Go Forward Bravely and Fear Nothing!
Update 381 Terf Month #BeMore Porcupine
Squeezing this update into one part, dear readers, but it is a long one!!
Our first speech for Terf Month is from detransitioner, Ellie at Let Women Speak in Glasgow.
Thanks as ever to two wonderful readers for suggested pieces.
General Election
LGB Alliance have produced their questions for candidates. These , of course, especially look at the situation for lesbians, gays and bisexuals. I believe that Sex Matters are publishing their questions on Monday. If there is no Party of Women (POW) candidate in our constituency I will probably be adapting my version of both these sets of questions for the candidates.
LGB Alliance is focusing on TWO KEY ISSUES for this election and has FIVE CRITICAL QUESTIONS for candidates.
OUR KEY ISSUES
ONE: We believe that it is critical to protect children, the majority of whom would grow up to be lesbian, gay or bisexual, from gender-identity ideology.
We know that young people who are LGB are particularly vulnerable to gender-identity ideology and are the most likely to fall victim to those who say that children can be ‘born in the wrong body’.
TWO: We oppose a Conversion Practices Ban that would not protect children and young people but would, instead, seek to criminalise therapists and even parents who ask children why they feel uncomfortable in their own bodies and question whether drugs and surgery are the best options for them.
Our positions are supported by the Cass Review and we have attached a link to the full document, for your reference, at the end of this email.
Here are FIVE CRITICAL QUESTIONS to ask candidates on the doorstep.
Question one: Do you recognise that LGB young people are under the most threat from gender-identity ideology which tells them they need to change their bodies?
The Cass Review says: 89% of girls and 81% of boys who were referred to the Gender Identity Services (GIDS) at The Tavistock Clinic said they were same-sex attracted? We believe that LGB young people are being told they have been ‘born in the wrong body’ and that they need drugs and surgery to ‘fix’ them?
Question two: Do you support the NHS policy that has banned the prescription of puberty blockers?
The Cass Review says: “…there is no evidence that puberty blockers improve body image of dysphoria,” Puberty blockers “are not buying time to think” as is often claimed, as the vast majority continue to masculinising/feminising hormones.
Question three: Will you support a similar ban on feminising/masculinising hormones?
The Cass Review says: “There is a lack of high-quality research assessing the outcomes of hormone interventions in adolescents with gender dysphoria/incongruence, and few studies that undertake long-term follow up. No conclusions can be drawn about the effect on gender dysphoria, body satisfaction, psychosocial health, cognitive development, or fertility. Uncertainty remains about the outcomes for height/growth, cardiometabolic and bone health.” We believe it is lesbian, gay and bisexual people who are the most likely to undergo these experimental treatments.
Question four: Do you agree that socially transitioning children in schools is bad for gender-questioning children and for the wider school population?
The Cass Review says: “Social transition is an active intervention” and urges caution. We believe that it is wrong to tell a gender-questioning child the lie that it is possible to change sex, and that it is wrong to compel other children in a school to collude in that lie.
Question five: Will you oppose a Conversion Practices Ban that would not protect LGB young people but which would criminalise therapists and even parents who want to explore why children want to change their bodies?
The Cass Review says: “Throughout the Review, clinicians working with this population have expressed concerns about the interpretation of potential legislation on conversion practices and its impact on the practical challenges in providing professional support to gender-questioning young people. This has left some clinical staff fearful of accepting referrals of these children and young people.” We believe that all children will be negatively impacted if therapists are afraid to act ethically.
If you really want to get the measure of your candidate, and you want to persuade them to take a stand on the issues that matter to us, ask them these additional question too.
Should lesbians and gay men be allowed to gather without members of the opposite sex present?
Would you support a clarification of The Equality Act to confirm that sex means biological sex?
LGB refers to sexual orientation and TQ+ refers to a person’s identity. Would you support a split?
Do you support the right of lesbian, gay and bisexual people to meet together and have our own organisations and will you meet with LGB Alliance if you are elected?
Dennis Kavanagh and Clive Simpson are joined on Queens’ Speech by a new regular, Jack David. They cover Pride Month, the General Election, the three month ban on provision of puberty blockers ( shockingly Helen Webberley of GenderGP and the barrister Jolyon Maughan are suggesting that people could take children to Ireland or another European Union country to obtain puberty blockers!!!) and the attempts to ban puberty blockers in France ( unfortunately not successful as yet - see further below).
https://clivesimpson.substack.com/p/episode-93-the-holy-month-of-pride
Labour
Excellent piece in the Critic by Jean Hatchet about the UK Labour Party. However, for me, Jean doesn’t go far enough. As a long time Labour member ( who resigned in 2019 in the face of the gender borg taking over the Party) I have a message for those women ( and men) who are still members: “Get the hell out of there!!!!!”
Let us know what you think.
A Labour of unrequited love
19 April, 2024
For many years now, women have appealed to the Labour Party to try to understand the fundamental clash between women’s rights and the unfair demands of the trans activist movement, which would erode those rights. They have done it as individuals, in organised groups such as Labour Women’s Declaration, and as Labour MPs in the case of Rosie Duffield or Tonia Antonazzi. All of these women have been ignored by Labour at best — and allegedly bullied at worst.
The approaches have mostly been patient and calm — for example in the case of Woman’s Place UK, where women thought evidence-based, intelligent presentation of their case via organised meetings would eventually be considered thoughtfully by the Labour Party leadership. These were, after all, women of the Left and many stayed within the party. Instead, these women were called a “trans exclusionary hate group” in a charter signed by Angela Rayner, the Deputy Leader of the Party in 2020.
Many feminist women who have stayed loyal to the Labour Party (despite leadership refusal to debate with, or give them any semblance of fair hearing on, the trans issue), have done so because they know that a Labour Party in government is crucial to provide the public services and social care so vital to the most vulnerable people in society, particularly women and children. It has been an act of sacrifice for the greater good, which, it seems, has largely been taken for granted by Labour leaders. Women have remained hopeful that eventually sense would prevail, even in moments when that common sense seemed in short supply, such as when Keir Starmer effectively said that 1 in a 1000 women might have a penis.
Many, however, did leave the Labour Party in protest and have since declared themselves politically homeless. They had been pushed beyond their political limits by a Labour Party which could, in the case of Lisa Nandy, say that men should be placed in women’s prisons because “trans women are women”. Some women were unfairly expelled for their stance on women’s rights, some refused entry, and others are being investigated by the party at present.
When the Cass Review was released last week, there was a sense of vindication for all of the groups of women mentioned above. Everything they had warned of regarding the lack of safeguarding of children within the NHS, seemed to be confirmed by Dr Hilary Cass’s findings, and if women could be so right about this, possibly they were about to be considered right about many other worrying issues in a similar theme. This was surely just the beginning of the collapse of the ideological house of cards. No one could morally look away from these findings, and it was a searing torchlight indeed which shone upon the current Westminster cohort who have long ignored women’s pleas, including, but not limited to leading Labour MPs and ministers.
But there was intense anger in some quarters too. Why had it taken the release of this report for women to be believed about the harms being done to children and why were so many in Labour still saying so little about such a devastating set of findings?
There should have been a queue of top Labour politicians prostrating themselves at the feet of women to apologise for their refusal to listen. Instead, there appears to be just Wes Streeting making some apologetic noises, if not actual apology, as he did to The Sun:
‘To the extent that – and I say this with some self-criticism and reflection – if you’d asked me that a few years ago, on this topic, I would have said trans men are men, trans women are women. Some people are trans get over it. Let’s move on. This is all blown out of proportion. And now I sort of sit and reflect and think actually, there are lots of complexities. I take the criticism on the chin. And at the same time. I also think that there’s been some absolutely ugly rhetoric directed towards trans people who are at the wrong end of all of statistics on hate crime, on self-harm, suicide, mental health.’
This statement is a half-apology, and conjures up the image of fence-sitting, but because women have been looking so hard for signs they have been listened to, this sounded like a positive move in their direction. Some women are keen to allow this sort of backtracking to pass uncriticised — even welcoming it, because in their view there had to be a starting point for Labour to change their minds. Other women still carry a level of fury at how long it has taken Labour leaders to yield so slightly, to give so little, and only at the point that they are forced to because presented with such horrendous, evidence-based research in the form of the Cass Report.
The feminist journalist Julie Bindel was keen to pin Streeting down further and offered him the chance to apologise personally to her for how he had treated her in the past, outlining the harm it had done to her reputation:
‘I am open to accepting an apology from you. In 2008, when you were NUS President, I was no-platformed, alongside 5 fascist groups, for ‘transphobia’. I contacted you and asked for your help. You gave none. I asked you to condemn those that had orchestrated the no-platforming, and you refused. Have you any idea of the reputational damage this caused me? How it gave others permission to no-platform, denounce and defame me? How it meant that I could be slandered by other organisations, and so many, many universities around the UK and elsewhere? If this sounds bitter then good, because I am.’
Rosie Duffield unleashed a furious Twitter thread about unnamed colleagues who have treated her appallingly for years:
‘Some MPs’ cowardice, or a genuine lack of knowledge about what was happening is one thing. But pretending you got it, were against the ideology all along and were too scared to speak up while others were being bullied for doing so makes you lower than a snake’s belly. If voters want to ask me by DM where their MP stood, how they behaved when presented with the evidence, or heard colleagues at least suggest we pause and consider whether children were too young to consent to irreversible treatment, I will tell you the truth. If they say one thing on your doorstep or in the newspapers, words like “women should always be able to speak freely on their views”, “Rosie deserves an apology”, “this is a terrible scandal”, you deserve to know whether they even speak to me, or have shown any support at all. Or, if those now claiming to support the #CassReview or years knocking on the door of @UKLabour’s Chief Whip demanding that I be thrown out of the Party. Cowardice is one thing, so are genuine mistakes, but lying retrospectively is something else entirely.’
Why should these women, or any woman, restrain their anger or sweeten their bitterness? Children have been seriously harmed because those same women were ignored — granted not only by Labour politicians, but the women in those parties are right to expect that theirs are the politicians who should most apologise, because they turned a blind eye and a cold shoulder to the left-wing women who still did not desert them for doing so.
I think any request for women to restrain such angry outbursts shows a level of class prejudice and snobbery. Working class women, for example, are often categorised as not being very clever or strategic when they express anger, as though they are too lacking in intelligence to restrain themselves. The suggestion being that spontaneous anger is a limited and limiting response. It is unfair to say women are right to be angry about what has happened but “not that angry” or “not like that.”
Isn’t it the case that incandescent rage splattered over social media gathers the attention of politicians in a way that a privately furrowed brow and a stern letter does not? Likewise, feeling hopeful and grateful at the first sign of political breadcrumbs scattered in the direction of women, is not the same as dragging them into the open and making them apologise and commit to firm and concrete reparation of harms done. Honest righteous anger yields better results sometimes, than quiet, patient strategic waiting, which might not. Some women won’t accept breadcrumbing, until they are sure the Labour loaf won’t be mouldy come the General Election. Permit them their rage.
Joan Smith, who lost her job as co-chair of London’s Violence Against Women and Girls board for her views on women’s rights, is another Labour woman who has not been shy about expressing her anger at Labour’s determined ignorance on the trans issue. She told me:
‘Leading figures in the Labour Party can’t just expect us to forgive and forget. They denied biology, failed to condemn the misogyny of trans activists and looked the other way when we were abused. Trust has to be rebuilt and we are nowhere near that yet.’
I think the reason that some of her fellow MPs have, quite shockingly, called Rosie Duffield and women like her “f*ckin TERFs” — as she revealed today — is because she is embarrassing them by exposing their ridiculous adherence to a cult whose time is long since up, and she has refused to be bullied away from her stance. Every woman on the Labour Party front bench knows what it is to be a woman, because they had to fight the grassroots misogyny embedded in their local wards, and then fight it again at each rung on the Party ladder they climbed. I wonder if they would dare whisper that insult in Rosie’s earshot today now that she’s made it plain that she will reveal their disgusting passive-aggressive attacks.
Standing up to bullies makes bullies fearful, and some in Labour must be feeling very, very uncomfortable just now. Let’s hope at least some of them are somewhere in the House of Commons corridors, scribbling out their unreserved apologies to deliver to the press and that Keir Starmer’s scrap of paper says:
I apologise. I haven’t found a penis on a woman yet and let’s be absolutely clear, it’s not for want of looking.
https://thecritic.co.uk/a-labour-of-unrequited-love/
Two pieces from the latest excellent Sex Matters newsletter, Memo.
Vaclav Havel
First a great piece from Maya Forstater.
The power of the powerless ( 01 June)
In honour of pride month I am re-publishing my illustrated version (first published on Medium Feb 1st 2021) of excerpts from the 1978 essay The Power of the Powerless written by Václav Havel, dissident, and later President of Czechoslovakia.
It is an essay about how totalitarian regimes turn ordinary citizens into dissidents. And about how individuals ‘living within the truth’ can break the spell of a totalising lie. I have updated some of the pictures.
The full piece is here:
https://www.forstater.com/the-power-of-the-powerless/
Puberty Blockers
Puberty blocker private prescriptions banned (01 June)
Health Secretary, Victoria Atkins has banned private providers such as GenderGP from prescribing puberty blockers. She told the House of Commons: “I made it my priority to protect our children who have been questioning their gender in increasing numbers.
“The Cass Review laid bare the damaging effect that social media and degrading pornography has had on young people's sense of self... Today I want to set out my clear intention to introduce a banning order on puberty blockers, with limited exceptions, under Section 62 of the Medicines Act 1968.
“This is an extraordinary use of that power, but it is the right use of that power because we must protect our children and young people from this risk to their safety.”
Sex Matters campaign director Fiona McAnena applauded the move, explaining: “Children need to be protected. Victoria Atkins’ use of political muscle to ban puberty blockers will be welcomed by all those concerned by the devastating impact of so-called gender medicine on children.”
The banning order is set to come into force before the dissolution of the current parliament, though it will cease to have effect on 2nd September 2024, at which point the next government will have to decide whether to extend it or let it drop.
Dusty - I understand from the Queens’ Speech ( see above) that the Shadow Health Secretary, Wes Streeting, has said that Labour, if they become the next government, will make this ban permanent.
https://www.transgendertrend.com/private-gender-clinics-teens-young-adults/
The Woke We Pay For
Charlotte Gill ( who writes Gill’s Quill) is interviewed on a podcast called Bombshells by Amy Sheppard and Fleur Elizabeth about the vast amounts of tax payers’ money that is used by the Arts Council and by UK Research and Innovation to fund totally mad gender woo productions or so called research. If you watch the video I would start it at about 16 minutes and you can skip the last 12 minutes unless you are very interested in cycling. In passing, I disagree with Charlotte’s take on preferred pronouns.
https://www.charlottecgill.co.uk/p/the-millions-wasted-on-pregnant-men?r=7ogxh&triedRedirect=true
Stop Press
Talking of pronouns, great short piece by Mr Menno and I totally agree with him. All thoughts gratefully received.
Heehaw Heehaw
Thanks to Feminist Legal Clinic for this piece and the German report below.
NSW barrister Lindsay Ellison’s ‘Mx’ faux pas results in dismissal (31 May)
A NSW [ New South Wales] silk who said his preferred pronouns are “HeHaw HeHaw Ha Ha Ha” and questioned the use of gender-neutral titles in court has been sacked as the chair of one of the state Bar’s central committees.
Lindsay Ellison SC, who has practised as a barrister for nearly 40 years, was stood down by NSW Bar Association president Ruth Higgins SC this month, after she received complaints about his conduct while chairing a meeting of the Succession and Protective Law Committee in late April.
The Australian understands that during the meeting, Mr Ellison questioned the use of the term “Mx” – a title used by non-binary people – which was used in a practice note written by NSW Supreme Court Chief Justice Andrew Bell about the proper way to address a party in court.
Mr Ellison was called to the Bar in 1985, and has been named a “market leader” in wills and estates practice for the past four years by the Doyles Guide. He was previously vice-president of the NSW Bar Association, and in 2021 became the inaugural chair of the Succession and Protective Law Committee.
Chief Justice Bell’s practice note, which instructs lawyers to “advise the court, where appropriate, of … forms of address such as Ms, Mr, Mrs, Mx, Dr, Prof”, was brought up in a committee meeting chaired by Mr Ellison last month. After he questioned the use of the term “Mx” in the meeting, he received a phone call from NSW Bar Association president Ruth Higgins, who counselled him over “the tone and content” of his comments regarding the practice note after the meeting.
Well done, Mr Ellison!!
Source: NSW barrister Lindsay Ellison’s ‘Mx’ faux pas results in dismissal | The Australian
The Pesutto Apology
I reported on the apology to Kellie-Jay Keen and Angie Jones from Australian Liberal Party leader, John Pesutto here:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/good-morning-missouri-part-1?utm_source=publication-search
Julie Szego on her substack Szego Unplugged ( Slandering the women who "speak" 30 May) writes:
Photos by Natalie J. Russell
In the prolonged fallout from Melbourne’s infamous Let Women Speak rally, gatecrashed by neo-Nazis, the state Opposition leader, John Pesutto, has issued an apology to two women who had sued him for defamation — the rally leader, Kellie-Jay Keen, otherwise known as Posie Parker, and her local associate, Angie Jones whose grossly under-reported story I’ll be focusing on here. Pesutto said: “It has never been my intention to convey that I believed Ms Keen and Ms Jones to be Neo-Nazis, or that they were members of Neo-Nazi groups.”
These women, Jones in particular, were collateral damage in Pesutto’s confrontation with MP Moira Deeming over her attendance and involvement in the rally. Deeming, as many will recall, was suspended from the Opposition Liberal Party, and then expelled after flagging her intention to sue Pesutto for defamation. Her action remains on foot.
As for the settlement with Keen and Jones, Pesutto has said that no money changed hands. Otherwise, confidentiality clauses have gagged the respective parties. Fortunately, no-one’s gagging me, so herein I’ll be bagging Pesutto for several paragraphs — not least for an apology I judge to be not really that — before tossing him some praise.
Jones, a single mother of four and long-time campaigner for women’s rights, last year told me about the devastating impact of his words on her life — I’m going to share her account with you.
And lastly, I’ll be training my guns on the institutions I hold responsible for letting the trans rights debate spiral into toxic insanity: the Victorian state Labor Government and a gullible progressive media.
Pesutto was guilty of panicked decision-making in the aftermath of the March 2023 rally. His problem was one of dreadful optics. Since his election as Liberal leader four months earlier, he had been trying to turn around the party’s image as a haven of hard right Christians, assorted reactionaries and dubious weirdos. Now here was one of his own MPs closely associated with what the media and the Government dubbed an “anti trans” rally — Deeming having helped Keen and Jones pull off the event. According to the theocratic dictates of identity politics this rally comprised the powerful (women) beating up on a group deemed the most vulnerable (trans people).
The fact that two dozen black-clad, sieg heilling, neo-Nazis turned up to express, as they put it, support for Keen further tainted her and the cause in the minds of many. It was an unfair deduction. Having been on the scene myself I can attest the women would not even have sighted the men until the police escorted them away down Spring Street.
But working backwards from the terrible optics on the day, Pesutto constructed an unreliable narrative of Deeming in alliance with people “who have known and established links with people who have Nazi sympathies who have white supremacist views and ethno-fascist views.” The accusation against Keen and Jones was therefore one of guilt by association, which made the accusation against Deeming one of guilt by association with guilt by association: in other words, a house of cards and complete bullocks.
He published a 15-page dossier purporting to set out the “evidence” against the two women.
In respect of Keen his case was sourced from a false and misleading Wikipedia entry that suggested she self-identified as a Nazi and shared platforms with them. The worst that can be said about Keen is that she has a loose tongue and that she’ll grant an interview to anyone who comes knocking no questions asked, and sometimes that lands her in conversation with far-right characters — and at other times, with far-left characters. But these days misinformation finds fertile ground in sanctimonious newsrooms. At the time one editor at The Age told me it was pretty clear Keen was “associated with the far right” and that my column for the newspaper ought to reflect this almost certain reality. (The column was suppressed in any event.) Note to editors everywhere: when assessing highly controversial issues in which the very language is contested, do not assume Wikipedia is an authoritative source.
If the case against Keen was based on a malicious stitch up, the case against Jones was a travesty far, far worse as it was based on one tweet. In the aftermath of the rally, Jones was trading insults on Twitter with a regular antagonist. She made a throwaway remark that the only thing the women protestors and “Nazis” agree on is wanting to “get rid of paedo filth.”
The full piece is here:
https://szegounplugged.substack.com/p/slandering-the-women-who-speak?r=7ogxh&triedRedirect=true
Fetishism and The World Health Organisation
This is a real FFS piece!!!
Genevieve Gluck in Women’s Voices ( Norwegian BDSM Activist Behind WHO Decision To Remove Transvestic Fetishism And Sadomasochism From Psychiatric Diagnoses 30 May) writes:
Reduxx can reveal that the man who led a decades-long campaign pressuring the World Health Organization (WHO) to destigmatize fetishism, sadomasochism, and fetishistic transvestism, which is now included under the transgender umbrella, was a celebrated gay rights activist who ran a BDSM dungeon in Oslo. Svein Skeid, who passed away in December 2020, led the fetish rights campaign group Revise F65, which lobbied the WHO for decades and achieved their goal in 2018.
Skeid, renowned in Norway as a leading gay rights advocate, founded the Revise F65 committee in 1996 as a subsidiary of the National Association for Lesbian and Gay Liberation, or LLH, which has since become a trans activist group known as The Norwegian Organization for Sexual and Gender Diversity (Foreningen for kjønns- og seksualitetsmangfold – FRI).
“The purpose of Revise F65 is to remove Fetishism, Transvestism and Sadomasochism as psychiatric diagnoses from the ICD, the International Classification of Diseases, published by the World Health Organization (WHO) and translated into national versions world wide (mandate from the 1996 biennial national convention of LLH/FRI),” wrote Skeid in 2018.
“The mandate was based on a national survey conducted among the nearly two thousand lesbian and gay members of LLH, ‘rejecting discrimination of leather, SM and transgender people, and judging this diversity as a valuable resource.'”
Skeid’s statement was written in response to the June 2018 decision by the WHO to remove the three psychiatric diagnoses Fetishism, Fetishistic Transvestism and Sadomasochism as “disorders of sexual preference” from their latest edition of the International Classifications of Diseases and Related Health Problems, the ICD-11.
In a statement justifying the decision, WHO said, “From WHO’s perspective, there is an important distinction between conditions that are relevant to public health and indicate the need for health services versus those that are simply descriptions of private behavior without appreciable public health impact and for which treatment is neither indicated nor sought.”
The full article is here:
https://genevievegluck.substack.com/p/norwegian-bdsm-activist-behind-who?r=7ogxh&triedRedirect=true
The American Psychiatric Association
The Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism attempted to lobby the APA annual meeting about so called gender affirming care and the Cass Review but were cancelled. Excellent report on their website about this.
Evidence in Exile
FAIR’s fight for evidence-based dialogue about gender-affirming care at the American Psychiatric Association annual meeting
AND
MAY 31, 2024
On May 3rd, I traveled to New York City for my first major assignment as the newly appointed Interim Director of FAIR In Medicine (FIM), attending the 2024 American Psychiatric Association annual meeting. The Jacob K. Javits Convention Center welcomed more than 9,000 in-person attendees and an unknown number of virtual attendees to learn the latest scientific evidence from conference presenters. In addition to various psychiatric issues, the conference covered a number of controversial topics, such as DEI, gun safety, climate change, and the Ukraine-Russia war. But when it came to the subject of gender-affirming care, the APA enforced an orthodoxy and did a disservice both to patients and APA members, who clearly want robust debate on this important topic.
American and international members and non-members attended the APA meeting. The conference theme, “Confronting Addiction From Prevention to Recovery,” featured over 500 educational sessions and more than 1,000 research poster presentations with topics including addiction, mood disorders, and other psychiatric diagnoses. The meeting hosted exhibitors, mostly pharmaceutical and device companies, job recruiters, residency program recruiters, and a bookstore where attendees could purchase materials published by APA members.
FAIR planned to staff a table in the exhibition hall and talk with psychiatrists and other health professionals about the research on gender-affirming care for youth. Among those who planned to talk with attendees were whistleblower Jamie Reed, head of the LGBT Courage Coalition, and psychotherapist Paul Garcia-Ryan. We also lined up members of LGB Alliance USA and I Have Concerns, detransitioners, and educated members of FAIR.
We aimed to share evidence-based resources about the existing treatments for children with gender confusion. That includes a summary of the UK’s final Cass Review—a 388-page report on available evidence for youth gender medicine based on information specific to clinics in England and international systematic reviews and guidelines —and journal articles and books written by American writers. It also included editorials written by American journalists just days after the Cass Review was published, urging a more evidence-based look at the issue in the United States.
We also planned to have a copy of the APA textbook Gender-Affirming Psychiatric Care. We would ask attendees to read FIM’s open letter requesting the APA revise its policies and textbook to reflect quality scientific data and to sign if they agreed.
Since members of our team attended the American Academy of Pediatrics conference previously with the same aim, we were prepared to encounter people who would vehemently disagree with our presence and be openly angry or even hostile. We planned for our exhibit booth to be a source of information, encouragement, and support for those with questions and concerns about the issue needing support and encouragement, and those who had little knowledge about gender identity and children and were open to learning.
Unfortunately, we never had the chance. I learned that event organizers had canceled our exhibitor booth reservation without any explanation. I also received a message in the meeting mobile app that an organizer had personally removed me from the event.
The full piece is here:
https://news.fairforall.org/p/evidence-in-exile?r=7ogxh&triedRedirect=true
Women’s Liberation Front ( WoLF)
I previously reported on this shocking issue here:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/cold-mountain-part-1?utm_source=publication-search
The excellent WoLF have had a knock back in their campaign to get men out women’s prisons but, of course, are fighting on. Here is their report on their website - please donate if you can for their continuing fight.
THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER: NEXT STEPS IN CHANDLER V. CDCR
May 17, 2024
WoLF is committed to pursuing every legal avenue to justice for Janine, Tomiekia, Krystal, Nadia, and all incarcerated women in California
This week, WoLF received the disappointing news that the district court dismissed Chandler v. CDCR [ California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation] on procedural grounds. We are reviewing the decision and considering our options for the next steps in this case.
BACKGROUND
In 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 132 (SB 132) into law. This legislation, which went into effect in January of 2021 as the “Transgender Respect, Agency, and Dignity Act”, allows incarcerated men to be housed in women’s correctional facilities based on self-declared “gender identity.” This law allows men to “self-identify” as women or non-binary, and be housed in women’s facilities.
Women’s Liberation Front (WoLF) filed a lawsuit on behalf of four incarcerated women challenging SB132. WoLF asked the court to overturn this law and declare it unconstitutional. The full case background and information on our four plaintiffs is available here.
CASE DISMISSED WITHOUT CONSIDERING CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENTS AFTER YEARS-LONG DELAY
The decision by the Eastern District Court of California, issued on May 14, 2024, granted the State’s Motion to Dismiss, and gave leave to amend the complaint as to the named defendants. The Court did not examine WoLF’s arguments that SB 132 is unconstitutional, but rather decided that CDCR is immune under the Eleventh Amendment and therefore could not be a defendant in this case. The Court looked at the immunity issue “sua sponte” [ ‘of one’s own accord’] - though neither party raised the issue. The Court said that the state needed to explicitly waive immunity and that it had not done so.
AN INTERVENOR IN THE CASE IS CHARGED WITH RAPING A WOMAN WHILE IN PRISON WITH HER THANKS TO SB 132
Coincidentally, as the judge in the Eastern District Court was dismissing the case, WoLF held a press conference on the steps of the California Superior Court in Madera County. Tremaine Carroll, an incarcerated male intervenor in the Chandler case, is now facing two counts of forcible rape and one count of attempting to dissuade a witness from testifying. The Madera District Attorney feels they have a very provable case. WoLF and WomanIIWoman held a press conference on the courthouse steps Friday, before the preliminary hearing, to raise awareness that rapes are indeed occurring within women’s custody facilities, committed by men who leveraged SB 132 to transfer in, despite having committed prior sexual assaults.
NEXT STEPS: CONTINUING THE FIGHT TO STOP SB 132
We have already seen the devastating result of these policies in the two years it took to get a response from the court: rape, pregnancy, and repeated violation of women's constitutional rights. This is not the end of our fight.
We will continue pursuing every avenue of justice for Janine, Tomiekia, Krystal, Nadia, and all incarcerated women in California.
The full piece is here:
https://womensliberationfront.org/news/the-fight-is-not-over-next-steps-in-chandler-v-cdcr
More German Madness
Germany is looking to take over Tranada at the top of the Gender Woo League Table I think!!
GERMANY: Women’s Gym Fined €1,000 After Denying Balding Trans-Identified Male Access to Showers ( 01 June)
A women-only fitness center in Erlangen, Bavaria, has been ordered by the government to pay compensation to a trans-identified male after the facility’s owner denied him permission to use the women’s showers.
Doris Lange, who has been the owner of the Lady’s First fitness studio for over three decades, received a notice from Ferda Ataman, the Independent Federal Commissioner for Anti-Discrimination, recommending “appropriate compensation” in the form of €1000 to a trans-identified male for the “personal injury suffered” at being rejected from using the women’s showers.
Speaking to NIUS, Lange noted that a significant number of her clients were Muslim females who required a sex-exclusive place to train away from males.
“It looks to my female customers as if I’m letting a man train there – at least as long as this lady is still equipped with male sexual organs.”
While the identity of the man in question was withheld by NIUS in accordance with German privacy law, Reduxx will reveal that the trans-identified male involved in the case is Laura Holstein.
As previously reported by Reduxx, Holstein was the first trans-identified male to be approved by the Bavarian Football Association (BFA) to play in a women’s football league.
French Madness
An attempt in France to block puberty blockers being prescribed to children looks like it is going to fail.
Wonderful Bernard Lane on Gender Clinic News ( A vote to prod debate 01 June) reports:
The French Senate has passed a draft law to restrict puberty blockers and prohibit cross-sex hormones and transgender surgery for minors.
The May 28 result was carried by the Senate majority of the centre-right Republican and Centrist parties, with near total opposition from socialist, ecological and progressive parties which cried “transphobia”, although one communist senator did abstain from voting out of uncertainty over the issue.
Opposed by the Macron government, the bill is thought unlikely to get the approval of the Lower House, the National Assembly, which is necessary for it to come into force as law.
https://www.genderclinicnews.com/p/a-vote-to-prod-debate?r=7ogxh&triedRedirect=true
Endpiece
The Sophie Molly Party 😂
This is priceless. Thanks to Rex Landy.
https://rexlandy.substack.com/p/life-comes-at-you-fast-eh-sophie
#BeMorePorcupine
Excellent update, Dusty. Thank you. Will share. #BeMorePorcupine
Well done Heehaw 😆 we need a donkey day of visibility.
Ffs the entirety of gender ideology is built on fetishism and perversion, you only have to look at its instigators. It’s staring people in the face but they’re too busy looking the other way.
Thanks as ever Dusty, great title. 😁
#BeMorePorcupine