LGB Alliance - New PR Campaign

.........

.........

Your contributions are helping us set up in a responsible way. We have been overwhelmed with your support and kind messages which prove the need for such an organisation as ours to exist.

We are preparing for 2020 - which we believe will be a critical year for LGB people, and especially young people. We are producing marketing materials (and merchandise) to use as we launch our message across the UK.

We will approach all MPs, MSPs , AMs, & MLAs. We need to explain that the time has come for these individuals to speak up on issues around sex and gender. To speak up in defence of respectful free speech. To resist the teaching of unscientific notions of gender identity to children from 5 years up (currently proposed for schools from September 2020). To stop the erasure of lesbians, gays and bisexuals under a mythical wave of multiple gender identities.

We need to influence Government Departments, the police, the courts, the NHS and public opinion in general. And fast. The task is enormous but we are confident of our success. The tide is turning and we hope that 2020 will be the year where facts and common sense return to public debate.

So please continue to support us - either with a one off donation or monthly donations which you can now make on this page.

Please follow us on Twitter @AllianceLGB and see our web site lgballiance.org.uk

In the meantime - Happy Christmas and New Year from all of us at LGB Alliance to all of you.

butch queen!

We need them in the US !!!

People in the US need to start a second organization. There needs to be a counterpoint to HRC and GLAD and their LGBTQ+++ monolith statements. Have at it.

In the meantime, support the one in the UK on social media, raising awareness among the public and financially if you can.

Their new campaign is right on the nail.

I'd rather have a straight son than a lesbian daughter.

Support it in any way you can, R7. Money (donations always help with campaigns and contributing from the US is easy and quick), re-tweet, support on FB and speak about the org to friends. It is never good to have a monolith opinion pushed, diverse voices are needed in this discussion.

Signal Boost

,,,,,,,,,

Love this!!!!!!

Anyone who is complicit in gay erasure deserves bigotry because they fomented it against us and used deceptive language to do so.

I'm all for this. To think that such a miniscule number of people could create so fucking much havoc for the rest of us pisses me off big-time.

R14: I’ve heard them call it “second-wave homophobia.” It seems fitting.

Support if you can, this work is important.

The voice of LGB Alliance matters, if only to break the public perception of LGBT lockstep.

I'd rather have a thin son than a fat lesbian daughter.

Cher

Aww, shit!

They dropped the "T"!

Bravo!

.....

Thank Christ for this! Get these fucking dimwitted trannies out and let them debate toilets on their own time/dime.

........

Support if you can, in the UK or from outside. Every bit helps.

If outside the UK, consider orgaizing alterative voices.

Russian trolls are trying to "divide and conquer" the LGBT community

There is no "LGBT" community since the "Ts" went from being gay drag queens and transexuals to psychotic, autogynophiles and other mentally ill people.

Nope, R24.

The emperor has no clothes and LGB clocked it long ago.

The blueprint

An unregulated experiment on likely to be LGB kids.

Lupron has horrific effects on bones and lowers IQ by 8+ points. This impact is in addition to the unknown effects of skipping the huge brain changes that take place during adolescence.

Enormous money and the pharma companies are the hidden hand of this movement.

R27 A shame it's on the Spectator site, but a must read. From the report:

[QUOTE]‘In Ireland, Denmark and Norway, changes to the law on legal gender recognition were put through at the same time as other more popular reforms such as marriage equality legislation. This provided a veil of protection, particularly in Ireland, where marriage equality was strongly supported, but gender identity remained a more difficult issue to win public support for.’

And that's why our charities and groups were taken over - so they could use us as a "veil of protection". It's all there, right from the horse's mouth

Political Parties have been taken over as well. Could not be much more stark than this. In the US it is Warren, in the UK, Labour.

1/2

Labour’s Trans Pledge Says Anyone Who Disagrees Is A Bigot | Janice Turner | The Times

Friday February 14 2020, 5.00pm GMT, The Times

Labour’s trans pledge says anyone who disagrees is a bigot

There is a bizarre race for ideological purity on the issue of trans rights and it is making many party members uneasy

Lisa Nandy brands herself as Labour’s truth-speaker. Rational, grounded, fearless of factions, the only leadership candidate prepared to tackle the self-delusion and disconnect which lost four elections, she’d won many prospective votes, including mine.

Until Tuesday, when Nandy signed up to a witch-hunt of thousands of (mainly female) party members, including me.

The Labour trans pledge is an astonishingly totalitarian document. It not only demands signatories “accept there is no material conflict between trans rights and women’s rights” but says anyone who disagrees is a bigot.

It names Woman’s Place UK and the LGB Alliance as “hate groups” whose supporters are transphobic and must therefore be expelled. Even though these were set up chiefly to defend women’s single-sex spaces enshrined in Labour’s own 2010 Equality Act and upheld in the party’s 2019 manifesto.

So calm, thoughtful, unite-the-party Lisa Nandy wants to expel supporters of the very platform on which she was just re-elected! Chuck on the pyre life-long trade unionists like NUT president Kiri Tunks and Ruth Serwotka, Corbyn policy chief Lachlan Stuart, ex-MP Laura Pidcock and Stonewall founder Simon Fanshawe.

Sprinkle the bonfire with thousands of horrified women members who tweeted, Spartacus-style. #expelme. Shove on top John McDonnell and Andy Burnham, who have both met WPUK and, Lisa, who will be left?

I mention Nandy because although every leadership candidate except Sir Keir Starmer has now signed this pledge, she has doubled down. There are no spaces at all, she said on Radio 4’s Today programme, where male-bodied people should be excluded.

2/3 She likened the debate over women’s refuges to fights between Eritrean and Ethiopian boys when she worked at a Centrepoint homeless shelter: ie a woman and any male who self-identifies as a woman are materially the same and must be treated as such. From changing rooms to sports to, presumably, female beauticians being compelled to wax — as Canadian trans activist Jessica Yaniv demanded — a trans woman’s testicles.

Nandy is not the first politician who, sucked into the gender vortex, loses all reason. This week Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle confounded biologists by saying that “sex is not binary”.

During the election Lib Dem Dr Sarah Wollaston denied that a baby’s biological sex is observed at birth; potential Lib Dem leader Layla Moran believes women can differentiate male predators from self-identified trans women by looking into their souls.

Meanwhile in the US Democratic primaries. Elizabeth Warren, desperate to seduce Bernie Sanders’ supporters, posted her pronouns on her Twitter page, pledged that every trans woman prisoner (regardless of having committed sexual offences) should be relocated to the female estate, and then declared that as US president her education secretary would first be interviewed and approved by a designated “trans child”.

How have LGBT issues, in particular gender self-ID, become such a moral test of politicians in progressive parties? Sociologists speak of how organisations can be overwhelmed by “purity spirals”.

This is when a group grades its members by a single value, which has no upper limit or agreed interpretation. Those who seek power must demonstrate their purity in ever more abstruse ways: those judged “impure” are denounced and destroyed.

Both Labour and the US Democrats have several concurrent purity spirals. Members fight to demonstrate their anti-racism by denouncing perceived white supremacy or by supporting no-border immigration policies.

A US gay rights purity spiral means that although married to a man, Pete Buttigieg is accused of being “not gay enough” because as a chino-wearing, church-going ex-serviceman his lifestyle apes “heteronormative” society rather than “queer culture”.

No matter that he’s bravely challenging prejudices of mainstream US voters for whom he’s too damn gay. Fighting a primary now, Barack Obama would be shredded as not black enough.

3/3

But the trans issue — specifically whether gender self-ID should be enshrined in law — is the purity spiral du jour. The Labour trans pledge transformed the leadership election from a civil, even dull contest, in which feminists felt they had a choice, into a grim, least-worst-option scenario.

Every candidate has recited the catechism “trans women are women”, leaving members to assess whether they mean it literally, like Nandy, so single-sex exemptions are toast, or as an assertion of existing legal rights of trans women to be recognised as women, in most circumstances, which no one would dispute. This is the position it is hoped that sane lawyer Starmer holds.

So why are they submitting to this test? Because progressive politicians’ fear of being “on the wrong side of history” trumps all sense. Gender self-ID is constantly presented as the new gay rights.

Yet gay men and lesbians only demanded to love freely. They did not materially encroach on any other group’s rights. Nor do most trans folk who simply wish to live without discrimination or violence and are horrified by activists who demand in their name that women surrender hard-won rights and safeguards.

Working on the 2019 Labour manifesto, Lachlan Stuart observed that LGBT activists were not “driven by a motivation to improve the quality of life for trans people” such as increased mental and physical health provision, only “to erode or erase the political rights of female people.” Their alarming central goal was to open up all female single-sex spaces to anyone who identified as a woman.

How will voters, who have hitherto been unaware of this arcane debate, feel about a Labour Party fully committed to ending historic safeguards? To a party which believes any male person should be allowed to legally change sex without qualification or checks, leaving women and girls vulnerable yet unable to object?

Will Labour leaders pull out of the purity spiral and heed the fears of thousands of women members? Or will they, as that nice Lisa Nandy demands, simply chuck them out?

Another anti-trans hate thread.

Give The Times some clicks and consider subscribing if you are able, there broke from the orthodoxy of The Guardian, etc, diverse viewpoints and factual articles are needed.

[quote]Elizabeth Warren, [bold]desperate to seduce Bernie Sanders’ supporters[/bold], posted her pronouns on her Twitter page, pledged that every trans woman prisoner (regardless of having committed sexual offences) should be relocated to the female estate, and then declared that as US president her education secretary would first be interviewed and approved by a designated “trans child”.

HAHA! Nailed it.

[QUOTE]She likened the debate over women’s refuges to fights between Eritrean and Ethiopian boys when she worked at a Centrepoint homeless shelter: ie a woman and any male who self-identifies as a woman are materially the same and must be treated as such.

Does she really need to see the outcome of a fight at a woman's refuge between a woman and a transwoman to see the idiocy of this comparison?

The oddest thing about this concept of "transwomen are women" is how transwomen who scream it the loudest seemingly have to make sure you know they're transwomen. They constantly go on about being trans rather than just being a woman. Plus, the denial of gender being binary seems to suggest that they almost subconsciously know it's a bullshit concept.

R34 The Guardian does publish columns from a variety of viewpoints. Private Eye has noted on occasions how this has led to tensions between their writers, and how several have had to be told not to be mean to Owen Jones on social media.

This ruling is really important (text from The Telegraph below, in parts due to length)

Police compared to Stasi and Gestapo by judge as he rules they interfered in freedom of speech by investigating 'non crime' trans tweet

By Telegraph Reporters

14th February 2020 | 10:59am

Police compared to Stasi and Gestapo by judge as he rules they interfered in freedom of speech by investigating 'non crime' trans tweet

Judge says that the effect of police turning up at Mr Miller's workplace "because of his political opinions must not be underestimated".

Part 2

Humberside Police unlawfully interfered with a man's right to freedom of expression by turning up at his place of work over his allegedly "transphobic" tweets, the High Court has ruled.

Former police officer Harry Miller, 54, who founded the campaign group Fair Cop, said the police's actions had a "substantial chilling effect" on his right to free speech.

Mr Miller, who is from Lincolnshire, claims an officer told him that he had not committed a crime, but that his tweeting was being recorded as a "hate incident".

The College of Policing's guidance defines a hate incident as "any non-crime incident which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender".

In a ruling on Friday, the High Court in London found Humberside Police's actions were a "disproportionate interference" with Mr Miller's right to freedom of expression.

Part 3

But Mr Justice Julian Knowles rejected a wider challenge to the lawfulness of the College of Police guidance, ruling that it "serves legitimate purposes and is not disproportionate".

The judge said:

"The claimants' tweets were lawful and there was not the slightest risk that he would commit a criminal offence by continuing to tweet.

"I find the combination of the police visiting the claimant's place of work, and their subsequent statements in relation to the possibility of prosecution, were a disproportionate interference with the claimant's right to freedom of expression because of their potential chilling effect."

At a hearing in November, Mr Miller's barrister Ian Wise QC said his client was "deeply concerned" about proposed reforms to the law on gender recognition and had used Twitter to "engage in debate about transgender issues".

He argued that Humberside Police, following the College of Policing's guidance, had sought to

"dissuade him (Mr Miller) from expressing himself on such issues in the future", which he said was "contrary to his fundamental right to freedom of expression".

The judge said Mr Miller strongly denies being prejudiced against transgender people, and regards himself as taking part in the "ongoing debate" about reform of the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which the Government consulted on in 2018.

Part 4

The judge added that the effect of the police turning up at Mr Miller's place of work

"because of his political opinions must not be underestimated".

He continued:

"To do so would be to undervalue a cardinal democratic freedom. In this country we have never had a Cheka, a Gestapo or a Stasi. We have never lived in an Orwellian society."

In his judgment, Mr Justice Julian Knowles stated:

"I conclude that the police left the claimant with the clear belief that he was being warned by them to desist from posting further tweets on transgender matters even if they did not directly warn him in terms.

"In other words, I conclude that the police's actions led him, reasonably, to believe that he was being warned not to exercise his right to freedom of expression about transgender issues on pain of potential criminal prosecution."

Rejecting Mr Miller's challenge to the College of Police guidance itself, the judge said he was

"satisfied that the aims and objectives of (the guidance) justify the limitation it imposes on freedom of speech".

Mr Justice Knowles said the guidance pursued "extremely important" aims, including "preventing, or taking steps to counter, hate crime and hate incidents" and preventing "the escalation of hate-based hostility from low-level non-criminal activity to criminal activity".

The judge has granted Mr Miller permission to appeal against his ruling on the lawfulness of the College of Police's guidance.

Ian Wise QC, representing Mr Miller, asked the court to grant a "leapfrog" certificate to allow the case to go straight to the Supreme Court.

Part 5

Jonathan Auburn, for the College of Police, agreed that the case was suitable to go directly to the UK's highest court.

Mr Justice Knowles granted permission for the case to "leapfrog" to the Supreme Court, subject to that court's permission.

In a statement, Mr Miller's solicitor Paul Conrathe from Sinclairslaw said:

"We welcome today's judgment, which is a vindication of Mr Miller's actions in posting tweets that were critical of transgender ideology and practice.

"It is a strong warning to local police forces not to interfere with people's free speech rights on matters of significant controversy.

"Today, the judge held that it is entirely acceptable to hold the view and communicate that a trans woman is not a woman. That view is not hateful, transphobic or unlawful."

Speaking outside the Royal Courts of Justice after the ruling, Mr Miller said:

"Mr Justice Knowles was very clear - we have never had a Gestapo or a Stasi in Great Britain.

"Well, the actions of Humberside Police came way too close for comfort. This is a watershed moment for liberty: the police were wrong to visit my workplace, wrong to 'check my thinking'."

Holding a copy of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, he added:

"I'm going to continue tweeting, I'm going to continue campaigning and I'm going to continue standing with women in order to secure their sex-based rights.

"This judgment today has told us that we can do that and, if the police come knocking, say: 'Miller v Humberside Police, bugger off!"'

In a statement, Deputy Chief Constable Bernie O'Reilly, executive director at the College of Policing, said:

"It is pleasing that today's judgment found that the College of Policing's guidance on the recording of non-crime hate incidents is both lawful and extremely important in protecting people.

"Policing's position is clear - we want everyone to feel able to express opinions as passionately as they wish without breaking the law."

He added:

"Our guidance is about protecting people because of who they are and we know this is an area where people may be reluctant to report things to us because of the very personal nature of what they experience or perceive.

"In policing we don't always get things right and there will of course be some learning following today's judgment."

I am not a QUEER.

From The WSJ:

The Dangerous Denial of Sex - Transgender ideology harms women, gays—and especially feminine boys and masculine girls. (archive link due to paywall)

Transgender ideology can take on a comical character, as in a recent American Civil Liberties Union commentary objecting to sales tax on tampons and similar products while pondering: “How can we recognize that barriers to menstrual access are a form of sex discrimination without erasing the lived experiences of trans men and non-binary people who menstruate, as well as women who don’t?” Yet it’s one thing to claim that a man can “identify” as a woman or vice versa. Increasingly we see a dangerous and antiscientific trend toward the outright denial of biological sex.

From The WSJ above:

Denying the reality of biological sex and supplanting it with subjective “gender identity” is not merely an eccentric academic theory. It raises serious human-rights concerns for vulnerable groups including women, homosexuals and children. Women have fought hard for sex-based legal protections. Female-only spaces are necessary due to the pervasive threat of male violence and sexual assault. Separate sporting categories are also necessary to ensure that women and girls don’t have to face competitors who have acquired the irreversible performance-enhancing effects conferred by male puberty. The different reproductive roles of males and females require laws to safeguard women from discrimination in the workplace and elsewhere. The falsehood that sex is rooted in subjective identity instead of objective biology renders all these sex-based rights impossible to enforce. The denial of biological sex also erases homosexuality, as same-sex attraction is meaningless without the distinction between the sexes. Many activists now define homosexuality as attraction to the “same gender identity” rather than the same sex. This view is at odds with the scientific understanding of human sexuality. Lesbians have been denounced as “bigots” for expressing a reluctance to date men who identify as women. The successful normalization of homosexuality could be undermined by miring it in an untenable ideology. Those most vulnerable to sex denialism are children. When they’re taught that sex is grounded in identity instead of biology, sex categories can easily become conflated with regressive stereotypes of masculinity and femininity. Masculine girls and feminine boys may become confused about their own sex. The dramatic rise of “gender dysphoric” adolescents—especially young girls—in clinics likely reflects this new cultural confusion. The large majority of gender-dysphoric youths eventually outgrow their feelings of dysphoria during puberty, and many end up identifying as homosexual adults. “Affirmation” therapies, which insist a child’s cross-sex identity should never be questioned, and puberty-blocking drugs, advertised as a way for children to “buy time” to sort out their identities, may only solidify feelings of dysphoria, setting them on a pathway to more invasive medical interventions and permanent infertility. This pathologizing of sex-atypical behavior is extremely worrying and regressive. It is similar to gay “conversion” therapy, except that it’s now bodies instead of minds that are being converted to bring children into “proper” alignment with themselves.

Trying again for formatting:

Denying the reality of biological sex and supplanting it with subjective “gender identity” is not merely an eccentric academic theory. It raises serious human-rights concerns for vulnerable groups including women, homosexuals and children.

Women have fought hard for sex-based legal protections. Female-only spaces are necessary due to the pervasive threat of male violence and sexual assault. Separate sporting categories are also necessary to ensure that women and girls don’t have to face competitors who have acquired the irreversible performance-enhancing effects conferred by male puberty. The different reproductive roles of males and females require laws to safeguard women from discrimination in the workplace and elsewhere. The falsehood that sex is rooted in subjective identity instead of objective biology renders all these sex-based rights impossible to enforce.

The denial of biological sex also erases homosexuality, as same-sex attraction is meaningless without the distinction between the sexes. Many activists now define homosexuality as attraction to the “same gender identity” rather than the same sex. This view is at odds with the scientific understanding of human sexuality. Lesbians have been denounced as “bigots” for expressing a reluctance to date men who identify as women. The successful normalization of homosexuality could be undermined by miring it in an untenable ideology.

Those most vulnerable to sex denialism are children. When they’re taught that sex is grounded in identity instead of biology, sex categories can easily become conflated with regressive stereotypes of masculinity and femininity. Masculine girls and feminine boys may become confused about their own sex. The dramatic rise of “gender dysphoric” adolescents—especially young girls—in clinics likely reflects this new cultural confusion.

The large majority of gender-dysphoric youths eventually outgrow their feelings of dysphoria during puberty, and many end up identifying as homosexual adults. “Affirmation” therapies, which insist a child’s cross-sex identity should never be questioned, and puberty-blocking drugs, advertised as a way for children to “buy time” to sort out their identities, may only solidify feelings of dysphoria, setting them on a pathway to more invasive medical interventions and permanent infertility. This pathologizing of sex-atypical behavior is extremely worrying and regressive. It is similar to gay “conversion” therapy, except that it’s now bodies instead of minds that are being converted to bring children into “proper” alignment with themselves.

The WSJ link, give clicks if you can...great comments too.

IMHO the LGB Alliance is helping to create a separate narrative for the separate interests of LGB whilst they are also advocating for women and children, many of whom will grow up to be LGB if left to go through a natural, healthy puberty.

T are starting to call out their own.

In normal times, such a list of self-serving demands, held together by a sense of entitlement and total lack of consideration for other vulnerable groups (notably women) could be a matter for a student debating society. But astonishingly, Rebecca Long-Bailey and Angela Rayner have backed the campaign. Both should be applauded for trying to support trans people, yet it is astounding that they chose to support these pledges.

Further:

Rebecca Long-Bailey and Angela Rayner are vying to become leader and deputy leader of the Labour party. Yet like Swinson before them, both seem oblivious that the public has little time for extreme transgender ideology. As a result, Labour is lurching towards a crisis brought on by transgender campaigners whose demand for compliance is total. By creating a narrative that trans people like me are the most oppressed in society and might crumble should someone look at us the wrong way or, heaven forbid, overlook our “preferred pronouns”, they have ensnared the party. Senior Labour figures are so firmly under this spell that they have even opened up all-women shortlists to any male person who identifies as a woman.

--------

LGB Alliance was wise to build bridges with T from the start.

LGB Alliance response to being smeared as a transphobic hate group

[QUOTE]Give The Times some clicks

[QUOTE]The WSJ link, give clicks if you can

You seem eager to ensure clicks are given to Murdoch-owned rags.

Fuck off R50. I am for supporting a diversity of opinon, as has been stated.

Deplorables are working overtime to create a gay KKK. It’s sad some are stupid enough to fall for it

The truth isn't a smear, R49.

R51, are you just super pissed that they closed down Stormfront?

R51 = Rush Limbaugh

R51 And yet you've only linked to right wing sites (Spectator, Times, Telegraph, WSJ), whilst inaccurately smearing sites like The Guardian

[quote]Another anti-trans hate thread.

Having a different opinion (that sex is biological) is not hate.

Having a group for gays and lesbians is not hate. if it were, the NAACP would be a hate group too

R53 They didn't close down Stormfront

[quote] Finally, PC Gul offered his final words of advice, words that I will never forget as I was so stunned by them. He said, 'You have to understand, sometimes in the womb, a female brain gets confused and pushes out the wrong body parts, and that is what transgender is.'

[quote] I replied, ‘You’ve got to be kidding me. Wrong body parts? You have to know that is absolute bullshit. Is this really the official police line ?’

[quote] PC Gul said, ‘Yes, I have been on a course.’

This is the sort of anti-science drivel Stonewall is now pushing. It's not hateful for LGB people to want to distance themselves as far as humanly possible from this.

Remember when gay marriage passed in NI and they forgot to tweet about it and didn't until the following day when people started pointing it out?

[quote] Having a different opinion (that sex is biological) is not hate.

Having a different opinion is fine, treating trans people like they're sub-human, as constantly happens on DL, is hate.

R57, they did close it down for a while. Guess it's been back up for a few years. That's too bad. The world was a better place when it was offline.

[quote]Having a different opinion is fine, treating trans people like they're sub-human, as constantly happens on DL, is hate.

That's not what's happening on this thread, nor in England by the LGB alliance, yet the trans groups are publicly calling them a "hate group"

[quote]That's not what's happening on this thread, nor in England by the LGB alliance, yet the trans groups are publicly calling them a "hate group"

This thread was bumped to celebrate a court ruling that posting transphobia online is fine.

You are not persecuted.

Rebecca Wrong-Daily just signed a statement calling them a hate group? Ugh, Jeremy 2 Electric Boogaloo...get rid of that jumped up office manager NOW.

They fit the definition of hate group perfectly. Their twitter spends more time bemoaning trans than it does supporting gay men.

r65 only in your deluded mind do they fit the definition of a "hate group".

They are arguing against gender self-id and supporting women's rights, and their arguments are logical and fact-based. Unlike the attempts by many to label them "hate group" or "transphobic" merely because they think that biological sex is real (which it is).

[quote]and supporting women's rights

Huh. I thought they were supposed to be an "LGB" advocacy group.

r67 hint: Lesbians are women.

So why call themselves LGB? Why not Women Against Trans?

Lesbians do not identify with gay men. They identify with women.

....

[quote]because they think that biological sex is real (which it is).

I actually don't know anyone who denies the existence of chromosomes.

As we've stated for the billionth time we simply disagree that that's all or primarily how society defines gender.

r69 read their fucking Twitter feed, they explain it in great detail.

r71 I've seen that thread, and it's completely meaningless. It's bizarre how people quote it like it means anything statistically if you know anything at all about LGB Alliance and what their points are besides merely trying to simplify and label them as "transphobic" because they exist.

Why are trans-specific organizations not labeled "cisphobic"? Why can there not be an organization just for Lesbians, Gay Men, and Bisexuals? Those are sexual orientation-based issues. "Trans" is not, and many trans are straight.

r72 who is "we"?

One of the points being made is that (biological) women's safe spaces (like women's only restrooms, women's only prisons) exist for real reasons. And when you have men (trans women or anyone who self-identifies as a woman) entering those spaces, it causes problems, makes women feel unsafe, and negates the point of having segregated spaces that women fought for the right to have.

"Gender" is a different topic, and many trans and TRAs equate biological sex with gender. The whole "trans women are women" sloganeering does that. "Women" is a specific, defined biological sex, and men are not women.

[quote][R69] read their fucking Twitter feed, they explain it in great detail.

I'm familiar with their feed, but have missed that. Can you link it?

[quote]Why can there not be an organization just for Lesbians, Gay Men, and Bisexuals?

Because of differing mutual interests, ultimately. I might explain more in a bit.

They deleted those tweets.

....

r75 it was a rhetorical question, explained by what follows.

I'm really not interested in the anti-women freak argument against Lesbians and women. You show up in every thread like this and you make these points trying to divide gay men and Lesbians - it's transparently obvious what you're doing, you clearly have an agenda and are likely trans yourself trying to manipulate people into fighting against each other to blunt the impact of what people are saying.

Engage on the topic or fuck off.

[quote][R75] it was a rhetorical question

[quote]Engage on the topic or fuck off.

r75 they have a pinned tweet showing their stances. You are clearly making disingenuous arguments.

I'm really curious to get that link I asked about at R75.

As a gay man I this group doesn't speak for me. I never consented.

Do any gay men work there?

r79 that isn't the topic, but nice try.

You're a trans division troll, trying to create division between Lesbians and Gay men. Go argue for your own separate alliances then! No one's stopping you! Why not let them have a LGB alliance? Why not argue against LGBTQIA+ being joined? Where are your many arguments about that? Why do you only show up in _these_ threads?

Because you're full of shit, your arguments are disingenuous, and you are merely here to create division out of an attempt to distract and manipulate.

[quote]Why not let them have a LGB alliance?

As a gay man I have a right to object to any group that claims to speak on my behalf.

I'm not responding to you again, r79, you're trying to fill up the thread with your division nonsense the same way you did the thread on JK Rowling. Suggest everyone F&F and block r79 and move on.

[quote]Suggest everyone F&F

Free speech lovers.

Calling an LGB-only group a hate group is homophobic, lesbophobic, biphobic, and misogynistic.

It isn't when the group in question clearly doesn't like a certain group of people.

[quote]Calling an LGB-only group a hate group is homophobic, lesbophobic, biphobic, and misogynistic.

No, calling THAT "LGB" group a hate group is accurate.

I wouldn't call it LGB though. It's seems to only be lesbians (and a few straight rad fems supporters) judging by their Twitter.

I don't really see any advocacy for gay men being done.

Block r88 as well, it's the same troll using a different account.

It's so funny when people who are actively saying they must split up LGBT are accusing others of being divisive.

I don't really care for the L, B, or T myself... but whatever.

[quote] Calling an LGB-only group a hate group is homophobic, lesbophobic, biphobic, and misogynistic.

Interesting how gay men and lesbians are separated and how muhsoggy somehow enters into it.

How is it muhsoggy?

They're Lesbian-led because Lesbians/women are most under attack by the trans agenda.

Why assume gay men consent to their lesbian agenda?

Who cares what a bunch of misogynistic homophobic breeder sons of bitches think about anything or anyone? You want to see what a gay hate group looks like, keep erasing gay people and you will get one.

As a gay man I don't feel erased. Yes, there can be problems in trans ideology, but it brings more good than bad to us.

The Trannies need to fuck off.

R97, I'm interested in what you think are the problems in trans ideology and also find it interesting that you use the term "trans ideology", which is often attacked for being transphobic. What good do you think they bring gay men and lesbians, especially lesbians since they are more impacted by what you call the trans ideology?

“Tr-nsph-b-“ is just a PC way of calling gay men f-gg-ts and lesbians Dyk-s.

I don’t care about lesbians only gay men. I don’t really care about trans either. I care only about gay men.

Basically, I see rad fem as being more homophobic than trans ideology, in part because it has the potential to become mainstream the way the latter never will.

I do sympathize with my brothers who see issues with trans ideology, but most of the trans haters on this board are women. Entitled, middle-class, homophobic women.

Misandry hits gay men the hardest.

Lots of holes in this thread mean lots of trolls in this thread.

Lots of holes? Should appeal to you then, R103

All tr-ns-enabling groups are hate groups and all tr-ns-enablers are bigots.

Those involved in transgender activism who think they are fighting for the rights of the marginalized will sadly only realize too late they are doing the bidding of the corporate state

Inside the Gender Identity Industry

No, it’s feminism that’s beloved by the corporate state.

R101, ok you don't like women but I'm still wondering what you consider the problematic aspects of what you call trans ideology are. You have a rather idiosyncratic view!

Anyone who would sell out lesbians for tr-nscultists is a homophobe and a misogynist.

r108 see r83 for an explanation

It’s supposed to be LGBT, I think.

[quote][R101], ok you don't like women but I'm still wondering what you consider the problematic aspects of what you call trans ideology are. You have a rather idiosyncratic view!

It's quite complex. Very quickly, I actually used to be quite transphobic. And see the main issues that can arise as being forcible transition of gay boys (under 18, without consent or understanding) into straight girls (which I now understand is less a problem than I previously thought, but still oppose) and problems with image for G (the only letter I care about) going forward. We don't want to be associated with an unpopular cause.

I'm happy to explain further but I only really want to talk to gay men. I could explain to L but we have nothing in common.

No, it's specifically LGB, r111.

[quote] Anyone who would sell out lesbians for tr-nscultists is a homophobe and a misogynist.

Anyone who expects gay men to act as a shield for lesbians is a homophobe and a misandrist.

Fight your own battles, because God knows you weren't there for ours.

I can add that I'm not totally opposed to a Trans Exclusionary Gay Men's Rights group.

But LGB Alliance is just a rad fem org. It hates gay men.

R114 shut up you troll. That's a damn lie and you know it. Lesbians have been crucial to gay rights and advocacy. They kicked out NAMBLA which would've held back rights even longer and stayed by gay men with HIV. Learn history so you stop looking so ignorant.

I fully support anyone who believes they are trans to live as they like. It's when those same people demand that lesbians suck their dicks and pretend they are women that I have an issue.

I like the LGB Alliance and support them. Transwomen are transwomen. No one can call themselves a woman unless they have ever had to ask their friend in a hushed voice, "Is there blood on my pants?"

[quote]They kicked out NAMBLA which would've held back rights even longer and stayed by gay men with HIV.

It isn't really for lesbians to decide who can and can't be part of the movement. That's for gay men.

And, no, there's no evidence to support the "lesbian were the real AIDS victims" stuff.

R115 you'll look foolish when shit hits the fan and this saves your rights, because they had enough brains to see this car wreck coming. It already started with gay and lesbians kids going after the medical quacks that harmed them.

[quote] I fully support anyone who believes they are trans to live as they like. It's when those same people demand that lesbians suck their dicks and pretend they are women that I have an issue.

There isn't demanding. There's passing. Ultimately, nobody should know. That's what transwomen aspire to.

learn some reading comprehension. Advocating for pedos isn't a good look either genius.

[quote][R115] you'll look foolish when shit hits the fan and this saves your rights

They don't want to save gay men's rights. They want drag banned, for instance.

[quote]Advocating for pedos isn't a good look either genius.

Go back to early '00s Glasgow, fish.

R120 yeah cause sex is so easily confused, right? Passing is not likely, so it's ignorant to rely on that to determine human rights. They have every right to advocate for themselves but not to stomp on other groups.

Seriously just F&F and block the troll, he will respond endlessly with his attempts to distract from LGB Alliance with his divisive Lesbians vs. Gay Men rhetoric.

[quote][R120] yeah cause sex is so easily confused, right?

Yes. I'm a gay man who was mistaken for a girl during my early teens.

[quote]Seriously just F&F

"I just want diversity of opinion."

R122 what's with the hyperbole in here lately? First of all, LGB alliance is a separate topic than drag queens, but ok. Second, being critical about cultural issues isn't banning shit. Stop trying to rule over this thread with your hysterical responses.

R126 no shit, children and teens can be fairly androgynous. We're talking about adult men. Keep up.

So basically r112, you are for just the G or maybe the GT.

Yes, r120. It IS demanding. You do not go onto lesbian dating sites if you have a dick. Lesbians are attracted to same SEX meaning other women with pussies. Then when we say we don't want to suck your cock, we get called Terfs, doxxed, attacked, etc. Sorry but if you have a dick and are attracted to women, you are straight, not a lesbian.

[quote]First of all, LGB alliance is a separate topic than drag queens

Almost like it isn't about gay rights, just hating trans.

I remember their silence on gay marraige in NI, free PrEP in Scotland, No Outsiders in England and most of their supporters critizing Phil Schofield's coming out.

[quote][R126] no shit, children and teens can be fairly androgynous. We're talking about adult men. Keep up.

I'm an adult gay man, quite short of stature, small boned, muscle free, feminine of face, with a high voice. With long hair -- I'm bald -- I could pass for a woman.

[quote] So basically [R112], you are for just the G or maybe the GT.

Well, if you say that LGBT is an unnatural alliance then why not consider that LGB might be too? The only group that seems to have a problem with LGBT is the L. It would be easier if they left. Instead they're trying to remove G too.

I'm a gay man. I care about my own rights because I know no one else will. I do feel for T a bit, since most of them are gay men and not accepted by society because they're seen as gay men, but I'm just here for G.

[quote] Lesbians are attracted to same SEX meaning other women with pussies.

Most lesbian couples never have sex. They're off-put by T personality mostly.

Man, be glad you didn't have Jeanette Jennings as a mother, R133. You'd have been transed before puberty for sure.

[quote] Man, be glad you didn't have Jeanette Jennings as a mother, [R133]. You'd have been transed before puberty for sure.

Yes, I'm opposed to transing gay boys, as I've already said.

Then why were you defending the two Connecticut track and field athletes the other day?

Those were two very clearly gay boys pushed to be trans by outside forces, particularly their mothers.

A FOUNDER of LGB Alliance is a GAY MAN moron. If you knew your gay history you would know he was a founder of Stonewall UK as well.

[quote]Those were two very clearly gay boys pushed to be trans by outside forces

Were they?

What were they doing in sports?

Yes, and he advocates for women more than gay men. A lot of gay men are brainwashed by society. You see gay men defending rad fems but never rad fems defending gay men.

What does the troll think he possibly has in common with straight mostly white autogyns who want to fuck women?

And who want to sterilize, lower the IQs of and castrate young gay boys? Making them lifelong medical patients?

r135, you have no idea what you are talking about.

We have sex. And often.

Don't engage the troll! It is relentless.

LGB Alliance has many gay men supporters (including me), and has trans supporters as well.

Just not the crazy kind.

explain the tweets deleted due to backlash from their replies at R76.

"I do feel for T a bit, since most of them are gay men..."

Oh boy, are you wrong on that one. Like, 80% wrong (if not more).

So what are T: gay boys being transed or straight men?

Or one thing when you’re trying to get gay men onside and then another among yourselves?

Straight men make up the majority of Transwomen.

A lot of female T's are gay women who, for whatever reason (internalized homophobia, societal pressure to be feminine, family homophobia, etc), believe they must be men if they are attracted to women. There are many videos out there of women who detransitioned after admitting to themselves they were just butch lesbians. It's horrible that some of these women cut off their breasts or got hysterectomies and then realized that they really were women.

Most transwomen are straight men who have a fetish about being a woman. They get aroused by presenting as a woman and making others refer to them as such. They believe odd things about what makes a woman and likely have masturbated to the thought of being one. Anyone who plays along with them is contributing to their fetish.

Some transwomen are gay men who, like the females above, are self loathing. The issue becomes trying to tell them apart. Which men really, truly feel that they are women and which men are getting off on it? That's the main issue here. Most of the transwomen who frequent lesbian spaces such as online dating sites are, in fact, the first type which is why lesbians are not having it. Don't expect us to participate in your sexual fantasies or to such your disgusting cocks. A lot of lesbians, like myself are repulsed by dicks.

A dress does not make you a woman anymore than wearing leather makes you a cow.

'Propaganda: The Psychological Effects on our Society.'- The transgender lie was deliberately designed to distract feminists from their priorities, sever vulnerable kids from their parents watchful eye and to weaken the public's perceptions of reality

People on here have called it a Trojan Horse for years. It is literally erasing a generatioin of young LGB kids.

r150 I've read that many young Lesbians no longer identify as such; they go for "nonbinary" or something similar under the trans umbrella. It seems to be hitting Lesbians much harder than gay men - so far.

The troll plaguing this thread seems to have gone to bed. We're safe for another six hours!

This is really quite astonishing.

Maybe Stef-on-knee will be writing national health policy next.

How many generations of LGB kids will be sacrificed?

How much $$$ will be made?

Lesbian who de transitioned coming out. Trans activists don't want this stuff out there. Not sure why as I think it likely happens a lot.

WE are the group they are hiding behind as was described in the Dentons Strategy Memo.

Who wants to be associated with this?

The LGB Alliance is the only group creating daylight between us in the public realm.

I’m opposed to gay males becoming women.

I support straight men becoming women.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

This should end well.

Totes the kind of person I want to be associated with in the public perception through relentless propaganda. We should erase the underlying basis for legal protection of LGB as long as brave and stunning humans like this get free access to very young kids, right?

Thought the LG were pretty vocal about pushing these types out in the 70s and 90s?

Pervs like the teacher will hide behind us as long as we allow it.

We giggled about MichFest and dithered while our organizations were taken over, so as to provide cover for an agenda aimed at eliminating the basis for our legal rights and erasing generations of LGB kids, while making money on their suffering.

Many in the public unthinkingly support this while thinking they are supporting US. The plan worked, but now it needs to be exposed.

[quote]and erasing generations of LGB kids

Wait, I thought it was all adult straight men who were transitioning.

You've switched back again.

Oh no, the crazy troll is back.

A lot of women and lesbians are used to groupthink and gay men deferring to them and consider any difference of opinion trolling.

r162 That is a shocking and sinister read.

LOL!

Ironic that a man campaigning for rad fems would accuse someone else of being brainwashed.

He may be disappeared soon!!

It’s always the most uneducated and inexperienced people who fight against change. They never win and history judges them poorly.

Not all change is good, r170.

"It’s always the most uneducated and inexperienced people who fight against change."

Yep. People who still think-- in the year 2020-- that women don't deserve their own sports teams are pretty fucked up.

Pic of OP

r173 so to defend trans people from whatever (nothing in this case) you're being fatphobic?

Yes, R170. In twenty years' time, we'll all look back and say, "God, can you believe people used to think women don't have penises? Can you believe people used to think men don't have wombs? Can you believe people used to think there were two sexes?"

Oh wait - no, we won't. Because women don't have penises, men don't have wombs, and there are two sexes. This is true regardless of whether we want to believe it.

Actually, r170, the most intelligent people I've encountered online are the people rejecting the extreme trans/gender activism.

R176 A dumb person generally thinks other dumb people are intelligent. The KKK view other members as intelligent

r170 A simplistic reductive argument and frankly a very lazy one too.

r177 nothing you want to say about Hitler while you're at it? 🙄

I'm not sure that's the OP, it might also be this great big fat person with disgusting hygiene issues.

.........

Damn! You people are oddly obsessed with genitals

Most of us are gay men, R182, so DUHHH!

And, R182?

[quote]Yep. People who still think-- in the year 2020-- that women don't deserve their own sports teams are pretty fucked up.

Of course it's feminists and their push to have women's sports taken seriously that's behind transwomen in sport.

In fact the whole trans stuff only took off because of women. Women professors in women dominated social science departments in women dominated universities.

Polls have shown that it's men not women who are most opposed to transgenderism.

You women got total power and gleefully tried to deconstruct everything, now you dislike that it's being thrown back at you.

You wanted people arrested for words. Well, now they can be.

Oh, look...

What a non-surprise:

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot with rainbow laces stamping on a human face - forever."

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Did the thread about the track lawsuit in CT get deleted?

No, it's still up. Problem's on your end.

R188, it's called "throwing a race." But you knew that.

When transwomen win it's because of unfair advantage.

When transwomen lose it's because... they threw the race... because... who knows why? But it's all part of their conspiracy to ruin things for butch, unattractive female athletes.

This is very sad and not at all surprising.

We need to speak up for the generation of LGB kids that is being erased. Mutilating, sterilizing and lowering their IQ is only in the interest of the surgeons and Big Pharma.

Are You Now or Have You Ever Been a Believer in Biological Sex?

Only one comment on this and not supportive.

Their reply sections are revealing.

Since you're all so GLB-friendly which 2020 presidential candidate do you think is best for GLB people?

Oh, look, another deleted tweet.

....

Seriously, r193! Gen Z doesn't need to be any stupider!

It might also help if some of the people they associate with didn't say that they choose their sexuality.

Homophobia, you say?

Wut, MORE Orwellian nonsense?!

NOTHING in the tweet by the Mayor has ANYTHING to do with LGB. Tired of those pushing this agenda hiding behind our movement. Their PR strategy was wildly successful, time to call it out.

Rad fems are the ones who spent decades demonizing normal male sexuality. They said it was a problem for a man to be attracted to a young, slim, blonde woman rather than his aging wife. He should be sexually attracted to the wife anyway, they said. Or having normal urges was a problem altogether.

They're responsible for any girl dick sucking.

Lesbians don't experience homophobia.

Homophobia is something experienced exclusively by gay men.

I've been seeing a post on Facebook shared by well meaning, let's call them acquaintances, saying something like 'Cis [sic] people don't get to define what transphobia is."

And I think yes, fair enough.

But on this condition:

Trans women don't get to tell actual women, whom they should or shouldn't want in their refuges, rape crisis centres etc etc.

Deal?

Transwomen are actual women. I wonder if ciswomen are real women, though. Since they didn't make a conscious choice to be a woman how can we know?

The plot thickens...remember how the story of Stonewall was re-written? Wonder what hidden hand was at work?

Who benefits?

Worker’s parties were hijacked long ago — by feminism not transwomen.

That was the ‘70s. Women entering workforce — who benefits?

Lesbians have also been trying to insert themselves into Stonewall.

To make clear: gay men and gay men alone led the fight for gay rights.

At R208 I see someone is trying to claim a lesbian started it (Storm or Stormy or whatever).

No. It was a gay man. We won’t be erased.

TERFs, you are responsible for this.

No R213 the man who started the fire is responsible.

That happened after extensive dehumanisation of transwomen by TERFs.

R214, don't you know that misogynistic TRAs will always find a way to blame men's violent crimes on women?

Are any of you going to condemn that or just keep pretending you're the real victims.

The US is far too politically correct to support an exclusive LGB movement. And while I've defended trans people vigorously here on the DL, I have come to believe there's a need for support for gay men and women that does not include transgenders but does not operate in opposition to trans affirmative policies.

The candidacy of Mayor Pete has really shone a light in my eyes on the existing homophobia and stereotyping on not just the right but also on the left. In talking with more left-leaning activists I see homophobia cloaked in anti-bourgeois sentiment. They are less bothered by Pete's policies than his department store suits, bad nerd haircut, lack of piercings and tats, and milquetoast existence. He's just not radically queer enough for the left and he's a deviant homosexualist to the right.

Gay men and gay women need an advocacy group to educate the general public that we are happily male or female and exhibit a variety of masc/fem characteristics but we do not have gender identity issues. It's like going back to basics. It's the same message my eldergays sent throughout the 20th century. Unfortunately, that message has been overshadowed by the public's rather lewd and lascivious facination with transgenders which are but a teeny weeny fraction of a per cent of the population.

The trans community deserves respect, GLB support, and their own organization to forward their often very different goals than mine. For example, so much time, political energy, and resources have gone into bathroom issues which have zero effect on us. I wish them well and they can call on me when they need help, but I still have work to do in my own community and we need a gay political support network to facilitate that.

R218 - I totally agree that the trans community deserves respect. But respect is a two way street and there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of respect coming back to LGB people.

I agree, R218. Good post.

But I feel any LGB/GLB (the terms change even in your post) is inherently unstable. What I think we need is a Gay Men's Movement.

^^^ r220 Good catch on the GLB vs LGB. Subconscious attempt to equalize. Poor B, though. Also the afterthought. Maybe they should make up their damn minds but that's another topic. ;)

It used to be GLBT then became LGBT when lesbians complained -- which should've been taken as a harbinger of doom and mostly proves my point about how GLB/LGB will be more unstable than GLBT/LGBT.

I get the feeling this org would rather the term LGBT to GLB.

Trans would not exist without bigotry against women and gay men.

That seems like another switch back to 'Gay boys are being transed'.

So are most transwomen gay boys or straight men?

One DOES wonder about the end goal...

Why was this clip (from an interview w/ Dr. Eric Vilain in 2017) removed from the NBC Bay Area website?

"I'm actually wondering what are we trying to accomplish here? Are we trying to reduce the number of gay & lesbian adults?"

Going out on a limb, suspect is not REALLY about the stairs. Society never REALLY protected kids but to not even have a pretense at safeguarding young kids at school? Shades of Stef-on-knee.

The solution is to encourage straight men to transition. That’ll increase the number of lesbians.

This teacher is aggressive as hell.

Should teachers be familiar with the needs of the very young children they are entrusted to educate? Or is obsessive self focus and using the children as props in their fetish good value for the taxpayer?

Clymer is always using lingo like this - do they get a style handbook from HRC?

My darlings.

Is this how they imagine women speak?

Aren't the bathroom fixtures for students in primary schools child-sized? There is no valid reason for an adult male to want to use a children's lavatory. Also 'Vica Steel' sounds like a porn name.

People exercising free speech is 'crying transphobia' except when TERFs do it and it's 'standing up for womyn'.

Wow, this is big news.

Times article, Part 1

Ministers are expected to drop plans to make it easier for people to change their gender amid concerns about the impact on children.

The government will formally respond to a public consultation on updating the Gender Recognition Act by the summer. The consultation, which was launched in 2018 by Theresa May, proposed to change the law so that people would be able to officialy transition simply by making a declaration of their gender.

At present they have to receive a medical diagnosis, appear before a specialist panel and wait for two years for legal recognition of their new gender. They also have to pay a £140 fee.

The proposals to change the Gender Recognition Act have met with criticism from some feminist groups, whose members are concerned about the prospect of trans people being able to use single-sex spaces.

Ministers are also concerned about the impact the proposals could have on children, who are being helped to transition while still developing their “decision-making capabilities”.

“While we believe adults should be able to live their lives, and trans rights should be respected and protected, the government also has a role to play in protecting children,” a government source said.

The approach is in contrast to that of Theresa May, who as prime minister said: “What was very clear from our survey is that transgender people across the UK find the process of legally changing their gender overly bureaucratic and invasive. I want to see a process that is more streamlined and de-medicalised, because being trans should never be treated as an illness.”

The consultation concluded in October 2018 but a response has been repeatedly delayed.

Part 2

Last month Victoria Atkins, who was then the minister for women and equalities, said the government was looking “carefully and methodically” at responses to the consultation. She said: “We are clear that we want to protect trans adults’ rights and protect single-sex spaces for women. We do not want to rush this, we want to get it right.”

Penny Mordaunt, who at the time was a backbench Tory MP but has since become a minister in the Cabinet Office, said there was “huge consensus about what should happen”. She told The Independent: “There is a paucity of care for people needing support and services and consequently massive delay in getting access — hence the two-year wait.

“There are some outdated barriers facing people wanting to change their gender, such as having to get your spouse’s consent, and government should have a ‘tell us once’ service so we end the nonsense of people having different documents in different genders. The law on women-only spaces also needs clarity. Some of this will take time — you can’t grow healthcare and support capacity overnight, but I think all sides of the debate will be reassured when the consultation results are published.”

At present NHS rules enable children to start gender transition treatment before puberty without their parents’ support. Children unhappy with their birth gender can begin treatment after as few as three therapeutic assessments. They can discuss treatments separately from their parents and are encouraged to self-define their status and to develop “autonomy” in decision-making. Interventions include hormone blockers to suppress puberty and, later, cross-sex hormone therapy. The average age at which children begin such treatments is 14, but some are as young as 12.

NHS England has ordered an independent review into the use of puberty suppressant drugs and cross-sex hormones. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), which is responsible for clinical practice guidelines in England and Wales, has also been asked to develop guidance for the first time about referring children to gender identity services.

Existing NHS treatment draws heavily on international guidelines that recommend approaches in care for gender dysphoria.

An NHS contract with the Tavistock & Portman Trust, issued in 2016, says that it will “conform” or “broadly conform” to standards of care issued by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) in 2012. These say that they reflect the best available science and “professional consensus”. The Tavistock Trust works with children and young people with gender identity issues.

However, Gene Feder, professor of primary care at the University of Bristol and an expert in clinical guidelines, said that these fell far below the benchmark for British healthcare guidelines used by Nice and that he would not recommend their use.

The manipulation of crime stats also needs to stop.

Sweden

A whole generation of likely to be LGB kids, erased...

Worrying that gay boys could be erased.

New group formed in Canada for anyone who is interested...

LGB Alliance @AllianceLGB · 14h We received a postal request for help from a Canadian group of founding members of gay and lesbian centers who sign themselves “STAND UP! Standing up in Canada for the safety and health of women and children, or trying to.”

What do women and children have to do with LGB?

Turner Times Article 1

Giving puberty blocker to ‘trans’ children is a leap into the unknown

A landmark legal review will examine claims that confused young people are being subjected to a giant medical experiment, says Janice Turner

Friday February 21 2020, 5.00pm GMT, The Times

An 11-year-old child is probably years from his or her first kiss. Yet the drug they are about to take will almost certainly lead to a medical pathway which will leave them sterile. Since their gametes will never be allowed to mature, doctors will not even be able to harvest their sperm or eggs. Can any 11-year-old understand the gravity of ruling out ever having children?

Moreover can this child, for whom sex is an unimaginable, probably rather revolting adult business, consent to a treatment which will depress their future libido to the extent they may never have an orgasm? (Imagine trying to explain the concept, let alone the desirability, of an orgasm to an 11-year-old.)

These are the ethical issues which make puberty blockers the most controversial of medications. On one side are “affirmative” clinicians and trans activists who believe that halting the onset of natal puberty is the only way to alleviate the distress of gender dysphoria, a sense of being “born in the wrong body”. On the other is a growing number of psychotherapists, doctors and endocrinologists concerned that blockers are administered too readily and, since they are prescribed “off-label” with no research into the long-term outcome for patients, amount to conducting a medical experiment on children.

In recent months these brewing worries have crossed into the public sphere. A landmark judicial review is being brought by Susan Evans, a former psychiatric nurse at the Tavistock Gender Identity Development Services (GIDS), a woman known as Mrs A who is the mother of an autistic 16-year-old girl referred to the clinic, and Keira Bell, a 23-year-old woman who as a child was enabled by GIDS to transition into a male and now regrets it. The plaintiffs argue that prescribing hormone blockers to under-18s is illegal because, unable to understand their far-reaching consequences, children cannot consent to take them. They say the Tavistock is “materially misleading” child patients and their parents, omitting to say that “nearly 100 per cent of children who commence hormone blockers go on to take the irreversible cross-sex hormones”.

Meanwhile, in the light of a 3,000 per cent increase in referrals to GIDS in the past decade, the government has announced a long-awaited independent review, chaired by Dr Hilary Cass, a former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, to assess children’s gender services and make “evidence-based recommendations about the future use of these drugs”.

So what are puberty blockers and how did they come to be used on children worldwide? The group of drugs, GnRH agonists, release a form of the human hormone gonadotropin to stop the testicles and ovaries from producing sex hormones. Triptorelin, the most widely used, is licensed to treat advanced prostate cancer in men and endometriosis in women, to “chemically castrate” male sex offenders and in children to halt rare cases of early puberty, but not to treat child gender dysphoria.

Yet in 1994 a 16-year-old girl told the Amsterdam Gender Clinic she wanted to be a boy. Uniquely, three years earlier she had persuaded an endocrinologist to halt her puberty. Inspired, clinicians began administering hormonal blockers before secondary sex characteristics had occurred, then moving on to cross-sex hormones. The “Dutch protocol” was seen as a remarkable breakthrough for trans people whose most heartfelt desire is to “pass” as the opposite sex. Puberty blockers could end the agony of repeated cosmetic surgeries. If you never developed a beard you would never need painful electrolysis to remove it. If you never grew breasts you wouldn’t need a double mastectomy. Besides, for gender dysphoric children puberty is a dread moment when your hated body emerges categorically as the “wrong” sex.

Turner Times article 2

Triptorelin is presented by gender clinics as a “pause button” which need not stop puberty for ever but can give a “breathing space” while a young person decides whether they wished to proceed to transition. If not, you just stop taking them and your natal puberty will kick in. What parent, faced with a deeply distressed child, would not press that button?

The problem is that almost everyone who takes puberty blockers goes on to transition. Frozen Peter Pan-like, they see classmates develop into adults. Many have already “socially transitioned”, assuming opposite sex names and clothing. Going back is scary, so inevitably they press forward into cross-sex hormones.

Susie Green and Jackie, who had gender reassignment surgery at the age of 16 Susie Green and Jackie, who had gender reassignment surgery at the age of 16 KEN MCKAY/REX FEATURES But would they have transitioned anyway? Most likely not. A statistic, undisputed by GIDS and North American gender clinics, is that without medical intervention around 85 per cent of gender dysphoric children come to terms with their biological sex after puberty. As GIDS notes: “‘Persistence [in identifying as trans] was strongly correlated with the commencement of physical interventions such as the hypothalamic blocker.” Moreover the vast majority of these non-conforming kids seen by clinics — girls who prefer short hair and skateboarding, boys who love Barbies — will grow up into lesbians or gay men. In the maelstrom of adolescence, are they confusing same-sex attraction with being trans?

Clinicians believe the natural cascade of sex hormones at puberty can resolve bodily self-hatred. Yet if puberty is thwarted this cannot happen. Moreover, the claim that blockers are fully reversible, that natal puberty will just spark up even years later if you stop taking them, is largely untested — because almost no one does that.

The Dutch protocol was quickly taken up by gender clinics worldwide but British clinicians, who upheld a “watchful waiting” approach, initially remained cautious, refusing to prescribe blockers to under-15s. But quickly these drugs became a political as much as a medical demand: campaigners argued that to deny them to children was transphobic.

Some British parents started taking their children to America where easy access to drugs and even paediatric surgeries — including mastectomies for 14-year old girls — are commonplace. Notably in 2007 Susie Green, an IT manager from Leeds, took her 12-year-old son Jack to a Boston clinic to be prescribed hormones, then at 16 to Thailand for genital surgery, illegal in Britain and now in Thailand. Later Green became chief executive of Mermaids, a charity for trans children, which under her leadership has fiercely advocated for blockers, hormones and early surgical interventions. The Mermaids website recommended Dr Helen Webberley, a private GP suspended by the GMC for running an unlicensed gender clinic, who prescribed triptorelin online.

Bowing to activist pressure, in 2010 GIDS reduced its lower age prescription limit from 15 to ten. Even though the known side-effects of the drugs include lowered bone density and height, plus depression. GIDS admits it has no idea how freezing puberty affects the fast-developing teenage brain. The question of adult sexual function is swerved as too tasteless, but real-life examples are emerging. Jazz Jennings, 19, a trans reality TV star in the US, who never experienced natal puberty and looks indistinguishable from a natal girl, has admitted having almost no libido and asked her parents if an orgasm was like a sneeze. Susie Green revealed that her trans daughter Jackie was left with a child’s penis, so the Thai surgeons inverting it into a vagina had little to work with.

I agree: transing kids should be banned.

What we really need is more translesbians.

Turner Times article 3

Remembering that triptorelin is used off-label, shouldn’t every gender clinic conduct exhaustive long-term research, monitoring every patient to ensure that their radical drug regime works? In 2011 GIDS embarked on a study of 44 young people and Dr Michael Biggs, associate professor at Oxford’s Department of Sociology, has analysed the results that GIDS has only published in dribs and drabs. This includes findings that children — although happier and more confident after six months — noted “internalised problems and body dissatisfaction, especially in natal girls” after a year. Most alarming was a significant increase in patients agreeing with the statement: “I deliberately try to hurt or kill myself.” Given that parents are repeatedly told (wholly erroneously) their children will kill themselves if they don’t take blockers, this surely requires more scrutiny.

Dr Biggs is concerned by GIDS’s methodology, the clinic losing touch with patients in the trial and, above all, its failure to publish a conclusive report. Why is this? Would clinicians have to concede that they had sterilised children, consigned them to life-long patienthood, including needless surgeries to remove healthy body parts for no good reason?

Meanwhile the problem has increased exponentially: in 2009, only 77 children were referred to GIDS but a decade later it was 2,590. Whereas male referrals were once the majority, three quarters are now natal girls. In any other health sector researchers would leap to investigate such a trend. Yet GIDS remains incurious. Last year its senior consultant psychiatrist Dr Elizabeth van Horn said on Newsnight: “We do not know why the numbers have gone up so dramatically recently. Or why more of them are girls.”

Perhaps this isn’t surprising when anyone who interrogates this phenomenon is hounded by an activist lobby. Dr Lisa Littman, of Brown University, explored what is termed “rapid-onset gender dysphoria”: clusters of teenage girls, often friends, often same-sex attracted, who after long exposure to online transition forums in early puberty abruptly declare themselves trans. Her paper was denounced as bigotry and removed from her university’s website.

Yet her views are echoed by GIDS clinicians, 35 of whom have resigned in the past three years, many alarmed by the rush to medicalisation and the way Mermaids, Instagram trans influencers and the CBBC programme I Am Leo present transition as uncomplicated. They say they are seeing girls with a panoply of other issues — anxiety, depression, self-harm, undiagnosed autism, victims of homophobic bullying and sexual abuse — for whom transition to a male body was presented online as the universal panacea. Often a normal, tom-boyish disgust at their new breasts, eliciting sudden and unwanted sexual attention from men, is interpreted as a certainty that they are in the “wrong body”. Yet instead of interrogating these underlying issues, clinicians are told to “affirm” a young person’s “trans identity” and prescribe the puberty blockers that trans campaigners fiercely insist are their right.

The former psychiatric nurse Susan Evans, in her statement to the judicial review, says she saw triptorelin prescribed after just three or four sessions. One ex-GIDS psychotherapist tells me that getting a blockers prescription is seen as an end in itself, a sign you are truly on your trans journey. Even if a young person has already gone through puberty — so the side-effects for girls are akin to sudden menopause — they must take triptorelin for around a year before being allowed cross-sex hormones. Although this period is supposed to be a pause for reflection, young people then receive less therapy not more: “They are told, ‘Go away we’ll see you in three months’.”

Turner Times article 4

The trouble for clinicians is that there is no diagnostic tool which can predict who will “desist” and who will go on to transition. For adult trans people, who have felt from childhood that to live authentically and free from mental distress they must live in the opposite gender, whose painful lives are marked by bullying, discrimination and search for treatment, it is wholly understandable that they wish to save younger people their pain. “I would without doubt have accepted the opportunity of early female hormone therapy and early sex-change surgery,” a trans woman wrote to me. “I would be ecstatic and have grabbed the opportunity as a young teenager to become the woman that I am.” Many, however, regard the haste with which children are put on a medical pathway with grave unease.

That such controversial drugs will come under the scrutiny of a judicial review and a public inquiry should be welcomed. Dr Hilary Cass proved herself a fearless whistleblower in 2013 when working at Great Ormond Street Children’s Hospital, exposing how poor management was endangering patients. She will need to be robust to deal with the inevitable vicious accusations of transphobia which greet anyone probing gender ideology and medicine.

Above all, any examination needs to be cool, objective and above the frenzied politicisation of the culture wars. In the US, eight state legislatures have introduced bills to ban doctors prescribing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to minors, a move easily dismissed as more bigotry from anti-choice Republicans. But in the US few liberal voices or newspapers dare to interrogate the explosion of highly lucrative paediatric gender clinics willing to diagnose kindergarten kids as trans or how pharmaceutical companies will profit from having millions of life-long customers. Dr Cass might ponder why Ferring Pharmaceuticals, which produces triptorelin, not only financially supported a trial into the Dutch protocol but since 2013 has donated £1.4 million to the Lib Dems, the most vocal supporters of gender self-ID.

Doubts about puberty blockers have come from senior clinicians, from LGBT campaigners worried that gender clinics are performing “gay conversion therapy” on future homosexual kids, and from feminists appalled that girls who do not conform to sexist gender stereotypes feel they cannot be girls. Already a growing number of “de-transitioners”, mainly young women, are coming forward, angry that doctors rushed them into irreversible treatment.

How will this play out in the next decade, as the first cohort on puberty blockers come to terms with their probable infertility? Such experimental paediatric medicine has been politicised and shrouded in secrecy for too long. It is time to ask serious questions.

Another article, this time in the The Times.

I thought you bitches were being silenced.

Surely inferences can be drawn

All about control and re-defining reality. Orwellian.

Why is it so hard for ciswomen to be polite?

Interesting

What's THAT supposed to mean?

At a time when us lesbians are having the literal ends of pencils rubbed against us by those evil men in dresses the least you fa... eh, boys could do is help us out. Don't you remember that we single-handedly did all the nursing during the AIDS crisis? In fact, that was really a crisis of our unpaid labour. The hundreds, nay, thousands of gay men I nursed all told me on their deathbed 'the greatest crisis facing gay men is straight men preferring transwomen to cis.'

And this is how you repay us?

If you boys don't start helping us out here it'll be time for us to drop the G too.

Misogynist, homophobic trans troll at r252.

Moron at r247, The Times is about the only paper that asks questions, and that's because it's behind a paywall so the online trans lynch mobs can't get to it like they swarm and attack everyone else who dares question the ideology.

[quote]Misogynist, homophobic trans troll at [R252].

Anti-homophobia actually. You should address the actual homophobia of lesbians trying to center themselves into the Gay Men's AIDS crisis.

[quote]The Times is about the only paper that asks question

Except for The Guardian, The Telegraph, all the tabloids...

Lol, the idiot tranny just admitted that his post at r252 was a fake troll post pretending to be a lesbian in order to sow division between lesbians and gay men and incite hatred of women and lesbians.

Hey you misogynist, homophobic tranny troll, the AIDS crisis was almost 40 years ago, lesbians aren't going on about it all the time. The fact you have to try to twist events of so long ago to justify your misogyny and homophobia just proves that there are no incidents of division between lesbians and gay men and you're making the up. The only time our "community" has been divided is now, when you tranny homophobes have tried to infiltrate and destroy our community of people who love others of the same sex as them from within.

FYI, the Guardian is pro-tranny and trannies aren't a major concern of the Telegraph. Currently in the UK there is a semblance of debate, despite most of it being shut down, about reforms to the GRA. But, yes, there will be increasing voices against the trans lunacy as more and more people start to realise what bullshit your ideology is, especially with some judicial cases coming up and Labour losing votes and members because of the stupid trans support (they confuse trans with gays, as the trans deliberately intend).

One of my tiresomely woke 20something acquaintances has just taken a screen shot of the LGB Alliance Twitter feed and sent it to me saying "I have questions for you" because I'm following them.

Where do these fucking people get off? I suppose he wants to come round to my place and throw out my Father Ted DVDs because of Graham Linehan too?

I have lots of trans friends, I totally support equality under the law for everyone but the continuous shutting down of any sort of discussion or debate is despicable. I can only conclude that it is because the trans activists have no logical arguments to make or facts to back up their demands as everything is based on 'feelings'.

I'm pleased the UK government seems to be putting a brake on self-identification. If one woman suffers because of a self-identified transwoman's actions then that is one too many. And yes any violence or action against a transwoman is one too many too.

When has one gay man suffered because of transwoman's actions?

“It is .. unsurprising that those lesbian, gay and bisexual people who feel they have political interests that still need advocacy might be starting to leave a movement that increasingly prevents them, in the name of inclusivity, from doing so.” #LGBIssues

Troll at R257 - all the little gay boys who "transition" in order to erase away the gay. But, as a tranny, you wouldn't consider that suffering because, even though you are suffering very much deep inside, you don't want to admit to yourself that you're really a gay man and not a "woman". It's because you're so bitter and suffering that you hate real women so much.

Emma Palermo @AngryRadFemMums Replying to @AllianceLGB I keep hoping the the Trans movement will rise up and say “THIS IS NOT WHO WE ARE” and eject the toxic filth from their ranks. But no, it’s just more of the same AGP males, rank homophobics, child mutilators and misogynists that have co-opted the Trans movement. #DroptheT

Example of a gay man being shat on by a transwoman who calls himself "Legally Trans", has the twitter handle @gal_lawyer and claims to be "Very passionate about LGBTQ media representation" depite shitting all over the LGB.

"some studies have shown that cis gay white males are, on average, doing better in the country than cis straight white males. As a group, they are ridiculously privileged compared to the rest of the LGBTQ community, and Pete is a shining example of that privilege."

That is appalling, R261, but I see far more hate coming from ciswomen than trans.

It is important for transwomen to remember that, like ciswomen, they exist only to serve gay men.

I'm an ally, but only to the extent they benefit gay men. Beyond that I don't really care what happens to these people.

*Pete hate specifically.

You lesbians need to ask yourself why you're supporting straight women over gay men.

[quote] “It is .. unsurprising that those lesbian, gay and bisexual people who feel they have political interests that still need advocacy might be starting to leave a movement that increasingly prevents them, in the name of inclusivity, from doing so.” #LGBIssues

I'm okay with G leaving "LGBT" which is a woman-run artificial construct. But I'm skeptical about gay men who support this org. A look at their twitter profiles usually reveals they spend all their time advocating for women not their gay brothers.

Responsible adults need to denounce this.

Gay men are not the sex offenders showing up at schools and public libraries to lead drag story hours to young kids. It is part of a relentless agenda hiding behind our movement. Call it out.

And the homophobia is back!

Drag is beautiful.

[quote] and I enjoy watching drag, even if I find it problematic

Can any of you dykes explain this?

This is basically what I find sad: the twitter profile of a gay man that makes no reference to him defending his own or his brothers' rights but does mention that he defends the right's of rad fems who hate us.

Instead of having drag queens twerk in libraries to groups of understandably bemused children why not invite gay and lesbian professionals to read to kids? I don't see how drag queen storytime's ostensible agenda of 'show kids that people like us exist' is all that positive given what a huge fucking mess some of these 'people like us' have turned out to be (sex offenders, substance abusers, etc.).

...And the anti-drag side comes out too.

Just admit you're not gay rights org, you're a rad fem org and we can move on.

Same idea as my post at R270 but expressed better:

Drag is gay liberation.

Any organization that does not support drag is not a gay rights organization.

There was an organisation that sent ordinary lesbians, gay men and bisexual into schools in the UK called Diversity Role Models. I assume they are still up and running.

What are you blithering on about R273 ? Drag has nothing to do with gay liberation. I'm a gay man, and I've been an activist for 30+ years. I've never done drag, never felt the need to do drag, never wanted to cross dress even for a laugh.

Drag belongs in the past, leave it there.

r252 I take my hat off to The Times newspaper for their journalism and questioning/research on this issue. I'm a bit shocked at The Guardian being lukewarm and less proactive on this.

The Line Must Be Drawn!

[quote]Drag has nothing to do with gay liberation. I'm a gay man, and I've been an activist for 30+ years.

Please. Any actual gay man who has been an activist for 30 years would know SOMETHING about the history of drag and gay liberation.

You sound like that lady who tried to claim she was a UK lesbian activist for 30 years and then ran off when questioned about it, because she was faking it and couldn't even manage to go to Google to try to make her lies sound halfway believable.

At least this thread explains why there is so much racebaiting, homophobic shit all over Datalounge recently; you guys always start one thread like this, then stink up the whole rest of the board as you get yourselves worked up in an alt-right frenzy.

[quote]Drag has nothing to do with gay liberation. I'm a gay man, and I've been an activist for 30+ years.

Well, guess who threw the first brick at Stonewall...

Oh, wait, I forgot you don't care about gay men beyond using us as useful idiots for feminists.

[quote]Drag belongs in the past, leave it there.

Drag is the one uniquely Gay artform. It belongs whenever gay men want to do it and that right must be defended.

So does Dykefront has an official anti-drag stance yet?

Yes!

[quote]And the effect on children, especially girls, of seeing what we called “a cartoon stereotype, almost pornographic version of a woman” presented as a positive role model. Girls matter. Boys matter. The images and role models presented to them matter./end

[quote]They present a cartoon stereotype and an almost pornographic version of women that is often close to misogyny.

Putting the tranny loon on ignore certainly cleans the thread up.

The corporate endorsement of the erasing of a generation of LGB kids is repellant. All whilst claiming to champion our community. Kudos to all who rightfully speak the truth and who refuse to participate in this travesty of twisted branding.

Belstaffie @Belstaffie As a life-long lesbian and after 35 years of LGB activism, I no longer want to be associated with the LGBT community. It’s now corrupt, a men’s sexual rights movement, pro-paedophilia and grooms children to “change sex”. I’m appalled and have shed tears about it. I’m done!

This is messed up in so many ways

Stonewall has astonishing influence - why? How? Who pays? Who benefits?

Is commerce really empowering?

New interview

Glad somenoe is saying it.

r291 These developments are deeply troubling and I am shocked that anybody is trying to mainstream them.Are they out of their mind?They are creating all the perfect conditions for a nasty massive backlash against the LGBT community. What are they hoping to achieve?

The T continue to try to hide behind our movement. We do not have to play along.

R293 - wow, that was eye-opening. Basically, try to add on trans legislation in the dark and tie it to marriage equality and other issues. They need to do this because people aren't educated about the trans issues.

So no discussion is allowed. That's exactly what we've experienced across the board. You cannot question the trans ideology.

r295 and it's why the pushback is so strong and angry and the battle so vicious because trans activists are trying to control a contentious issue that needs debate, discussion and thoughtful consideration by trying to screw down the lid on a pressure cooker and refusing to let it come off at all costs if they can help it. It is not working and is quite dangerous.

I meant r294 in above post ^^^^

Btw - SurvivingAngel - we post a lot on the same threads and seem to agree with each other a lot. I'm anon, but I always like your reasoned posts.

Carry on.

Thank you very much indeed r297 .Your kind words are appreciated. 👍🙂

Any elder gays remember this from back in the day?

Why indeed? Per article at link...

Why go to all the bother of defeating your opponents in argument when you can just drive them from the public sphere, deny them the opportunity to build their own movement, and effectively make opposition impossible?

That’s the problem with the transgender debate: there isn’t one. One side is trying to have a debate and the other side is trying to shut it down.

Paraphelias and mental illness glorified and untreated. A generation of likely to be LGB kids erased, mutilated, sterilized...

Allison Bailey @BluskyeAllison If you’re concerned that some trans identified males are fetishising gaining access to women’s single sex spaces, focusing on that goal with an enthusiasm disproportionate to the act itself, e.g going to the loo, reading this piece by David Thomas is unlikely to calm your fears.

ghost @tomboyatheist · 12h Replying to @BluskyeAllison and @NoToMisogyny I pity the person whose life ambition is to 'pass' and visit, of all places, the Ladies loos. Mermaids encourage transitioners to aspire to this lofty goal as some kind of Holy Grail. It is like a cult.

Text from The Telegraph

My transgender diary: 'What trans women really get up to in ladies’ loos' DAVID THOMAS

Part 1

Author David Thomas still lives as a man, but has begun the male-to-female gender transition. This week, David talks about mastering trips to the ladies' loos as a trans woman

I have now done it at six motorway services, as well as sundry other garages. I’ve done it at London Victoria, Gatwick airport and my local railway station. And I’ve also done it several times at a hair salon – but less often at a couple of restaurants, a pair of museums, a handful of Starbucks and one cinema.

Yes, I’ve recently been using a lot of ladies’ loos.

Now, I don’t wish to brag, but I feel this makes me something of an investigative reporter, fearlessly going where others dare not tread.

After all, the presence in female-only spaces for transwomen – and particularly those, like me, who have not yet had genital surgery – has proved to be a rather hot topic of late.

So what actually happens when I, wearing one of my many fashionable frocks and sporting the messy bun that I’ve recently got the hang of creating, walk into a ladies’?

Well, I start off by locating a spare cubicle. I use it for the purpose for which it is intended then, taking care not to get my skirt caught in my tights, flush and exit the cubicle.

Part 2

Next, I proceed to the nearest basin and give my hands a thorough, virus-bashing wash, before carefully checking my make-up, hair and general appearance. Male readers please note: this is not just vanity. It is essential monitoring.

For example, I discovered the other day that I had spent half of a rather important lunch with my two bosses – because one just isn’t enough for me – with my necklaces hopelessly tangled in the collar of my polo-neck sweater.

I looked utterly rubbish and it made me appear like someone who can’t even put a necklace over her head without messing it all up.

Still, it was a miracle that I was able to even spot my mistake because the mirrors in the ladies’ loo at this fashionable London eaterie were tinted sepia, with a vintage, cracked finish that made them look stylish, but at the same time prevented a proper reflection.

‘Only a man could have designed that,’ I thought, then realised, with a wicked thrill, that this was my first disparaging, womanly thought about the uselessness of men. An encouraging sign that I was heading in the right direction, I felt.

Of course, female readers may be thinking at this point, ‘But where is the exciting frontline reporting in all this? It sounds exactly what we’ve all done a million times.’

To which my answer is: absolutely, yes, it is precisely the same – barring the odd, private, anatomical difference. And that’s my point. There’s absolutely no drama at all.

Part 3

However, I may not have yet provided quite enough gritty, inside information. So I will answer the question that I’m sure some of you will still be asking by saying, ‘Yes, most of the time I sit down’.

In one of nature’s snide little ironies, despite goodness knows how many oestrogen patches, I still suffer from the exclusively male curse of an enlarged prostate. This affects my ability to urinate and can mean I have to stand to function properly – or even at all.

But I only do that if the cubicles have solid sides, so no one can look across and see my feet pointing in the wrong direction. I wouldn’t want to alarm them, or embarrass myself.

What, though, of other female toilet-users? How have they greeted my arrival into their midst? Well, to be honest, there hasn’t been a lot of them. Everyone goes on about the long queues outside and bustling crowds inside female WCs, but I have breezed right in and no one has paid me the blindest bit of notice.

Except once. As I walked into the ladies’ loos at Gatwick South Terminal, there was another woman in front of me. We stood for a second and regarded the endless line of cubicles, all apparently occupied, stretching away into the distance.

The other woman headed off in search of an unlocked door. Finally, she found one. Then she turned and looked straight at me.

For an awful second I feared she might have spotted me for a trans-intruder. Instead, she simply smiled, pointed to the door next to hers, and called out, ‘It’s free!’

I smiled back, said, ‘Thanks!’ and went to do my business.

So that, dear reader, is what transwomen get up to in the ladies’. And there is no cause for alarm.

Is there a word for narcissism taken to that level?

It is hard not to feel sorry for the families, esp the children, of these AGPs. In their fetishizing of tights and loos, there is little to no space for the personalities of needs of anyone else. The world becomes a stock player in validating something that can never, in reality, happen.

There is the tricky bit that transwomen (or perhaps more accurately described as trans identified MEN) commit crimes at the same rates as MEN. So perhaps self id and free access to womens spaces and children should have been headed off at the pass. Saying that voyerism, sex crimes and sex offenses against children were commited by women does not change the fact that they were commited by people with XY chromosomes.

There is the tricky bit that transwomen (or perhaps more accurately described as trans identified MEN) commit crimes at the same rates as MEN. So perhaps self id and free access to womens spaces and children should have been headed off at the pass. Saying that voyerism, sex crimes and sex offenses against children were commited by women does not change the fact that they were commited by people with XY chromosomes.

It appears that The Guardian employes one journalist with common sense. Hope they turn to protecting likely to be LGB kids next.

Remember, LGB rights are sex based as well. If women lose sex based rights, so will G, like dominos falling.

The time to push back on the threats to erode our rights is now.

This is quite good

#presspause

This is astonishing.

The T are trying to prevent LGB Allance from getting charity status. If you believe gay men, lesbians and bisexuals should be able to organize to protect their human rights, please report the Change.org post as hate speech.

LGB History Project interviews

First with Fred Sargeant is pretty cool. Have a listen.

Morgan Oger, what an apt name, is up to his old tricks.

The LGB Alliance needs LGB to step up and claim a space to organize around SEXUAL orientation, not gender.