The Long Riders
Update 880. Dora Moutot Special. #BeMorePorcupine.
Given that I have been down in London, there is the usual backlog at Dusty Towers but I am keeping this to one part. So another long one, dear readers.
Thanks as ever to my paid subscribers and to those who buy me a coffee. These updates do take up an enormous amount of work, so please consider becoming a paid subscriber.
Onwards with the Dusty,Nicola, Moodie and Rex Film Series 😀 Please keep the suggestions for films coming in but please check the list first which I am updating as we go along. Please send suggestions in the comments here at this link:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/empire-of-light-dustys-film-series
The Long Riders is a 1980 American Western directed by Walter Hill.
During the years following the Civil War, banks and trains become the targets of the James-Younger gang, who terrorise the Midwestern United States. The band of robbers is led by Jesse James and Cole Younger, along with several of their brothers. After getting antsy during a bank robbery, Ed Miller opens fire and kills the clerk, resulting in a shootout where Jesse is wounded. Jesse dismisses Ed from the gang; his brother Clell remains.
Mr. Rixley, a detective from the Pinkerton’s agency, is assigned to capture the outlaws. Rixley doggedly remains on their trail, accidentally killing a Younger cousin and the youngest James brother, and losing several of his men in the process.
For the cast, see here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Long_Riders#Release
Spoiler alert: this is the last bank robbery.
Thanks to three wonderful readers for suggested pieces.
Some of the linked pieces below may be behind a paywall.
UK - The EHRC Guidance
We reported on the Guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission here:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/no-more-excuses
Several people have been pointing out weaknesses in the Guidance ( which is fair enough) but I would urge people to make the most of this moment. What we can say ( correct me if I’m wrong) is that if you are providing services to the public, unless you have a really small premises, you should provide a ladies’ toilet. Gyms etc should provide ladies’ changing rooms. Larping men in women’s facilities can be challenged. If someone complains to the organisation about a larping man in the ladies’ toilet or changing room, the organisation needs to do something about that. Despite the incorrect description of data on the basis of sex as ‘special category data’, data should be collected on the basis of sex. Don’t forget that guidance does not trump the law. So I think we should move forward on that basis. Obviously all thoughts gratefully received.
Malcolm Clark warns that the guidance, which is now laid before Parliament for 40 days, could be rejected but it is extraordinarily rare for this to happen so I think we needn’t worry about this.
He warns - I think absolutely correctly - about a likely big fight back from the Gender Borg. This fight back will be backed by the Labour Government themselves!! I have long said that the Labour Government have not appeared as bad as they might have been on the Terf Wars but this is because they were held back by the Cass Review and the Supreme judgment in the For Women Scotland case. Their commitment to a Conversion Practices Bill shows their true position.
On his substack, The Secret Gender Files Malcolm points out that:
Just three days ago - and a mere 48 hours before the EHRC’s Code was published - the government announced that next year it will host a lavish celebration in London of the LGBTQ+ lobby: the European IDAHOT Forum. Uhh?
Well may you ask.
IDAHOT (or International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia to its few friends) used to be known as IDAHOBIT, a name beyond preposterous. After years of ridicule the LGBTQ+ powers-that-be seem finally to have taken the hint. What’s not changed though is their determination to use IDAHOT (aka IDAHOBIT) to advance the toxic nostrums of trans ideology.
If there was any doubt about that let me tell you how the Labour government intends to use next year’s event to funnel an extraordinary £21M of taxpayers money to LGBTQ+ groups. Groups that will promptly use this money to try to change our laws. Including perhaps the Equality Act.
Malcolm also points out how the new Chairwoman of the EHRC, Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson, in her brief video on the lodging of the guidance, manages to not mention women, and to say that this is a change of the law ( it is not, it is a clarification). Not a great sign!!
Malcolm also points out that the new Health Secretary, James Murray is a trans rights ally, that Harriet Harperson…sorry Harman, is the new adviser for women and girls ( see here: https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/for-women-and-girls ) and that the Government have now said they will introduce a Conversion Practices Bill. So the fight continues but, on single sex facilities and women’s sports, STAND YOUR GROUND!!!!!!
All thoughts gratefully received.
https://open.substack.com/pub/malcolmrichardclark/p/the-trans-empire-strikes-back
Karen Davis on You’re kiddin’, right? is concerned about the emphasis on the possibility of some unisex toilets or facilities. I take Karen’s point though I think that, if an organisation wants to waste their time on one unisex facility, knock yourself out as long as women have facilities just for themselves and, while we’re at it, men have facilities just for themselves.
In many ways, this simple piece from Kara Dansky sums things up. Sensible people need to be ‘brave’ and say women are women and men are men. Seemples!!
https://karadansky.substack.com/p/listen-to-womans-hour-the-terf-report-776
England - Cambridge University - Maeve Halligan
Excellent speech by Maeve at this debate at Cambridge University where she is co-founder of the Society of Women. Buck Angel was also involved in this debate and she ( not he) also had a debate with Julie Bindel recently. I am still pondering this and will revert on this in due course.
UK - Women’s Rights Network
Two pieces from the latest WRN Newsletter ( 24 May):
Lorna Young tribunal
WRN Manchester supports former equality manager
Members of WRN Manchester attended the commencement of Lorna Young’s employment tribunal this week.
Lorna is taking Manchester City Council (MCC), her former employer, to tribunal for unfair dismissal on the grounds of religion or belief. Lorna, who was — ironically — an equality manager at MCC, is gender critical and was dismissed for, among other things, her anonymous social media activity.
As featured in a WRN blog, in February 2022 MCC passed a motion by unanimous vote entitled ‘Trans rights are human rights’. This committed the council to audit its services for ‘trans accessibility’ and to support trans and non-binary employees. Two months after the motion passed Sarah Herdan, one of Lorna’s direct reports, complained to Lorna’s line manager that Lorna was “a witch”. Her crime? Liking tweets from JK Rowling and Julie Bindel.
In her complaint, Herdan wrote: “Many trans people, especially younger ones, are actively engaged online and will be fully aware what those likes mean about Lorna’s views. I am ashamed to be associated with someone holding those views in the position that Lorna is in.”
The good news is that the tribunal’s opening week shone a light on MCC’s incompetence, lack of process and complete disregard for women who don’t hold the right sort of views.
One MCC employee called as witness believed ‘trans-age’ — the concept that adults can identify as children and vice versa — is a concept protected under the Equality Act. Another stated that a presentation given to staff entitled ‘The Triumph of Organised Transphobia. Exploring the political, legal and social impact of the Supreme Court Ruling in For Women Scotland’ did not link gender critical beliefs to transphobia. The same presentation identified campaigning against men in women’s sport and the “cotton ceiling” as transphobic.
The tribunal will resume on 21 September. You can read the full transcript of proceedings to date on the Tribunal Tweets Substack. WRN expresses solidarity and support with Lorna, another brave woman fighting for reality.
Dusty: I wonder what the Mayor of Manchester, a certain Andy Burnham, front runner for taking over from Keir Starmer, has to say about this!?
Changing room shame
A depressingly familiar tale
A teacher was jailed this week for a string of child abuse crimes and another man found guilty of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl. The link? Both committed crimes in mixed-sex changing rooms.
Between them, the men were discovered to have thousands of indecent images of children in their possession, many of which were taken in mixed-sex changing rooms at swimming pools. WRN has long been campaigning against such facilities, because we know sexual predators use them to gain access to women and girls and we regularly report on them in this newsletter.
Incredibly, local authorities, leisure centre providers and sports groups still aren’t taking this threat seriously, despite 83% of women aged 16-24 experiencing sexual harassment in the sports facility they use. Time for them to read and engage with our leisure centre investigations, which have uncovered the shocking scale of this scandal.
Dusty - see above about the EHRC Guidance. This should now be coming to an end.
UK - The Good Laugh Project
Dusty - I have no idea why this fox is laughing!?
We have been following Sarah Phillimore’s action against the appalling Dictator …sorry Director of the Good Law Project. The claim has been lodged! Please consider donating to Sarah. We don’t want her to lose her house!!!!!
FINALLY!
Claim form in libel issued. Let’s go.
May 22, 2026
On 29 August 2025 Jolyon Maugham defamed me to his 400K followers on X, refused to delete and apologise, later republished and used the money raised by the Good Law Project in its general ‘trans defence’ fund to instruct a KC to draft a complaint about me to my regulator, presumably in the hope that I would be disbarred.
I set up my crowdfunder in early September and your generous donations have enabled me to issue a claim form in defamation today on 22 May 2026. This process has taken rather longer than I had hoped but the mills of God of course grind slowly. I have had some good news along the way - on 27 March 2026 the BSB rejected the Good Law Project complaint that I had ‘harassed’ the young trans woman ‘Kate’ into an attempted overdose of anti histamines (aka the 39 year old man Euan) and that rejection was reassuringly robust. Maugham then instructed his KC to draft a request to a review that was made on 9 May 2026; a document that I found reassuringly weak in both its analysis and claims.
Roddy Dunlop KC has offered to represent me No Win No Fee and I am very grateful - this will certainly help your money go further and provides me with some equality of arms against Maugham, who will no doubt further raid the GLP funds to pay for very pricey silks.
So now we begin. Libel is of course notoriously tricky and expensive. If I lose then I will lose my house. It’s the only asset I have and costs are likely to be in the region of at least £200K.
So why am I doing this? Concerned friends have offered me identical worried and quizzical expressions. What will I actually achieve? How can this be worth the only asset I have? I have obviously thought about this long and hard. I am a fan of having somewhere to live, especially my home for the last 14 years.
I thought about it again when watching Legends on Netflix on Friday night. This is a truth adjacent story about some plucky Customs Officials in the early 90s who with very little training or resources, managed to bring down two major drug cartels and seize 20 tonnes of heroin. And so what? Fast forward to 2026 and drugs remain a significant societal scourge, cut down one cartel, two more spring up in its place.
But on that analysis we would all do nothing and we would all be nothing. I operate from the simple principle that Maugham is doing significant harm now - to our profession, to the rule of law, to the rights of women and the safety of children. And many continue to take him seriously.
For example, I noted with serious concern that on May 15 Ofcom announced that it was working with ‘experts’ such as the Good Law Project.
‘We have worked with a range of organisations to gather evidence about suspected illegal terrorist content and illegal hate speech online, including antisemitic and anti-Muslim material. As part of this, we have received and independently reviewed evidence from a number of expert organisations including British Future, the Antisemitism Policy Trust, Center for Countering Digital Hate, Community Security Trust, Good Law Project, HOPE not hate, Tech Against Terrorism and Tell MAMA.’
The Good Law Project are not ‘experts’. They are an unregulated and unaccountable outfit controlled by only one man who has a very particular hobby horse. They should not be taken seriously by Ofcom to offer advice on ‘internet hate’, particularly given Maugham’s clear endorsement of domestic terrorism.
Maugham has now shifted his operation to Jersey, to ensure that he avoids scrutiny, or as he would describe it - to replicate the characteristics of charity status without being bound by the ‘moving political guardrails policed by the Charity Commission’.
The Good Law Project raises money off the back of vulnerable people’s fears and they consistently misrepresent what they have achieved or hope to achieve. They in fact do harm to the cause they claim to be fighting for, most recently demonstrated by yet another victory for a woman denied single sex facilities in the NHS. The tribunal judgment at para 194.1 noted that the GLP’s previous failed attempt to challenge EHRC interim guidance in the High Court, cemented binding authority that an employer who permits trans women to use the women’s toilets in effect no longer provides single sex facilities for women as defined in Regulation 20(c) of the Workplace Regulations.
The Good Law Project is indivisible from Maugham; it is simply his vehicle to showcase his own peculiar ideological fixations. He has clogged up the courts, wasted time and significantly extended and inflamed the harms caused by the ongoing insanity over sex versus gender.
I think the harm Maugham does extend significantly beyond what he has tried to do to me. I think it is worth standing up against this, and him. Even if twenty years from now a hundred more Maughams proliferate, at least I tried to do something about this one. I think my defamation action will be illuminating for many who still consider him ‘expert’.
And maybe I too could be a Netflix drama about a plucky underdog who pulled off something special. Suggest some titles in the comments!
Sarah has asked for suggestions about the film of her upcoming success (she doesn’t put it like that 😊) . Here are mine. Please let me (and Sarah) have yours (doesn’t need to be about foxes😂) :
Revenge of the Foxes
Dawn of the Planet of the Foxes
The Foxes ( hat tip to Hitchcock 😀)
The Fox Has Landed.
France - Dora Moutot
Kara Dansky and (via Feminist Legal Clinic) Genevieve Gluck pay tribute to Dora and her brave stand for sex based rights!!
FFS Friday: Dora Moutot
May 22, 2026
Today’s FFS Friday honors Dora Moutot, a French feminist who has been convicted of a criminal offense and ordered to pay a fine. Her crime? Uttering the words “As women, we are compelled to be wary of people with penises.”
It is unacceptable that a woman can be criminally convicted for expressing, in a debate of general interest, a concern related to women’s safety and the reality of biological sex.
I first wrote about Dora and her colleague Marguerite Stern nearly two years ago, in May of 2024, when I explained that they had published a book that year titled Transmania: enquête sur les dérives de l’idéologie transgenre (Transmania: An Investigation into the Abuses of Transgender Ideology).
If I’ve got this right (and I could be wrong), today is Dora’s birthday. The reason I think that is this X post by Marguerite, from this day in 2024:
Someone, please tell me if my French has gotten so bad that I am misunderstanding that post.
On May 20 of this year, she posted (in English) that she had been convicted of a criminal offense.
Her offense was uttering the following words on television: “As women, we are compelled to be wary of people with penises.”
The full piece is here:
https://karadansky.substack.com/p/ffs-friday-dora-moutot
FRANCE: Women’s Rights Activist Convicted of Insulting “Transgender Women” by Discussing Their “Male Attribute,” Fined €4,500 | Genevieve Gluck
A French women’s rights activist has been found guilty of “public insult” over a remark she made during a televised debate with a trans-identified male. Dora Moutot was informed on May 20 that she had been convicted of “public insult against a person or group of people on account of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity” due to her comment that women are “wary of people with penises.”
Moutot made the statement during an October 2022 episode of the popular talk show Quelle Époque!, where she had been invited as a guest to debate a trans-identified male named Marie Cau, the mayor of Tilloy-lez-Marchiennes. While discussing the issue of men who claim to be transgender women, Moutot stated that women have a need to be cautious in the presence of “people with penises.”
In its ruling, the court argued that Moutot had reduced “transgender women” to “their male attribute.”
Incredibly Moutot was fined €1,000, to be paid to the state, as well as the payment of €500 in damages to each of the three trans activist associations who backed Cau’s legal complaint, and an additional €2,000 to cover the court costs, which had come from public funding.
Moutot also stated that she intends to appeal the decision, saying that she is willing to take the case to the Court of Cassation, the highest court in France.
In September 2022, Cau published an autobiography titled Madame Mayor (Madame le Maire) wherein he described his urge to wear women’s clothing, an activity which he says brings about the “height of happiness” for him.
In his autobiography, Cau also detailed his divorce from his wife, and railed against the justice system, which granted custody of their children to his former wife.
In a staggering hypocrisy, though Moutot had been accused of “advocating violence against transgender individuals,” the author and women’s rights campaigner has herself been subjected to a targeted campaign of harassment, with trans activists explicitly calling for her murder.
Ireland - The Capture Of A Nation
Glinner explains how someone who helped his wife and himself, then went against them. And looks at the wider situation:
Ireland next
The men who destroyed women’s rights in my home country
May 24, 2026
In October 2015, my ex-wife and I were campaigning for abortion reform in Ireland. The man driving us up the east coast from Dublin to Belfast was Colm O’Gorman. Sound man, brave man, I thought. Founder of One in Four and, of course, the face of Amnesty International in Ireland. I liked him enormously and considered him a friend.
But it was my wife who suffered the tragedy that put us in that man’s car. Her first pregnancy after we had begun to try had been diagnosed with a fatal foetal abnormality. Had she been in Ireland rather than London, the law would have forced her to carry the baby to term. She and I did a short film about it that went out under the Amnesty banner, and we were proud to be useful to a brand we considered one of unassailable goodness, much as my grandparents and parents once thought of the priesthood.
The next time I saw Colm O’Gorman, it was three years later. He was outside an RTÉ studio with a placard, protesting a five-minute interview I had given on the matter of women’s rights, which he had now decided he was against. By now, my marriage was failing, so I had no time to admire the elegance of his method. Pre-cancellation, he had used my wife and me to burnish Amnesty’s feminist credentials. Post-cancellation, he used my notoriety to help destroy women’s rights in Ireland.
The institution he served has run Ireland’s gender politics ever since. Amnesty Ireland did not merely consent to self-ID. It led the charge. It campaigned for the Gender Recognition Act of 2015, briefed politicians, told journalists what to think, and when the law passed it celebrated. The organisation that had once put my wife’s grief on a poster now used its authority to ensure that no Irish woman would be permitted to object to a male in her ward, her cell, or her refuge. What we gave Amnesty was the down payment on a betrayal.
But Britain has just done something Ireland will not. On Thursday, more than a year after the UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously that “woman” in the Equality Act means biological woman, the Equalities Minister Bridget Phillipson finally laid the updated EHRC code of practice before Parliament. After a decade of being smeared, sacked, doxxed, arrested and dragged through the courts, women in Britain have a piece of paper that tells hospitals, schools, gyms and refuges what the law actually says. Single-sex means single-sex. A man with a certificate is still a man.
Terf Island held the line.
But this is a global war, and Britain is just one front. While we toast at home, women in other countries are still being sued, sacked, fined, deplatformed and prosecuted by their own states for the crime of saying men are men.
In Australia, the Federal Court has just told Sall Grover that her women’s app, Giggle, was obliged to admit a male who identifies into being a woman. Last week, on appeal, the court doubled her damages to twenty thousand dollars for the offence of running the app she built. In the same country, Kirralie Smith of Binary Australia has been ordered to pay $95,000 to two trans-identifying males whose names and faces she shared online while raising concerns about males playing women’s football in New South Wales. The penalty was handed down in December. She must also pin a public apology to them on every social media account she owns, for as long as she owns them.
The full piece is here:
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/ireland-next
Staying in Ireland, Niamh Uí Bhriain in Gript News reports:
Photo credit: Pastor Sam (CC BY 3.0 https://bit.ly/3iCXLF4)
Rank hypocrisy: Mixed-sex toilets for schools, but not for TDs.
May 20, 2026
As I wrote yesterday in this long read on parents likely being forced to go to law to protect their children’s privacy in schools, the furore around the madness of imposing mixed-sex bathrooms on secondary schools hasn’t gone away, despite the curious disinterest shown by the legacy media.
But the indefatigable Offaly TD [ Irish MP] , Carol Nolan, has uncovered the rank hypocrisy of those in power in this regard by asking a most pertinent question: whether the DEI commitments of the Houses of the Oireachtas had led to the provision of gender-neutral toilets in Leinster House.
What was the reply? A lot of blather as usual about the OPW [ Office of Public Works] and inclusion and then an admission from the Minister Jack Chambers: “I can confirm that the OPW has not been requested to undertake a specific review of the provision of gender-neutral toilets.”
That’s actually pretty outrageous: schoolgirls across the country are being subject to humiliation and upset and risk because of the deliberate decision – made to placate a tiny number of people – that toilets in schools should now be ‘gender neutral’, but TDs and Senators aren’t subject to the same harmful nonsense.
Mixed-sex toilets for vulnerable 13-year-old girls – and boys – but not for TDs. Why do we let them away with this deceit? Thankfully, we have a small few honest representatives in Leinster House who can find out what is actually going on and expose these hypocrisies.
“While so called ‘Gender Neutral’ Toilets are being imposed on schools, a 2024 commitment to Gender Neutral toilets in the Oireachtas has still not been fulfilled? It’s crystal clear that there is an agenda to target school kids with ideology!” Deputy Nolan posted on X.
As the Minister’s response makes clear, those in charge haven’t even undertaken a review in regard to mixed-sex bathrooms in the Dáil. God, no. But gender-neutral toilets were foisted on schools without any consultation with parents or students, and when parents complained they were often ignored. Meanwhile, we have teenage girls going back to their classrooms in tears because they feel humiliated trying to access sanitary products in what used to be a private space – the bathroom – but is now shared with boys.
As one mother told the Irish Daily Mail, her daughter is ‘terrified of being ostracised if she kicks up a fuss”. It’s outrageous. The people who should be kicking up a fuss are the TDs in Leinster House, in particular the female of the species who bang on endlessly about bodily autonomy and privacy and period poverty etc etc. And where is the National Women’s Council? [ Don’t you mean the National Willy Council!] Surely they should have their taxpayer-funded apparatchiks all over this egregious disregard for the rights of girls. But no, not a peep.
As Leinster House staffer David Mullins wrote: “So, while gender neutral toilets are being imposed on school kids, a 2024 commitment to provide such toilets in Leinster House has not been progressed. A case of ‘good enough for thee, but not for me’?”
A survey commissioned by the Countess showed that 62% of respondents said that public buildings such as schools should have to provide single-sex toilets – yet mixed-sex toilets have been foisted on schools. But not on TDs. That’s very telling, isn’t it?
As was pointed out this morning in response to Deputy Nolan’s tweet, in 2022 a tampon and sanitary towel dispenser was installed in a men’s toilet in Leinster House – interestingly in a location “primarily aimed at visitors which often includes school groups but also are available to the wider community.” This measure was apparently undertaken to further “the aim of creating a more inclusive Parliament ” and would “be of benefit to the Parliamentary community and visitors”.
The move was widely ridiculed at the time. But that’s as far as it went. Female TDs are not being forced to share a bathroom with their male counterparts, but schoolgirls are. This is actually beyond rank hypocrisy: it’s deeply disingenuous, dishonest and wilfully indifferent to the safety of our girls.
There’s a sense that this trampling on the right to privacy of schoolgirls is partly driven by the political obsession with diversity and transgender ideology, and partly just another experiment in social engineering that the elites conveniently remove themselves from such as the undermining of marriage or attacks on faith-based schools.
Either way, as I also said yesterday, these matters are bound to end up in the courts. But in the meantime, can the Minister and the gender ideology advocates in Leinster House either rapidly change all the bathrooms to being gender-neutral, or acknowledge their incredible hypocrisy in this regard.
New Zealand - Bill To Define Men And Women
We have mentioned recently the extremely important Bill to make clear the meaning of ‘men’ and ‘women’ in NZ law as lodged by NZ First. Thanks to our friend, Katrina Biggs for allowing us to print the whole of this. Overseas Terfs are also allowed to make submissions. I suggest we wait for Katrina’s submissions and then join in with those.
The bill to define women and men in legislation passed its first reading in NZ Parliament. This is our chance to be heard now.
It’s a rare opportunity - let’s make the most of it.
May 23, 2026
On the night of Wednesday 20th May, I did a first-time-ever thing. I watched a livestream of a debate in Parliament, which in this case was on NZ First’s bill to define women and men in legislation. It passed its first reading with 67 MPs voting for it, and 55 against it.
You mightn’t be surprised to hear that all those who voted against were the Left-wing parties, whose debate speeches consisted of wailing about ‘poor trans’. It’s pretty clear they know that being able to twist the words ‘woman’ and ‘man’ to mean whatever they want is vital for trans ideology. There was barely a mention of women and girls from these parties, apart from assertions that defining women and men in legislation will somehow work against them. The reasons given for all their catastrophising varied from non-existent, to ridiculous.
A day before the first reading of the bill, National announced they would support it through to the first reading, and ACT announced the same support on the day of the first reading. Whether or not there was any influence from poll results released that same day, which showed increased support amongst all political parties for ‘sex’ to be defined by biology, compared to when it was done a year ago, we may never know. It remains to be seen if National and ACT continue to support the bill at its second and third readings.
In contrast to the Left-wing parties, the parties on the centre-right - i.e. NZ First, National, and ACT - focussed on women and girls in their speeches, and all the reasons why we have come to a point where defining women and men in law is now needed. They all, bar the Minister for Women Nicola Grigg (I’ll come back to her), gave brilliant speeches, which centred women and girls, were based on facts, and what our reality has become.
If you’re interested, all the speeches can be read in the link at the bottom.¹
Nicola Grigg is the National MP for Selwyn, and was born and raised on the family sheep and beef farm. Her four portfolios include being the Minister for Women. You’d have thought she might be quite keen on this bill, given she must be acutely aware of sex differences, but could barely summon up even a small puff of enthusiasm for it. She was not happy her party as a whole was supporting it, and claimed there were ‘more important things’ for women – can’t disagree, aren’t there always? – it was badly crafted, and wouldn’t achieve much. The vision and intention behind it, and how having legal definitions for women and men will actually help women as a sex class, seems to have unaccountably bypassed her. Word is that discussion in the National Caucus about whether or not the party should support the bill, prior to the decision to do so, got a bit heated. I expect Nicola may have been amongst the ‘heated’ opposers of it.
The thing about this bill to define women and men in legislation is that it’s a member’s bill, which means it is a bill that an MP who is not a government minister put into a ballot to be drawn at random. These bills don’t have the benefit of being shaped and polished by the party machine beforehand, so it’s quite normal for them to be rough around the edges, and need refining. This gets done by the usual process of them going to the select committee, who then hears and reads the public submissions, and makes adjustments and amendments accordingly.
This bill will go to the Social Services and Community Committee, and after the submission process it gets re-presented to Parliament for a second reading. It can take some time, so may not be done before the general election on 7 November this year. If at the second reading it gets more yes than no votes again, a third reading in Parliament is required with the same outcome, before it gets passed into law.
If passed, this law will go into the Legislation Act, rather than the Human Rights Act, so it has greater coverage over all legislation. Right on cue, twats on X started sharing a meme which claims that putting the word ‘male’ (as in, man = adult human biological male) into the Legislation Act to cover all legislation, means it includes legislation which talks about the likes of male lobsters, because somehow the word ‘human’ can be overlooked. I kid you not.
Submissions to the Social Services and Community Committee close on 2nd July, and they can be either written, oral, or both. Yes, I’ll be making both a written and oral one 😊 As will transactivists, transmaidens, and transbros who are loud, numerous, and now raging on social media about the bill. Shaneel Lal, the horror who was instrumental in whipping up the mob frenzy against Kellie-Jay Keen in Albert Park in March 2023, is rallying his troops again to oppose it.
If you like the idea of women and men being defined in legislation according to their biological sex, and don’t want other voices to drown ours out, then please do make a submission to tell the committee you want this bill, and why. It doesn’t have to be long and fancy, but do make your voice heard. Individuals and organisations from overseas are also permitted to make written and oral submissions. The link to where and how to do this is at the bottom.²
As already acknowledged, the bill needs some refinement and amendments, and the select committee process is where any wrinkles can be ironed out. An excellent submission already published on X by Peter James Steven [ copied after this piece] identifies some of those wrinkles, and may help if you want to make a submission which addresses the more technical details. It’s worth a read, regardless.
However, there’s no need to get technical, or try and address every single issue wrong with the wording of the bill in your submission. A submission based simply on personal experience of encountering a man in a women’s space, for example - if you’ve had that experience – or of not wanting either yourself or your daughter, granddaughter, or niece to have that experience, is fine. Some good general guidelines to help with whatever you choose have been created here.
I will publish my own written submission in due course. One thing I’ll be asking in it, is that Councils and organisations not be allowed to make their own meanings for the words ‘woman’ and ‘man’, or ‘female’ and ‘male’, and put it into their policies as a sneaky way to bypass the legislation.
¹Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill – First Reading scroll about three-quarters of the way down the webpage, and look for the heading ‘Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill - First Reading’ for the speeches.
² The link to make your submission is here: Legislation (Definitions of Woman and Man) Amendment Bill
You may also find Ani O’Brien’s five-minute video clip on X entertaining/enlightening, where she talks about the nonsensical reactions to the bill by Left-wing MPs, and how they miss the most basic of all reasons why we need this bill to define women and men in legislation.
https://aboldwoman.substack.com/p/the-bill-to-define-women-and-men
Here is the piece from Mr Steven:
https://x.com/pjamessteven/status/2057721526116655204?s=46
This Never Happens - Transgender Serial Killer
Genevieve Gluck reports:
Transgender Serial Killer Convicted of Slaying, Dismembering Third Female Victim
May 22, 2026
A prolific transgender serial killer with prior convictions for the murders of two women has been convicted for the third time in the grisly slaying and dismemberment of a third female victim. Harvey Marcelin, 87, who previously claimed to identify as a “lesbian” called Marceline Harvey, was convicted in a New York court last week of the murder of 68-year-old Susan Leyden.
In March 2022, Leyden’s headless torso was found in a shopping cart blocks away from Marcelin’s Brooklyn apartment, prompting police to search Marcelin’s residence. There investigators discovered Leyden’s head, as well as a number of saws and bloody sheets. One of Leyden’s legs was found near a garbage can a few blocks away.
On March 11, the NYPD held a press conference with updates on the gruesome crime in which they released surveillance footage from a retail store featuring Marcelin. In it, Marcelin is seen utilizing a motorized wheelchair with what appears to be a severed human leg on the seat, visible when Marcelin stands from the chair to look at products.
During the conference, Kings County District Attorney Eric Gonzalez introduced Marcelin as a “female” and stated he was “born a male, but prefers the pronoun ‘miss.’” Gonzalez uses feminine pronouns to refer to Marcelin throughout, and often refers to him as a “female person of interest.”
Leyden’s body was found in pieces scattered across the neighborhood, with parts being found on two separate days. Her leg was found on March 7, poking out of a discarded tire, and her headless torso was found in a shopping cart blocks away on March 9, along with a number of electric saws.
During court proceedings, one witness testified to having come across the shopping cart while on his way home to Brooklyn from a night out. After deciding to take it with him, he peered into a plastic shopping bag that had been placed inside the cart. Ramon Lopez told jurors that within the bag, he “found a body.” Lopez said he called the police immediately.
Prosecutors told the court that inside the bag were some of Leyden’s remains. Surveillance footage showed Marcelin pushing the shopping cart the day before it was discovered.
The jury swiftly convicted Marcelin after just one hour of deliberations, reports The New York Times. While the outlet had previously referred to Marcelin as a woman, their most recent article regarding his conviction refers to him as a man repeatedly, and states that “at the start of his trial last month, Mr. Marcelin told the court that he identifies as a man.”
On July 30, 2022, The New York Times released a lengthy sympathetic profile on Marcelin and his crimes, utilizing “she/her” pronouns throughout. The article insisted “transgender people are far more likely to become victims of violence, not perpetrators,” and implied that Marcelin’s history of violence against women was a result of his internal “gender identity” conflict.
As previously revealed by Reduxx, Marcelin had known the victim and was interacting with her on Facebook. Reports from last week’s trial confirm that Marcelin had met his latest victim after being granted access to a homeless shelter for women. When they met, Leyden was a resident of the Sage Center at Stonewall House, an LGBTQ residence in Brooklyn that also houses homeless seniors.
The full piece is here:
https://genevievegluck.substack.com/p/transgender-serial-killer-convicted
Here is the New York Police Department discussing a female serial killer. Ummm…hold on just a minute!!!
Endpiece
From Dusty
#BeMorePorcupine
#KeepTerfing
#TickleMyArse
#KeepFighting
#RepealTheGRA
#AdultHumanFemale
#LetWomenSpeak
#LGB✂️TQ
#BeMoreDissident
#HoldTheLine
#StopTheBlockersTrial
#NeverSurrender
#NeverForget
#TruthWillTriumph
#WeWillWin
Thanks Dusty. I’m glad you’re positive about the Guidance. I’d heard a few negative things so I’m relying on you to be right….of course you always are 😁.
Ireland- I’m heartbroken. The people need to take control and reverse the madness.
#FoxPower 💪🏻
#BeMorePorcupine