Women Do Not Consent!
Update 909. The Shut Up The Terfs Bill. #BeMorePorcupine.
The news and views continue to flood in to Dusty Towers but I am determined to keep this to one part. So a 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, especially because I read or listen to all of the potential pieces before deciding which ones to feature. I obviously don’t run with all of the stuff that I have in front of me! So please consider becoming a paid subscriber.
The month of June is, of course, Pride Month. However, traditionally, on this substack it is Terf Month🥂🎈🍾😎🎇 , when we pause the film series and each update will start with a great Terf or women’s rights speech. Such speeches can be at rallies and demos, at lectures, in videos, in films and podcasts and in news items.
Today’s speech is a real blockbuster from Amy Sousa ( aka The Known Heretic) at a rally in support of the Korean Women’s Spa who had been told they had to allow larping men into the women’s spaces. The speech starts at about 12.50.
Thanks to two wonderful readers for suggested pieces.
Some of the linked pieces below may be behind a paywall.
Let Women Speak Part 2
Following on from our last report about the event yesterday, LWS gathered again at Marble Arch today to sing hymns and songs, to then visit Speakers’ Corner and to end up with a picnic in the park. The ‘highlights’ are:
At about 28 mins, an American tourist starts arguing about trans rights and is effortlessly dismantled by Kellie-Jay. Interesting how he reels off many of the usual (totally untrue) statements used by the Gender Borg!!
At about 1.04.22 a Muslim man threatens to cut Kellie-Jay’s throat!! I understand that he was later arrested ( I should think so too). I hope this didn’t spoil the picnic too much.
Well done as ever to all those who attended.
UK - The Conversion Practices Bill
We are, of course, closely following this.
Sarah Phillimore on her substack eviscerates this appalling bill. She feels, shockingly, that, if a parent is prosecuted, this may have knock on effects with regard to the custody of any children involved!!!!!!! I am delighted that, as did Dennis Kavanagh, she thinks, as I do, that this is clearly incompatible with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 ( the right to private, family life and home).
We just have to defeat this Bill!!!
The Conversion Practices Bill
Is this capable of bringing down both the criminal AND family justice systems? Much more work needs to be done to analyse the impact of this bill on the already tottering family justice system.
Jun 27, 2026
On 25 June 2026 the Government published the ‘Conversion Practices Draft Bill’ the promised and long awaited attempt to criminalise attempts to ‘convert’ people out of being gay or ‘trans’ - despite the fact that the acts complained of such as ‘corrective rape’ or assault are already very serious criminal offences and despite the lack of evidence that ‘conversion practices’ are carried out in the UK routinely or at all.
Section 1(2) provides for an extremely wide offence - a ‘conversion practice’ means any conduct carried out by a person towards an individual, causing that individual to have or not to have, or to believe or not to believe that they have a sexual orientation or a transgender identity.
There is a protection for medical professionals under section 1(3) where the conduct is carried out in the course of providing health care services. This will not be a ‘conversion practice’ unless that person acts in a way that falls ‘far below the standards reasonably expected’.
Pursuant to section 2(1) the ‘abusive conversion practice’ must cause serious harm to the individual’s physical or mental health or serious alarm or distress which has a ‘substantial adverse effect on their usual day to day activities’.
As the cross examination of ‘Samantha Tempest’ continues in his claim against his employers by allowing him to be ‘harassed’ by any ‘gender critical’ view expressed in the workplace, we don’t have to go far to see an example of how those claiming a trans identity will assert that even mild mannered online posts which do not 100% ‘affirm’ the reality of a trans identity, will be claimed to cause immediate and very significant harm. See the posts from Tribunal Tweets about the frankly incredible evidence given by Mr Tempest in the recent tribunal hearing.
‘Transgender identity’ includes an individual identifying as ‘neither male nor female or as not solely male or female’. This is a ‘status’ unknown to any other legislation and would seem to be an attempt to dodge the ruling of the Supreme Court in 2025 about the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 and the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’ which does not include some nebulous ‘neither one nor the other’.
The draft has the distinction of being immediately reviled by almost everyone, save for a group of proudly smug MPs, too busy patting themselves on the back to deal with the volley of concerned questions as to how it would operate.
Jolyon Maugham for example is annoyed by the ‘massive carve out’ for the provision of health care services, and expresses himself in his usual measured and reasonable way. Any ‘crank’ providing mental health services is providing ‘health care services’ - indeed it has become ‘orthodox’ for the NHS to engage in ‘abusive conversion therapy’. I assume by this he means the year long investigation into the very serious failures of the WellBN clinic who carried out little or no assessment of 78 child patients before medically transitioning them. But not to worry! The Good Law Project now hopes to take over payment for at least 15 of those children and get them treated at Susie Green’s latest venture, Anne Health.
It begs an interesting question as to whether the GLP could be charged with an abusive conversion practice if any of those children were acting out of internalised homophobia. Maybe this cloud will have some silver linings…
Sarah concludes with a quote from Dennis Kavanagh:
…how do you parent in this situation… the harm threshold is very low and it can be anything … why don’t parents have the same protection as doctors? … this is a very, very dangerous piece of legislation… it exposes parents to the wholesale violation of their article 8 rights and I think it has the potential to turn children against parents which is pretty ugly. You can’t just legislate for this stuff and pretend the Tavistock didn’t happen… we are not going to forget the Tavistock, we are not going to let you treat parents like this, you have got to stop lumping gay people in with transgender issues… you pass this and you bang a lot of parents up and you stop them protecting their children… I think you are finished as a political movement. This is worse than section 28 which wasn’t a criminal statute. Game on. Expect a fight.
The full piece is here:
https://sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/the-conversion-practices-bill
Lucy Marsh of the Family Education Trust also reports on the Bill:
Dear supporter,
The conversion therapy bill aims to silence dissent
The Government has just published its draft conversion therapy bill which is unfortunately much worse than we anticipated. Despite previous assurances that any bill would not criminalise parents whose child is experiencing ‘gender distress’, the bill puts parents at risk of five years in prison and an unlimited fine if they are accused of ‘unreasonable behaviour’ by questioning their child’s sexuality or gender identity and causing ‘serious harm’.
The test for ‘harm’ is vague and subjective, and will lead to a flood of complaints to the police. This bill is intended to frighten people into silence and also puts organisations like FET at risk.
The bill defines ‘conversion practice’ as any conduct carried out by a person towards an individual with the intention of changing either their sexuality or transgender identity. It adds that it ‘is not a conversion practice unless the person acts in a way that falls far below the standards reasonably expected of a person in their position’ but goes on to define ‘abusive’ behaviour as:
words or behaviour of a sexual nature;
(b) violent or threatening words or behaviour;
(c) controlling or coercive words or behaviour;
(d) use of economic pressure;
(e) use of psychological or emotional pressure.
Thus, a loving parent who tries to protect their child from being groomed to believe that they were ‘born in the wrong body’ could end up being prosecuted and imprisoned for not affirming their child’s opposite sex identity or refusing to pay for so-called ‘gender affirming care’.
Even if the bar for prosecution is high, the impact this bill will have on the family unit is profound. We believe that this is a huge State overreach to separate children from their families. It is straight out of the playbook of North Korea to encourage children to report their parents for not supporting LGBT+ activist-driven ideology.
Parents and organisations at risk
It’s not even just parents of trans-identifying children who are at risk. The bill defines a transgender identity as anyone who is ‘transexual’, has undergone or is even ‘proposing to undergo’ gender reassignment. It also includes anyone who ‘identifies as neither male nor female or as not solely male or female,’ meaning that parents who refuse to agree that their child is ‘non-binary’ or ‘gender fluid’ could also fall foul of the new law.
Ministers have also stated that ‘asexuality’ is also covered in the bill. This is a bizarre addition as anyone forced to have sex against their will would be covered by existing rape laws.
FET has previously seen school sex education materials where children under 16 are encouraged to identify as ‘asexual’ as they have not experienced sexual attraction, so it is yet another concerning sign that legislation is being driven by queer theorists attempting to label children as LGBT+.
The way the bill is drafted not only targets individuals including parents, teachers, medical professionals and therapists, but also specifically mentions ‘corporate and unincorporated bodies’ including support groups for parents and organisations (such as FET), which provide information to combat gender ideology.
The severe penalties for being convicted of conversion practice will apply only to actions that occur after the legislation officially becomes law. While criminal charges cannot usually be brought retrospectively, anyone who believes themselves to have been the victim of past abuse may be able to pursue compensation in the civil courts by bring a private prosecution against individuals or organisations.
The evidence of ‘harm’ is worded as to be completely subjective. The document says in section 2 that serious harm is (a) defined as anything that impacts on the individual’s ‘physical or mental health’, or (b) ‘serious alarm or distress to the individual which has a substantial adverse effect on their usual day-to-day activities.’
You only need look at the huge number of young adults claiming to be unable to participate in either education or employment because of self-proclaimed ‘psychological distress’ to realise this wording could lead to huge numbers of reports to the police.
Self-diagnosis has led to huge rise in anxiety
Mental health conditions and behavioural disorders have been a primary driver of the increase in the working age personal independence payments (PIP) over the past decade, which correlates with the huge increase in children and young people identifying as LGBT+.
The most recent Government figures show that the monthly average of new PIP awards where the primary medical condition was anxiety and depression has increased from 2,500 per month in 2019, to 8,800 per month in 2024.
One in ten 16-24-year-olds in the UK now identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) according to a 2025 report by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) – a significant increase from previous years.
UK rates of transgender identity have also risen five-fold since 2000, with the highest rise observed among 16- to 29-year-olds, according to analysis from the British Medical Journal (BMJ) Group.
It has been consistently reported that in the UK, LGBT+ individuals experience increased levels of common mental health problems, including depression and anxiety. It’s therefore not difficult to imagine a scenario where many children and young adults who believe their parents didn’t sufficiently support their sexual orientation or transgender identity bringing forward private prosecutions for ‘conversion practice’, egged on by trans activist organisations such as Stonewall and others.
Individual parents, parent-led support groups like Bayswater Support Group and healthcare professionals continue to be bombarded with false accusations from transgender activists that they are engaging in conversion practices by protecting children from the ‘affirmation-only’ route.
Supporters of the bill counter that it is aimed at harmful attempts to change identity, not at parental caution. Indeed, the press release for the bill claims there are ‘robust thresholds that protect open conversations, and free speech,’ but such thresholds are not in the bill itself. Instead, it relies completely on subjective assessments to define what constitutes criminally ‘abusive’ conduct, stating that this would need to involve ‘controlling or coercive words or behaviour’ or ‘use of psychological or emotional pressure’.
Considering that some activists consider that any parent who says ‘no’ to their children is guilty of emotional abuse, we expect a raft of complaints to police.
Similarity with Non Crime Hate Incident Fiasco
The introduction of Non Crime Hate Incidents (NCHI) resulted in a massive increase of police reports and waste of resources, which led to the Government deciding in March to scrap legislation because ‘unclear guidance has led to officers being called out to people’s homes over insults and routine arguments.’
However, the recording of a NCHI did not generally result in imprisonment: whereas this draft bill adds the threat of criminal prosecution to parents, individuals and organisations who decline to go along with LGBT+ dogma.
This is chilling and must not be allowed to go unchallenged.
We believe the bill is purposely intended to shut down debate and ensure that parents are rendered powerless to protect their children, since even questioning the legitimacy of pro-trans RHSE materials in schools could result in accusations of ‘conversion practice’.
Considering that trans activists claim that a social media post saying that men can’t be women causes them ‘harm and distress’ and frequently campaign to ensure that individuals and organisations are cancelled from speaking at events and banned from social media platforms, they will have a field day if the bill in its current form becomes law.
FET has already been subject to expensive legal challenges and cancellation from transgender activists attempting to shut us down. This bill hands legitimate power to vexatious individuals with a mission to silence any dissenting voices.
It also means that schools may be more likely to affirm a child’s opposite sex identity due to the threat of being prosecuted for corporate conversion practice, despite the Government’s safeguarding advice on gender questioning children instructing teachers to exercise caution. However, teachers are highly likely to be more worried about accusations of ‘homophobia and transphobia’ and the threat of prosecution than the consequences of affirming a child by using ‘preferred pronouns’ without parental knowledge or consent.
Cruel conversion practices are already illegal
Legitimate abuse is already illegal through existing anti-torture laws which can result in a life sentence for anyone found guilty of causing severe physical or mental pain. We believe that the draft conversion therapy bill is not only unnecessary, but has purposefully been published in the same week as the announcement that the NHS puberty blocker trial will go ahead in order to shut down concerns that this trial is abusive.
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) announced on 19 June that it has concluded that the PATHWAYS clinical trial is safe, despite the fact that the minimum age to participate is just 11 for girls and 12 for boys. We are appalled that the Government is pressing ahead with experimenting on children using dangerous drugs that evidence already shows can cause loss of cognition, infertility, loss of sexual function, damage to bone density and other serious health issues.
On their podcast, The Dumb Ages Clive Simpson and Jack David discuss this Bill and also touch on: the puberty blocker trial; the Scottish prisons judgment; and their hope that Pride may be on the way out.
https://thedumbages.substack.com/p/episode-58
UK - Education
EDI Jester looks at The Youth Endowment Fund which has launched a new funding round for its “Violence Against Women and Girls Prevention Programme” focused on secondary schools. On the surface it sounds reasonable but in reality, EDI states, it is a vehicle for contested ideology craftily dressed up as safeguarding. He believes that a legal challenge is necessary. Here’s hoping!!!!!!!
https://edijester.substack.com/p/vawg-as-a-trojan-horse
UK - Andy Burnham’s Chief of Staff
Uhoh!!!!!! Malcolm Clark reports on X:
Meet James Purnell, Andy Burnham’s Chief of Staff. In 2018 he devised the BBC’s LGBT+ Plan. This enforced ‘preferred pronouns’ and greater portrayal of “LGBT+ identities”. The man behind the glut of drag queens on TV is Burnham’s right hand man. Dearie me.
Andy Burnham picks former Blair minister James Purnell as chief of staff
https://x.com/TwisterFilm/status/2070177316475470172
Ireland - The New Campaign
We just reported on this new campaign group here:
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/a-joan-of-arc-for-ireland
In this video four members of the group explain the presentation they have just made to the Dail ( the lower house and principal chamber of the Irish parliament).
Meanwhile, the Countess on X reports on a shocking new mural in Dublin!!!
This is profoundly sad. Joe Caslin’s new mural ‘Seen’ on Townsend Street celebrates a young woman who identifies as trans – a female who has undergone significant body modification in the pursuit of ‘visibility’.
Why are we plastering public spaces with images that affirm medicalisation of distressed young women and girls?
Pride should not mean erasing sex-based reality or encouraging irreversible interventions on healthy bodies.
Women and girls deserve better than this. Real support means addressing root causes like mental health, trauma, autism, and social contagion – not celebrating the erasure of female bodies.
#SexMatters
#https://www.rte.ie/news/2026/0626/1580541-joe-caslin-pride/
https://x.com/TheCountessIE/status/2070810235728507275
The States - California Takes Your Children!
Erin Friday, co-lead of the group Our Duty, reports on their substack about a California Bill that could lead to children being take from parents who do not ‘affirm’ their ‘transition.’
The Two-Bill Pipeline: How California Continues to Build a Legal Machine to Take Your Children
Jun 15, 2026
There is a specific kind of California bill that does not announce itself honestly. It arrives with a sympathetic framing, with some provisions that appear to be beneficial and a set of legislative findings that describe a problem real enough that most legislators will be loath to oppose. Read the Post Script to see how the Assembly Republicans were hoodwinked by this bill.
Assembly Bill 1967 is one of those bills. To understand how dangerous this bill is, we have to begin with a law that passed three years ago, AB 665, about which we wrote extensively. AB 1967 is not a standalone policy but is part of a bigger agenda. This agenda is to create a hellscape where “chosen families” replace biological families, where children’s autonomy replaces parental direction and where parents’ hard-earned money is used to fund the entire operation.
Step One: Assembly Bill 665
In 2023, California passed AB 665, authored by Assembly member Wendy Carrillo. It amended Family Code § 6924 to allow minors 12 and older to consent to mental health treatment and residential shelter services without parental consent and without notice to the parent. The sweetener in the bill was that Medi-Cal would cover mental health treatments for poor children. This aspect provided a pathway for the author to present a perceived benefit while ignoring the most pernicious provisions. This strategy is quite successful especially when the press does not read the bill, fails to understand it, or needs a convenient hook to pivot from the genuine effect of the bill.
Prior to AB 665, California law had a gatekeeping requirement. A minor could only self-consent to residential shelter services if two conditions were both satisfied. The conditions were that the minor was mature enough to participate intelligently in the therapeutic process, and the minor was either in danger of serious harm to themselves or others, or was a victim of incest or child abuse. That second condition was a crisis predicate. It was the line between a state system responding to genuine emergency and a state system substituting its judgment for a parent’s.
Under the new Family Code § 6924, operative July 1, 2024, a 12-year-old needs only to be deemed “mature enough to participate intelligently” in the outpatient or inpatient mental health sessions by a “professional person.” (Notably, Assembly member Rick Zbur tried to pass a bill (AB 2242) that would have expedited licensure for those professionals who would commit to engaging in “gender affirming” medical or mental healthcare. It was vetoed, despite Governor Newsom’s desire to “see trans kids.”)
When a child leaves the family home, without consent or knowledge of the parents, and goes to a residential shelter, a definition that includes LGBTQ centers, the center needs only to make “best efforts” to contact the child’s parents. What does that mean? It means consulting the child first to determine whether parental involvement is “appropriate.” If the child objects to parental involvement and the professional agrees after hearing only from the child, the parent is not contacted. The parent is not afforded the opportunity to provide his or her position, inform the shelter of the child’s mental health or medical issues, or defend against any misrepresentations by the child. The record of that “appropriateness” determination gets tucked away into the client file, completely inaccessible to the parent. Should the professional believe that the parent is worthy of knowing where the child is, the professional determines whether his efforts were good enough. The record of any attempts is also kept in the private file.
Any argument that the purpose of AB 665 is to protect children is belied by the bill’s own legislative findings. Finding (h) identified LGBTQ+ youth who reported that needing parental permission was “sometimes or always a barrier” to accessing gender-affirming health care. Finding (i) bemoans the fact that school counselors cannot always get parental consent because of the parent or caretaker’s beliefs, like say in biological reality?
AB 1967 builds out the process such that a gender-dysphoric 12-year-old can now walk into a state-connected residential shelter, begin receiving gender-affirming counseling, without parent consent or notice, and that child can start the process to find another family.
The full piece is here:
https://ourduty.substack.com/p/the-two-bill-pipeline-how-california
The States - Irene Lawrence
Kara Dansky interviews Irene Lawrence who is part of Women’s Declaration International and discusses her work in the ‘Not Our Crimes’ project which is compiling an enormous database of crimes committed by larping men. You can find more information about the project here:
https://karadansky.substack.com/p/listen-to-womans-hour-the-terf-report-7ae
The States - The Sad Story of Mackenzie McLelland
Kat Highsmith brings us the sad story of a famous larping woman who now appears to be going seriously downhill.
https://kathighsmith.substack.com/p/unfortunately-she-is-getting-worse
Australia - Jasmine Sussex
We last reported on Jasmine’s case here (Australia - Breastfeeding):
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/gladiator-sheath-your-swords
Talk about the process is the punishment!!!!!
Feminist Legal Clinic brings us an update:
Jasmine Sussex returns to Brisbane tribunal as vilification case continues |HRLA (28 June)
A former breastfeeding counsellor was back before a Brisbane tribunal on Wednesday – not for a final hearing, but for a procedural step in a case that has now been running for years.
Jasmine Sussex is defending a vilification complaint brought by a transgender-identifying man after she publicly criticised men who claim they can breastfeed. The complaint, lodged in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, alleges she incited hatred, serious contempt, or severe ridicule.
Wednesday’s hearing was about evidence before the tribunal. The complainant claims to have induced lactation under medical supervision. Jasmine’s legal team sought an order that the complainant provide medical evidence relating to that claim. A single-member panel of the tribunal ruled earlier this year that the complainant need not produce the evidence, and that it was irrelevant to whether Jasmine’s criticism amounted to vilification.
Jasmine, who is represented by HRLA [ Human Rights Law Alliance] and Anthony Morris KC, is appealing that ruling.
This is how these cases grind on – each procedural question argued, reserved, and appealed while the years accumulate, and still without any finding of vilification. In many ways, the process is the punishment.
Queensland has, in the past year, taken modest steps toward restoring common sense to gender policy – reinstating a freeze on puberty blockers for minors, and a cabinet minister acknowledging that a woman is an adult human female. But in the same state Jasmine has been hauled before a tribunal for saying something nearly all Queenslanders would accept as common sense.
The question is not whether Jasmine’s views are contested. It is whether contested views on biological sex, infant welfare, and women’s rights can be expressed at all without attracting years of legal proceedings.
When they cannot, the cost falls on ordinary Australians – not on those with the resources to absorb it.
Source: HRLA
Go, Jasmine!!
Endpiece
From Dusty.
Things are bad in Australia!! Let’s have a great Aussie female singer singing about a rather doomed relationship.
#BeMorePorcupine
#KeepTerfing
#BeMoreHellsGranny
#KeepFighting
#RepealTheGRA
#AdultHumanFemale
#LetWomenSpeak
#LGB✂️TQ
#BeMoreDissident
#HoldTheLine
#StopTheBlockersTrial
#NeverSurrender
#NeverForget
#TruthWillTriumph
#WeWillWin
Such a lot of terrible news. Just when you think that the Labour govt can’t get any worse, it surpasses itself. The possibility of parents being criminalised for refusing to accept fantasy beliefs is evil but I’m afraid it’s just another nail in the coffin of the freedoms we used to have. But at least the Terf Resistance is well organised and ready for the fights. The use of the human rights act sounds hopeful. Let’s hope that Terfs elsewhere are equally well prepared and perhaps the collapse of WPATH will speed things up.
Thanks Dusty.
#BeMorePorcupine