said you should disclose. Only 18% were prepared to say you should hide the truth about your biological sex.

Jax then interviews Amy. Amy says she is open to dating anyone whether male, female, trans-identified etc. However she feels embarking on intimacy requires honesty. She also brings up the comfort of the sexual partner who needs to know what to expect. Nobody wants a six inch surprise when they are expecting Lesbian sex! Or to be told the vaginal sex which turns out to be with a “man”.

Kade takes a man home for sex and ”forgets” to tell him shes really a man. Realising she failed to be “honest” she reveals that he has actually just had sex with a man, irrespective of the vagina part.

Kade is dismissal of the response which is all about biology and puts it down to the man feeling discomfort about having a gay experience, with a woman!

Jay asks Kade the burning question.

Kade says the question is complicated. She then sighs and says she should not have to have a briefing every time she contemplates casual sex. If she had to give a yes or no answer it would be NO! Trans people should not feel obliges to tell the truth about their sex.

Gay men! Listen-up 😳🤔

Despite demanding we accept her self-redefinition of her own sex /sexuality she thinks it is perfectly acceptable to redefine someone else’s, and an entire demographic. Jax asks what Kade would say to her erstwhile sexual partner if she saw him again. Here was the reply. He is now GAY!

I honestly thought when females started identifying as gay men we would call a halt to the madness. I was wrong.

The BBC are grossly irresponsibly for not pointing out the illegality of some of the responses by the interviewees and I will be sending yet another complaint about their content. It is worth also pointing out that Stonewall want to ”reform” criminal justice in this area.

If you are sick of this, can’t say what you think, to keep your job, feel free to bung some support my way. I do this full-time and am unsalaried. By April 15th I should have a tiny, subsistence income but at the moment I rely on donations. The right wing, christian evangelicals seem to baulk at funding an atheist, feminist, leftie!

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching /Exposing the pernicious effects of Gender Identity Ideology on women’s rights, gay youth and who is pushing the social engineering that is rooted in sex denialism.

£10.00

Sex by deception: 1

R v McNally

A recent BBC short documentary discussed the ethics around disclosure of biological sex to persons with whom you are engaged in sexual activity. Nowhere in that documentary was any reference made to laws around sex by deception. Before I cover that documentary let us look at the conviction of a female who posed as a male and engaged in sexual activity with a female.

Here is the transcript of an appeal against sentence which outlines details of the offence and the legal judgement.

McNally v R. [2013] EWCA Crim 1051 (27 June 2013)

The judgement sets out the details as follows: The appellant was a 13 year old female and posed as a boy on the internet. ’M’ was also female. They communicated by messenger and over the following three years discussed getting married and starting a family and engaged in phone sex. They agreed to be in an exclusive relationship which culminated in ”Scott” visiting ’M’ just after her 16th birthday.

‘Scott’ arrived in London, presenting as a male with a dildo in her trousers to give the appearance of having a penis. There were four more visits and sexual activity took place.

Finally ‘M’s mother confronted Scott about his biological sex:

“Scott” had pleaded guilty to the offences so the appeal claims she was badly advised and did not realise it was incumbent on the Crown to prove that ’M’ did not know she was female. The legal advisors, from the first court case denied this and stated that ’Scott’ was told he could offer this as a defence but the fact that ’M’ had purchased condoms would be revealed to the jury who would have to judge who was telling the truth:

Following this advice “Scott” added the following to her statement and pleaded guilty.

The judge details the legal definition of sexual offences as set out in the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

The relevant excerpt is section 74.

The judgement considers other cases where arguments were made which vitiated the issue of consent. These include a sexual partner that did not reveal HIV status, lying about being post vasectomy so a condom was not deemed necessary, removing a condom without the partner’s knowledge, ejaculating inside a partner after being asked not to do so. The judgements on these issues were mixed.

The Judge, in this case, dismissed arguments, which are still used today, to justify lying about your sex vitiates. One of the is indeed to imply that convicting people for lying about something as fundamental as your sex, is equivalent to ”curating” your dating profile by exaggerating, for example, your wealth.

Therefore deception as to ”gender” can vitiate consent. ‘M’ was deliberately deceived into thinking she was having sexual activity with a male. Therefore she did not ”freely consent” to sex.

There are a few other cases of prosecutions for similar offences and, where deception about your biological sex is concerned, those who have been prosecuted in the U.K seem to be all female.

There is the case of Gayle Newland covered, along with this case and others, by The Secret Barrister here: 👇

Gayle Newland

This paragraph jumped out at me:

You can also read of earlier cases on Stephen Whittle’s blog. Whittle is a trans-identified female and a proponent of Gender Identity Ideology.

Sex by deception

Alex Sharpe, another trans-identified legal bod, this time male, has written an entire book on this topic. You can read an article, written by Sharpe, here:

Gender Identity Fraud

Sharpe argues that by singling out action based on “Gender Identity” we are fuelling ”transphobia. What Sharpe doesn’t use is the phrase “biological sex“ . SEXual orientation is a legally protected characteristic in law and it is based on SEX! You may be open to sexual encounters with either sex but if you are exclusively attracted to one sex, only, you have the legal right for your boundaries /consent to be legally protected.

Trans ally in the tweets. Terf between the sheets.

What Alex is demanding is that we accept a belief that people can literally change sex. The proposition here is that we should not allow these prosecutions if “we accept a trans man is a man” . However that essentially demands societal acceptance that a personally held ”Gender Identity” is privileged above the material reality of biological sex. I don’t accept that a ”transman’ is literally a man and a gay man is highly unlikely to do so! Trans-allies in the tweets are often “Terfs” between the sheets.

Dare I say, this is incel logic. Nobody has a right to sex. We could certainly examine why the prosecutions are all female. We could raise questions about internalised homophobia or why it is so hard for these women to be openly ”Lesbian”. We could discuss whether the length of the prison sentences are excessive, in some cases. What we cannot do is privilege a, subjective, sense of self over reality. Lying about something so fundamental, to most people, if they are honest, is not merely unethical. It is a criminal offence.

Which brings me to part two of this series. Why did the BBC not point out the law in a recent documentary short which allowed a discussion about non-disclosure of your sex, to partners?

There are huge foundations funnelling billions into the spread of Gender Identity Ideology. If you can help offset the disparity by donating for my content. Friends of my work can do so here:

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and the impact on women’s , sex based, rights as well as the medical transitioning of vulnerable, often gay, youth.

£10.00

Gender Diverse Youth. Part 4

Rites of Passage to become authentic self!

This series looks at a project featured on the website healthtalk.org. This project interviewed twenty families who believe they have been sent a ”transgender child” and some of the youth’s who identify as transgender. This series will look at the young people. I have done a series on the parents. All linked in this thread: 👇

Parents of Trans Kids: Series 2

You can access the website here: 👇

Diverse Pathways

The research is funded by Oxford University, among others, and is a collaboration with Mermaids. Many prominent trans lobbyists were involved, including Katie Montgomery.

Cal Horton is also involved; a non-binary parent with a ”trans child” and someone I covered in another series on parenting ”trans” kids. You can read that series here: 👇

Parents of ”trans kids”

Full details of the sponsors and the researchers are in part one: 

Gender Diverse Youth. Part 1

I am indebted to YouTuber, Exulansic, for crystallising my thoughts on the quasi-religious nature of the ”trans cult”. This section will cover the ritualistic nature of trans rites of passage. Smashing the gender binary turns out to involve a lot of performative behaviour associated with masculine and feminine sex stereotypes. Becoming your ”authentic self” also turns out to be quite a hazardous process for your health. The acceptance if the pain of these ”rites” is akin to the self-flagellation of religious penitents.

A female journey to “authentic self”

Here are some females talking about their ”trans-masculine” rites. First up we have Bee who is challenging the gender binary by appropriating ”masculinity” and then subverting expectations by being a female who presents feminine, if she wants to. There’s a teen vibe to Bee’s pronouncements.

Clothes have played a significant role in many youth subcultures since we invented the teenage demographic to fuel consumerism. Signalling membership of a group plays an important role in finding your tribe.

While writing this I took a detour to read a paper, by Friends of The Earth, which had many insightful thoughts on consumerism and identity formation. Transgenderism has been driven by a relentless mass marketing campaign and is a profit-making endeavour. The bodies of our young are the ”product” as they carve sex stereotypes into, and out of, their own flesh.

Another pertinent observation is the role played by social imitation, groupthink and peer pressure. Things can become a social norm “regardless of rationality”.

Breast Binding

Which takes me onto the subject of breast binding. Many of these women have adopted the practice and here are some of their observations. Patrick is performing the Holy Trinity: Hair cut ✅. New Wardrobe ✅ and breast constriction ✅.

Patrick describes this practice as “freeing” but also deeply uncomfortable. Self-flagellation reboot for the gender cult:

Jack reports the ”euphoria” on binding for the first time, a gender cult word for religious ecstasy:

Further exploration reveals some downsides but also neatly encapsulates the treadmill Jack has put herself on. Binding is painful but a double mastectomy will sort that out. 🤔

Some reported even more horrific experiences with breast constriction:

This is self-harm on a grand scale, yet we are valourising these girls as if the western world has morphed into a pro-ana movement. Here’s the list of side-effects from recent research.

So liberating! Here one participant explains that she cannot go anywhere without her binder. Even when nobody can see her, she must wear a binder.

The attention-seeking aspect is nicely illustrated by Loges. 👇. More tattoos piercings and a prosthetic penis because it’s better than passing unnoticed.

From prosthetic penis to standing to pee.

Another trans rite is the vertical urination ceremony. An article actually demanded men sit down to pee in solidarity with ”transmen”.

Here a trans-identifying female explains how it triggers their dysphoria seeing her male friends having a piss.

Asking men to change their behaviour, to avoid triggering dysphoric females, was never going to fly. Never mind somebody found a way to make it pay! You can sell prosthetic penises with a built in device so appropriate “himage” can be paid at the Urinal.

Male journeys to authentic self.

G also mixing it up. We met him earlier when he came to the realisation that his last relationship wasn’t a heterosexual relationship at all, because he is no longer a “cis” male. His journey is mainly about fashion, socialising and copying styles.

Male authenticity also centres the hair, long hair for a girl, make-up, prosthetic breasts or hormonal induced gynecomastia. What was missing was the practice of ”tucking” which is, I am told, fraught with health complications for men. There are lots of shopping trips, cos the Ladies love to shop, don’t they. 🙄. Then there are tears of joy in euphoric phases but tears of sadness when ”girl” clothes don’t fit. There is a long section on training to feminise the voice which seems like a lot of work. There is also a lot of self-loathing oozing from these stories. In my uncharitable moments I echo the sentiments of this cartoon.

All in all the male section can be summed up by this image and the word ”narcissism”.

I do this full-time and I have no income. If you can support my work it would be gratefully received.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on women’s and gay rights. I have a particular concern about the medical treatment we are giving to children and young people. Many are gay, autistic or victims of child sexual abuse.

£10.00

Gender Diverse Youth. Part 3

Gender Diverse journeys.

This series will look at a project featured on the website healthtalk.org. This project interviewed twenty families, who believe they have been sent a ”transgender child” and youth’s who identify as transgender. This series will look at the young people. I have done a series on the parents. All linked in this thread: 👇

Parents of Trans Kids: Series 2

You can access the website here: 👇

Diverse Pathways

The research is funded by Oxford University, among others, and is a collaboration with Mermaids. Many prominent trans lobbyists were involved, including Katie Montgomery.

Cal Horton is also involved; a non-binary parent with a ”trans child”. I covered another series on parenting ”trans” kids, based on work done by Horton. You can read that series here: 👇

Parents of ”trans kids”

Prepare yourself for endless navel-gazing, narcissism and some genuinely sad triggers for embarking on a medical pathway.

First up is Bee, who identifies as non-binary to escape the reality of sexual dimorphism, oops, I mean the “violent systems of kind of binary sex and gender …built by white supremacist patriarchal society”.

Many of the narratives are filled with the usual, adolescent, tales of not fitting in and the miraculous discovery of transgender narratives. These kids have fallen for a mass marketing campaign designed to appeal to vulnerable children / teens who don’t fit in.

One participant is relieved to find out he is not just a “weird” kid. Other participants had assumed they were gay but felt ill at ease as a ”flamboyant, feminine boy” . Could that have something to do with Grindr profiles specifying ”straight acting”? Does the gay community have a problem with gay men who are not ”macho”?

Others talk about adopting a ”trans” identity after a period of depression and mental illness. Tori came out as ”trans” after a vicious, homophobic attack.

Tori was also a flamboyant gay male until he was attacked and set on fire in what sounds like a gruesome experience. He recounts a tale from his childhood where he fervently wished he was a girl and, while he was accepted as a “effeminate” gay male, something still didn’t feel right. Now he knows there is another way to be. That would be the advertising campaign.

We seem to have created a world where flamboyant gay males are not flourishing. Males like Boy George and Marilyn rocked a vibe that challenged social norms for the male sex. They were not in flight from their sex and sexuality.

This is not progressive. It is the opposite of self-acceptance. It is no coincidence only one of these “identities” garners any profits for the gender medico-industrial complex.

Some of the other narratives seem like a desire to be “edgy” and not be a boring old male.

G gets to the heart of the matter. He found being male ”boring”. He didnt like the ”aesthetics” of masculinity. He also throws in the fact that he had been in a heterosexual relationship as a ”cis” man. There is no spot more lowly in the Gender Olympics than a ”cis, white,heterosexual, man”.

Some came to identify as ”trans” in response to the marketing on YouTube or movies or they identified with character’s in books. Once you become attuned to the trans-product placement you will see we are in the middle of a mass media campaign; the aim is to normalise a medically dependent existence. It is working. It is not just boring het males or flamboyant gays who are seduced by this propaganda. Eel👇 realises she is not just a Lesbian after reading a book by a “trans-man”. Summer identifies with Lili-Elbe from the film The Danish Girl.

Summer identifed as a feminist at University and decided the way to burnish his credentials was by ”living as a woman” , whatever that means. He decided to ”siphon” off the feminine as if he had found a tank of feminine essence. Interestingly, there is currently a lot of outrage about “black-fishing” where basic white girls darken their skin tone and mimic black hair and speech patterns. Often they perpetuate outrageous, negative stereotypes and their performances are parodic. How is this any different?

CJ Found ”queer theory” and trans-masculine YouTuber influences cemented (sold) her a trans identity.

Some of the sales pitch happened at social meet-ups hosted by Trans Lobby groups. 👇

In case it isn’t clear this is a mass recruitment drive. Gay males and Lesbians are especially vulnerable because homophobia has not disappeared and many of them are non-conformist, in terms of adherence to sex sterotypes. Some of the cheerleaders for this are gay males. {Crispin Blunt, Michael Cashman, Owen Jones and John Stryker of Arcus Foundation} and Lesbians {Ruth Hunt & Nancy Kelley of Stonewall, Linda Riley of Diva Magazine and Judith Butler, Queen of Queer Theory}. Did the Gay rights movement lay the seeds of their own destruction by allowing themselves to be force teamed with the T? What motivates these older homosexuals to betray their siblings?

I do this full-time and I have no income. If you can support my work it would be gratefully received.

The kids are NOT All right.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on women’s and gay rights. I have a particular concern about the medical treatment we are giving to children and young people. Many are gay, autistic or victims of child sexual abuse.

£10.00