Blog

  • An alarming case of mass social brainwashing

    s stuff; most of us did, and for far longer. Schools, universities, corporations, police forces and the NHS are still buying in. This is an alarming case of mass social brainwashing. In 2010, if you’d polled the public whether it was a good idea to induce widespread and often permanent in-abilities to orgasm and to reproduce in their nation’s children – or in anybody, really – almost no one would have said yes. Virtually overnight, the public has come to endorse child sacrifice.

    Any culture that squanders its efforts on drug regimes and plastic surgery meant to deceive both patients and the world at large that they are the sex they are not is profoundly decadent, if not debauched. We’ve a shortage of neither men nor women, and pretending to swap them back and forth is a waste of money, medical expertise and social aggravation. Private insurance and NHS coverage of this elective ‘treatment’ is a scandal. If people want to play fleshly dress-up, they should do so on their own dime.

    This entire fiasco is based on lies, and a society that embraces bald falsehoods is eating itself hollow. You cannot change sex. ‘Trans women’ aren’t women. There’s no such thing as ‘gender identity’, ‘brain sex’, or being ‘born in the wrong body’. Sex is not ‘assigned’ at birth; it’s observed. Sex is not a feeling but an external, immutable, biological truth. All these mystical notions are medieval, and in institutionalising them across the modern West we’ve made ourselves ridiculous.

    We’re inflicting those lies on a whole generation of children, who are taught that their sex isn’t a fact but a decision. We’re convincing misfits that the solution to their misery is mutilation. We’re enticing both kids and adults into an indefinitely medicalised future, and make no mistake: loads of these awful surgeries go wrong. We’ve still no idea how badly adults are damaged by skipping puberty. We’re emotionally imploding whole families.

    Promotion for a children’s graphic novel called Homebody describes it as ‘about trans identity and the importance of living authentically’. Authentically? ‘Trans identity’ is explicitly inauthentic. It’s a performance. It’s posing as something you’re not. Some of these thespians for life are better actors than others, but they’re all phonies. They’ve not discovered their true selves; they’ve adopted an artifice. Adults are free to make that choice – as I should be free to note that even successful imitation of the other sex isn’t ‘brave’, much less ‘authentic’, and it achieves exactly nothing.

    Until recently, dysphoria was a rare mental illness, which we’ve now elevated to a prestigious designer label. It’s still a mental illness, but the only one we ‘treat’ by nourishing the delusion – worse, a delusion we compel others, in the UK legally compel others, to pretend to share. Losing touch with reality is the definition of insanity. For more than a decade, the better part of the western world has been deranged. Myopic, destructive, unproductive and deeply sick, the trans mania suggests that collectively we’ve no idea what to do with ourselves and we lack a rational sense of purpose. As it does for susceptible individuals, the fad indicts a whole society’s weak sense of self. Does trans represent the demise of our civilisation? Maybe not quite. But it’s a bad sign.

    Body dysphoria in (mostly) young girls used to manifest itself in anorexia. No one suggested that these girls were right, that they really were fat, that starvation was being true to their authentic selves. And at least with anorexics cure was possible, and many many women now can look back on it as a stage they went through and came out of. With gender dysphoria "treatment" on the other hand – puberty blockers, hormone treatment, mastectomies – the damage is permanent.

  • FA trans change

    ce.

    “This is a complex subject, and our position has always been that if there was a material change in law, science, or the operation of the policy in grassroots football then we would review it and change it if necessary.”

    It's not a complex subject. It could hardly be less complex, but the old "complex" excuse is always trotted out to justify their inertia. Men shouldn't be playing in women's football. Simple as that. Now they're moving in the right direction, but with as little grace as possible. The poor men who can no longer have fun competing with women who are much less strong and fast as muscular as them are the ones who get all the sympathy – those men who "want to play the game they love in the gender by which they identify". Far more sympathy than the women ever got.

    Fiona McAnena, director of campaigns at Sex Matters, said: “This is welcome but long overdue. The FA has had ample evidence of the harms to women and girls caused by its nonsensical policy of letting men who identify as women play in women’s teams. The requirement to lower their testosterone tells you that everyone knew they were not women.

    “Thankfully, the UK Supreme Court has now confirmed this, saying it is lawful to exclude ‘all men, including trans women, regardless of their GRC status’.

    “Every other sporting body now needs to re-establish a genuine women’s category, and this shameful period in history will finally be brought to an end.”

    Added:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • Women with spines

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Full text:

    Trans activism divides women and rolls back our rights.

    Trans activism is a top-down movement; opposition has been a grassroots endeavor.

    Gender identity ideology is not feminist – it is a movement that enshrines male sexual predation as a "right" and reduces womanhood to a fetish.

    Enforcing laws that protect women's boundaries is not difficult. As much as such men desperately pine for their fantasy "genital checks," it is very easy to tell a man from a woman even when he's in panto.

    And finally, can I just say how tired I am of the term "moral panic." The burning of women alive as "witches" was a moral panic. Saying men aren't women is common sense. Women's boundaries, the safeguarding of children – common sense.

    When feminists opposed pedophile activism in the 70's – 80's, they, too, were accused of whipping up a "moral panic." I suppose we'll have to do this dance forever, but fortunately there will always be women who have spines, @NadiaWhittomeMP

  • The right side of history

    s://www.thetimes.com/uk/media/article/harry-potter-actors-letter-trans-supreme-court-ruling-gc3hjxjqj”>Here's the latest:

    A group of actors who have appeared in the film adaptations of JK Rowling’s books have signed an open letter pledging their “solidarity” with the LGBT community.

    Eddie Redmayne, an Oscar-winning actor who appeared in the Fantastic Beasts films, and Katie Leung, who played Cho Chang in Harry Potter, are among the 400 stars who have raised concerns about the impact of the Supreme Court ruling on biological sex.

    It has also been signed by The Last Of Us actor Bella Ramsey, Happy Valley star James Norton, The Brutalist actor Joe Alwyn, Babygirl star Harris Dickinson and Bridgerton’s Nicola Coughlan, who previously said she was “disgusted” by the ruling.

    Other notable signatories include Paapa Essiedu, who has been cast as Severus Snape in HBO’s upcoming Harry Potter series.

    The list goes on. I'd like to think there were at least a few who, on being approached, told the luvvie activists to fuck off. I doubt it though: that would be a career-ending move. 

    The letter said that the film and television community had previously come together to further the Me Too and Black Lives Matter movements by “reflecting” upon working practices and “uplifting” a broad spectrum of voices.

    “We believe the ruling undermines the lived reality and threatens the safety of trans, non-binary, and intersex people living in the UK,” it added. “We must now urgently work to ensure that our trans, non-binary, and intersex colleagues, collaborator…s and audiences are protected from discrimination and harassment in all areas of the industry — whether on set, in a production office, or at a cinema.”

    It said: “Film and television are powerful tools for empathy and education, and we believe passionately in the ability of the screen to change hearts and minds. This is our opportunity to be on the right side of history.”

    Ah, the right side of history. Alas, they seem to be facing backwards. The tide isn't coming in: it's going out.

  • The Lush campaign – trans activism targeted at children

    cool, edgy persona.

    This is not marketing; it is trans activism targeted at children.

    And it's all based on the mythical "trans kid".

    So what is a “trans kid”? It’s an idea created by trans activists, designed to convince children they could be “born in the wrong body.” Let us be clear: there is no such thing as a “trans kid”. We do not have a choice in the bodies we are born with; we are born as our bodies and we die as our bodies. The latest research shows that children who identify as trans are socially vulnerable children, typically neurodiverse, isolated and seeking a sense of belonging.

    The dramatic 5,000% rise in adolescents identifying as transgender over the past decade cannot be explained without acknowledging the role of social contagion. In a landmark 2018 study published in PLOS ONE, Dr. Lisa Littman documented the phenomenon of Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD) and suggested that trans identification often occurred in peer groups, where multiple friends simultaneously declared new transgender identities.

    This is a deeply vulnerable cohort. It is not the cool, savvy kids who identify as trans; it is the socially awkward, lonely, and lost children who are most likely to be dazzled by Lush’s cheerful, pastel-coloured campaign. Notably, 62.5% of those with ROGD had pre-existing mental health challenges before ever identifying as transgender.

    The authors – Sarah Holmes and Sara Morrison – go on to compare this new trans marketing to the old marketing of cigarettes by tobacco companies, using cartoons and sweets to entice children, and portraying smoking as glamorous and cool. Plus ça change….

  • Theroux and the West Bank settlers

    11pt”>No doubt the settler movement is peopled by some unpleasant people with racist views. However the prospect of Theroux – or anyone at the BBC – doing an equivalent hit piece on Hamas, with its proud boast that it aims to kill all the Jews in the name of Islam, is of course somewhere round zero – though Hamas is a far more significant force, and represents Arab Palestinian opinion, I would guess, to a much greater extent than the settlers represent Israeli opinion. The Beeb, meanwhile, continues to report all Hamas stories, and all Hamas statistics, as fact – to be prominently displayed as main news. So finding some nasty Jews to interview, as representative of Israel, fits the BBC agenda very nicely.

    Jake Wallis Simons at the JC – To demonstrate ‘impartiality’, the BBC shows the worst Jews they can find.

    Overall, it was impossible to form a proper opinion on the people we met due to the baked-in bias. Here was the world according to the BBC, in which Theroux’s every encounter happened to support the conclusions with which he had left Heathrow.

    Right at the end, he dispenses with his trademark light touch and treats us to a bit of raw dogma. “The settler dream shows no sign of abating, along with the dislocation, devastation and death that follows inevitably in its train,” he says. So here is the takeaway: the Jews are to blame for the bloodshed, not the Arabs, who tried to murder them from the start. Which is what we were supposed to think all along.

  • Resisting patriarchal oppression

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • The voice of the revolution

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Added:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • Whether women are human or a porn stereotype

    bodies with hair, wrinkles and odours, bodies housing diverse, creative, non-bimbo brains — rather than with plastic-breasted, wide-eyed fantasies. It is not for nothing that “protect the dolls” has become the go-to slogan for “supporting trans women”. Protect the fantasy of dehumanised womanhood from the threat of those saggy-breasted boner-killers, the adult human females!

    "Protect the dolls". T-shirts as worn by all the right people, from Tilda Swinton to Pedro Pascal to Connor Ives (who? – ed). Says it all. "Dolls". 

    The supreme court judgement was not about whether women are biologically female or a joyous, inclusive mix of identities. At its most basic level, it was about whether women are human or a porn stereotype. Humanity won. A significant number of men are so angry about this they’re threatening to rape and kill us.  

    This is what radicalisation looks like and women are not safe. We are condemned by incels and trans activists alike for existing as humans rather than objects, and politicians, in thrall to fictional rather than actual extremism, still say nothing. The longer they do so, the more things will escalate (as Jeni Harvey has written, this is “the most dangerous time”).

    The pandering has to stop. It really is time for the world to wake up.

  • Revealing their own ignorance

    At least some doctors are speaking out about that ridiculous BMA vote on the Supreme Court ruling:

    The British Medical Association has been accused of “destroying trust in medicine” and perpetuating “medical misogyny” after its members condemned the Supreme Court’s ruling on sex….

    Dr Louise Irvine, co-chair of the Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender, said: “­It is really worrying for female patients to think that doctors are seriously arguing that sex is not a clear-cut category in healthcare. Doctors have to recognise sex in order to be able to practise medicine properly and safely.

    “As a doctor, you need to know sex for accurate diagnoses. Sex matters for NHS service provision and single-sex wards. It is misogynistic to negate or ignore women’s rights. Medical misogyny is a huge problem. The profession has a long, long history of misogyny. Now the BMA is making out that sex is a nebulous concept and category. If doctors don’t understand sex then I don’t think they should be doctors.”

    Biology in Medicine, a group of doctors who campaign for patients to be treated according to their sex, said: “Activists are destroying trust and integrity in our profession. The denial of the biological reality of sex by the BMA is the culmination of a few activists infiltrating key BMA committees and forums.”…

    Irvine urged other clinicians to “reassure patients that motion does not represent the views of the majority of doctors”.

    She added: “The BMA say the Supreme Court ruling is scientifically illiterate, but they are the ones being scientifically illiterate because their motion implies that sex is not binary. That is unscientific: sex is binary. There are only two sexes; there is no third sex. They are revealing their own ignorance.”

    And…a Times poll:

    Times poll