Trump issued a solemn Statement. Short, but solemn.
Cool. Zuckerberg requested no more dinners, and Trump is complying. Whatever.
It is however quite rude and dismissive to refer to anyone as “his wife” and nothing else. Most women are not as empty and useless as Melania Trump, or indeed Donald Trump.
Tell me more about the residential accommodation one.
That’s so interesting, because by giving a trans woman the option of being in a single sex flat that is an all women flat, they remove that option from the women in the flat. He gets his preferred option and they lose theirs.
Why is that fair, again? I just can’t seem to grasp it.
It’s been sorted and Marion has what she needs for now.
What a glorious progressive movement, am I right?
Excellent post by Lily Maynard on The Curious Case of Marion Millar.
It’s all good; I’ll just whet your appetite with her take on Joss Prior:
Joss’s attack on women is a triple whammy, the epitome of bigotry – attacking women for their age, their politcs (entirely speculative) and their perceived intellectual capacity.
I imagine Joss’s idea of a feminist protest would have been a parade of 20-year-old bikini girls sporting full make-up and perfectly coiffed hair, chanting ‘transwomen are women!’
While explaining astrophysics to the people in the bleachers.
Prior- no spring chicken himself- is also disparaging about the number of women in the photo. I’m told that others were present who were not photographed, but bloody hell – just yesterday someone was threatening to shoot gender critical women with a ‘gun’! It’s pretty damn brave that these women dare show their faces at all! And with just six day’s notice, on a week day, when most women are either at work or have kids to ferry to and from school. In the middle of a pandemic. And where, exactly? Central Edingburgh? No: Coatbridge. A town in the lowlands of Scotland, about nine miles outside Glasgow. I’ll just hop on my bike…
…
For Women Scotland tell me, “It was just some friends and supporters outside the police station, so not really a protest as such.”
My favourite response was an… ahem… old photo of Prior in formal dress with the caption ‘bored, middle-aged dullard’?
If that seems harsh, bear in mind that Prior was not above doctoring a picture created by The Famous Artist Birdy Rose to make it look as if she had drawn Millar giving a Nazi salute.
It’s difficult to be harsh enough to Joss Prior.
H/t Sackbut
Susan Dalgety in The Scotsman:
Why have I spent the last 24 hours sharing despairing texts with some of Scotland’s most successful women, each as bewildered as I am? Women who have won awards for their work, women who have spent their entire adult lives overcoming prejudice, women who are the social, economic, and political equal of any man. Warrior queens every one of them. And now scared to speak out.
I could point to a Coatbridge police station, where on Thursday, Marion Millar, a 50-year-old feminist, was charged with malicious communications after posting allegedly “homophobic and transphobic” tweets, but the story doesn’t start there.
I could direct you to Johann Lamont’s powerful parliamentary speech where she argued successfully for the survivors of rape and sexual assault to have the right to choose the sex, not the gender, of the person who examines them after an attack. But the story didn’t start there either.
See also Joan Mcalpine.
Women who argue that biology is real and that our sex is the basis of inequality are dismissed as bigots. Women who marched alongside their gay brothers and sisters in the campaign for equality are accused, by some of the people they marched with, of causing a moral panic by asserting their sex-based rights.
Women have lost income, been shunned by their professional peers and pilloried for standing up for their sex-based rights. And one woman now awaits trial in Glasgow Sheriff Court on July 20.
It is now, she concludes, time to fight back.
Marion Millar put up a GoFundMe about 3 hours ago – the donations flooded in – so of course GoFundMe took it down.
I hate that Marion Millar is going through hell at the moment, but I’m delighted she’s about to draw attention to the tactics used by trans rights activists, the ideologically captured police who empower and enable them, and the silicon valley companies that hold women down while this theft of their rights and resources is underway.
When she finally does get it going, share it everywhere. Use it to peak friends and family. Let’s get the light flooding in on this dangerous cult that has done so much in the darkness. The accelerating demise of Stonewall and the imminent demise of Mermaids were both only possible because women like Marion fought like tigers against what amounts to an ideological coup, and a fraud comitted by Stonewall that took in the whole country.
Self-ID has been held back in Spain and Germany, and feminist groups inspired by the UK movement are popping up everywhere. The ripples from this case will be felt all over the world, so Marion, don’t lose heart. This is a dying movement, certainly in the UK, and you’re about to deliver the final blow.
Location changed to PayPal.
Updating to add: hold off on donating for now because evil people are setting up fake accounts and running off with the cash.
Valentina Petrillo could this year become the first openly transgender woman to compete at the Paralympics. For the visually impaired Italian, selection for the national squad would be a dream come true – but she says she understands why other athletes may have doubts and questions about racing against her.
“I’m happy as a woman and running as a woman is all I want. I couldn’t ask for more,” says Valentina Petrillo.
“I’ve got a fire inside me, that pushes me. An emotional strength. Obviously, my body’s not what it was at 20 when I was at my peak, but my happiness pushes me to go further, to go beyond my limits.”
But what Petrillo wants and Petrillo’s happiness isn’t the only issue.
The BBC does eventually get to the part about women who say it isn’t fair, but the part about Petrillo’s happiness and womanyness is what comes first.
I feel a need to learn something about these here Yogyakarta principles we hear so much about.
So I’m reading.
In 2006, in response to well-documented patterns of abuse, a distinguished group of international human rights experts met in Yogyakarta, Indonesia to outline a set of international principles relating to sexual orientation and gender identity. The result was the Yogyakarta Principles: a universal guide to human rights which affirm binding international legal standards with which all States must comply. They promise a different future where all people born free and equal in dignity and rights can fulfil that precious birthright.
Two words there I don’t understand – “binding” and “must.” On what basis do the people who drew up the principles have the authority to make them binding and to say that all States must comply?
Wikipedia gives some background:
The website promoting the Principles notes that concerns have been voiced about a trend of people’s human rights being violated because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. While the United Nations human rights instruments detail obligations to ensure that people are protected from discrimination and stereotypes,[4] which includes people’s expression of sexual orientation or gender identity, implementation of these rights has been fragmented and inconsistent internationally. The Principles aim to provide a consistent understanding about application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity.[5]
Those two things don’t go together though. They shouldn’t be formulaically paired that way as if they’re the same and have the same kinds of impacts on other people, because they’re not and they don’t.
The Yogyakarta Principles were developed at a meeting of the International Commission of Jurists, the International Service for Human Rights and human rights experts from around the world at Gadjah Mada University on Java from 6 to 9 November 2006. The seminar clarified the nature, scope and implementation of states’ human rights obligations under existing human rights treaties and law, in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity.
Again – not the same. Should not be treated as a pair.
The YP website explains each principle. On the page for principle 3 we get:
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. Persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities shall enjoy legal capacity in all aspects of life. Each person’s self-defined sexual orientation and gender identity is integral to their personality and is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom.
Yet again – not the same thing, should not be treated as a pair. It’s not even clear that “gender identity” is as solid a concept as sexual orientation is, let alone sex.
No one shall be forced to undergo medical procedures, including sex reassignment surgery, sterilisation or hormonal therapy, as a requirement for legal recognition of their gender identity.
Boom – there you have a “principle” that has turned out to be massively destructive of women’s rights. It’s too bad they didn’t manage to think about that back in 2006.
No status, such as marriage or parenthood, may be invoked as such to prevent the legal recognition of a person’s gender identity.
In other words children and spouses have no interests in this question.
No one shall be subjected to pressure to conceal, suppress or deny their sexual orientation or gender identity.
How are we defining “pressure”? Because if we define it broadly enough that means women are not allowed to say that men are not women. Again: more thought needed here.
States shall:
… b) Take all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to fully respect and legally recognise each person’s self-defined gender identity;
Seriously?
It’s bonkers.
Naomi Wolf pushed the vax conspiracy theorizing too far.
Stonewall raised “concern” with Ofsted that inspectors do not always discuss trans issues with primary school children, The Telegraph can reveal.
Ahhhhhhhh now that’s damning. Stonewall was complaining to Ofsted that inspectors weren’t pushing primary schools to groom children.
The LGBT charity questioned an exemption in the school watchdog’s guidance allowing inspectors to avoid asking children as young as five about topics such as gender transitioning if a headteacher “reasonably believes” it is sensitive for pupils.
In an email to Ofsted, released under freedom of information laws, Stonewall said: “We are concerned that exempting inspectors from speaking to pupils about certain protected characteristics could undermine their ability to effectively assess a primary school’s compliance with the Equality Act 2010.”
In other words schools have to indoctrinate small children into the trans ideology or they won’t be doing their duty by “certain protected characteristics” and Stonewall will have to punish. What power-drunk shits these creeps are.
In the email to Ofsted, seen by The Telegraph, Stonewall’s director of education and youth wrote: “We know that some students who are bullied (for whatever reason) do not disclose this to teachers, so it is difficult to envisage how inspectors could make assessments on whether homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying is prevalent in schools, without being able to speak to pupils about all protected characteristics.”
Yes that will definitely solve the problem. “Johhny, do you bully any classmates because you’re biphobic? Do you bully any classmates because you’re homophobic? Do you bully any classmates because you’re transphobic? Jenny, does Johnny bully you because you’re bi? Does he bully you because you’re a lesbian? Does he bully you because you’re trans?” Makes you wish you could be a kid again.
Meanwhile, more public bodies have quit Stonewall’s diversity scheme. They include the Post Office, NHS Highland, Swim England, three police forces and several councils.
Police Scotland should quite Stonewall’s diversity scheme. Yesterday.
Channel 4 has become the latest organisation to pull out of the diversity scheme run by the charity Stonewall.
In US-speak “scheme” is mostly a pejorative. That’s less true in the UK but I still smirk at calling Stonewall’s (cough) campaign a “scheme.”
The broadcaster, which has been praised for its programmes highlighting LGBTQ issues, said it was withdrawing from the “diversity champions” scheme.
…
Yesterday Moon Beever, a law firm, severed its ties with the charity. The Equality and Human Rights Commission and the employment dispute service Acas have withdrawn for “cost reasons”, and the DVLA and the housing department have also pulled out.
…
Frances Coulson, senior partner at Moon Beever, told the legal blog RollOnFriday: “After some disquiet about recent actions of Stonewall we have decided to exit the Stonewall Diversity Programme.”
“Some disquiet” – there’s that suave understatement again.
A law firm has ended its membership of a diversity scheme run by Stonewall citing concerns over its recent actions, saying it can no longer support the LGBTQ+ charity.
Moon Beever, based in Gray’s Inn and specialising in insolvency work, was one of 77 firms signed up to Stonewall’s Diversity Champions scheme.
But Frances Coulson, the firm’s Senior Partner, told RollOnFriday that Moon Beever had relinquished its membership.
“After some disquiet about recent actions of Stonewall we have decided to exit the Stonewall Diversity Programme”, she said.
“This in no way detracts from our commitment to diversity and equality, but in common with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Government Departments we no longer feel that we can support Stonewall”, said Coulson.
CeCe Telfer is hoping to qualify for the United States Olympic trials, which begin June 18 in Eugene, Ore. The asphalt road is her primary training facility.
In 2019, Telfer became the first openly transgender woman to win an N.C.A.A. title; she was a fifth-year senior at Franklin Pierce University, a Division II school in Rindge, N.H. Now she is among a handful of transgender women seeking to reach the Tokyo Games, which begin in late July.
In other words in 2019 Telfer stole an N.C.A.A. title from a woman, and now he hopes to steal a place at the Tokyo Games from a woman.
Recent clashes over transgender athletes have made it more important for Telfer to capitalize on her opportunity for elite competition.
While people are still pretending it’s fair.
“It’s important for me to do it for these kids,” Telfer, 26, said while sitting on the back porch of her college psychologist’s house. “It’s important for me to do it for my people — whether it be women, Black people, transgender people, L.G.B.T.Q. people — anybody who is scrutinized and oppressed.”
Whether it be women? Really? But women are the people he’s doing his best to cheat.
At the start of the 2018-19 school year, Telfer said, she walked into her coach’s office with a friend and asked to compete with other women. She expected the coach to balk. Instead, she recalled, he responded: “Finally.”
Telfer was overcome with emotion.
Her excitement, she said, was tempered by a backlash. Parents of Telfer’s competitors objected, saying she had an athletic advantage.
There’s a reason for that. He does have an advantage. It’s called being male.
Citing supposed competitive advantages, but little evidence that transgender athletes were dominating women’s sports, lawmakers in more than 30 states have introduced bills aimed at barring transgender women and girls from competing on teams that match their gender identity.
Bolding mine. These fuckers. Of course they’re not “dominating” all of women’s sports (yet): this has only just gotten started. It doesn’t matter that they’re not dominating all of it: just a little cheating is still cheating.
On the one hand Marion Millar is charged with a crime for disbelief in trans ideology on Twitter, on the other hand Trump is banned from Facebook for two years. Which of the two is really a threat to anyone?
Facebook has extended former President Donald Trump’s suspension for two years and says it will only reinstate him “if the risk to public safety has receded.”
The decision comes after Facebook’s Oversight Board told the company it was wrong to impose an indefinite ban on Trump after the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Facebook says it is setting new rules for public figures in times of civil unrest and violence, “to be applied in exceptional cases such as this.” Trump has received the maximum penalty under those rules, “given the gravity of the circumstances” leading to his suspension. Because the company took his Facebook and Instagram accounts down on Jan. 7, they will remain suspended until at least Jan. 7, 2023.
I’m seeing some “Don’t gloat lefties it will be your turn next.”
That could be true, but it’s far from necessarily true. It’s pattern-detection, but there’s more than one pattern here. The pattern could be: “I know, let’s just silence everything we dislike.” But it could also be: “This guy actually incited a riot that got people killed and came way too close to a literal successful insurrection so we really need to stop giving him this particular channel.” If it’s “everything we dislike” then yes, we’re all vulnerable, but if it’s “he’s an ex-president who incited what almost became an insurrection” then we’re not. Patterns are important, but so are particulars.
Trump says he has the best particulars.
Facebook’s decision “is an insult to the record-setting 75M people, plus many others, who voted for us,” Trump said in an emailed statement, misstating the number of votes he received in the 2020 presidential election. (It was just over 74 million votes.) He also continued his baseless attacks on the legitimacy of the election.
So he’s saying it’s an insult to the people who didn’t vote for him as well as the ones who did. Nah. He tried to spark an insurrection in order to steal the election, so no, I don’t consider myself insulted by measures to curb his ability to try that again.
Do we believe him?
I can’t say I do.
No misogyny in trans activism though. Oh no no no, what would ever give anyone that idea.
Ah yes how dare women be middle aged. Bitches. They should all drop dead at 25 because what possible use are they after that? Stupid old ugly dullards.
Some (necessarily cautious) reactions.
Brunel University has suspended the threats guy.
Murderous threats are the kind of thing that should be referred to police.
Wild Woman Writing Club had a fine old rant and I’m just going to quote it instead of posting all the tweets.
to shoot women’s rights campaigners, and several more organisations have bailed out of the sinking Stonewall ship, and several more countries have rejected self-ID, and a think tank is calling women’s rights campaigners “feminazis,” and TRAs are still calling WRCs antisemites, and a ‘pro bono’ project is attempting to get a lesbian & gay group’s charitable status revoked. So much happening, with such speed. Change is gathering pace. It makes you wonder.
Why are so many people so seemingly desperate to make women shut up about the simple fact of human sexual dimorphism, and the simple fact that #SexMatters?
That the sex denialist AstroTurf project would slam into the buffers like this was on the cards from the beginning. It was never going to work, gaslighting entire populations to forget about the birds & the bees.
Careers are swirling down the pan, placing mortgage payments in jeopardy. The plug is being pulled on hundreds of thousands of immersive fictions, forcing people to confront their pain.
What we are seeing is the reflex to blame the bringers of unwelcome news, the news being that sizeable swathes of the liberal left have been riffing on an enormous lie for reasons historians will have to make sense of.
And now the lie is visible. And those who have defended it to the hilt are going to have to save their names however they can. Because the extent of this…scandal?…grift?… propaganda campaign?…is only beginning to be revealed.
There will be years of this to come. Will disappointed true believers & profiteers feel the need to persecute the messengers for years to come? Can we prevent any more women being scapegoated for a situation which was not of our making, to which we responded in self-defence?
Really, women had no choice but to fight against our erasure in law & in language. Now the most brittle gender identity ideologues are going to be given carte blanche to take scalps? Is that really how this works?
Can’t we instead have some kind of internal memo, CC all, which says ‘an amnesty for the terven, in recognition of the fact that they have been responding to an intense & sustained rights-grab, during which time they fought back with words, stickers & ribbons only.’
Let’s have that.
I’m already climbing the walls with rage over Scotland’s assault on women, and now there’s yet another load of poison from Stonewall.
Stonewall has advised organisations to replace the term mother with “parent who has given birth” to help boost their ranking on an equality leaderboard, The Telegraph can reveal.
That’s not “equality.” Pretending mothers don’t exist is not equality. Trying to erase women from childbirth is not equality. Trying to disappear women is not equality.
The controversial charity has advised employers wishing to be included on their Workplace Equality Index that they must remove all gendered language, and allow those who self-identify as a woman to use female toilets and changing rooms.
And “self-identify” means just “say.” A man can just say he identifies as a woman and march into the women’s areas at work.
The Ministry of Justice – which comes in fifth in the leadership board – has admitted that its HR policies have in recent years been updated to include non-gendered language and in some internal documents terms mother and father had been removed.
The Home Office, MI6, the British Army, the Department for International Trade, the Government Legal Department and the House of Commons all also appear in the top 100 on Stonewall’s Workplace Equality Index.
Stonewall hates women.
Now a series of Freedom of Information requests, seen by The Telegraph, have led to warnings from lawyers that the LGBT+ charity is “misrepresenting” equality laws in advice to Government departments, councils, police forces, NHS trusts and a raft of private companies.
Oh well, it’s only the government.
Documents released under FOI from several public bodies reveal for the first time the lengths employers must go through to get to the top of the Workplace Equality Index.
Feedback to organisations on how they can improve their application shows that several were advised by Stonewall they should “remove” the term mother and father from all their policies.
Edinburgh University were told that they would “recommend using a gender neutral term, such as ‘parent who has given birth’ whilst Merseyside Police were advised the “pregnant employee” was a “more inclusive term”.
Inclusive of what though? Not women, certainly. Going to absurd, confusing, head-scratching lengths to avoid using the word “woman” is the opposite of “inclusive.” It’s just the same old shit, where the male pronoun was the only pronoun and “man” was used as a synonym for “humanity.” It’s erasing women from public life, and we’ve had that already and campaigned against it and we don’t see why we should have to start all over again now.
The Welsh Government, which appears ninth on the list, deleted the term mother from its Maternity policy in 2019, though the term father appears once.
But it was still their Maternity policy?
The 13-page application form for the next scheme, which has been delayed until 2022 because of the coronavirus pandemic, provides both guidance for employees and examples of best practice.
It advises that the organisations should use “gender neutral language” and pronouns throughout their policies, avoid terms such as husband or wife, and offer employees the chance to use the pronoun Mx.
Ms and Mr aren’t pronouns, and neither is Mx. How about Comrade or Citizen?
They say that “guidance must make clear that all trans employees can use the facilities (e.g. toilets, changing rooms) they feel most comfortable using” and there should be “a formal commitment to introduce gender-neutral facilities”.
Thus underlining and adding exclamation points to their total, brutal indifference to women’s safety and privacy.
Gender fluid employees should be given “multiple passcards with different forms of gender expression” so they can be a different gender each day, Stonewall states. Applicants could “choose a gender marker other than male or female” or even “remove gender markers and titles from your systems altogether”.
Why stop there? Why not give species fluid employees multiple passcards with different species on them, so that employees could be a tamandua one day and a blue whale the next?
The Welsh Government – which made it to number nine on the list in 2020 – has proven to be one of the more enthusiastic adopters of the advice offered by Stonewall.
In its application they noted: “The Maternity and Adoption Leave Policy was updated in April to incorporate gender neutral language, removing binary gender references wherever possible … An accompanying policy, previously called New & Expectant Mothers Policy has been renamed ‘Policy for Pregnant or Nursing Employees’.
Pregnant fathers have rights too.
Employers are told that they could signal their commitment with badges, mugs, bi and trans flags and by profiling transwomen on International Women’s Day.
Oh that’s nice – Stonewall actively telling employers to shove women aside on International Women’s Day, and then to kick them by profiling men. Stonewall really hates women.
In its submission, Edinburgh University referred to its use of Rainbow lanyards, pens, t-shirts, cakes, flags and banners 28 times, leading to “great” feedback from their Stonewall marker.
Childish enough?
The Metropolitan Police, after its failure to make it onto the equality leader board for 2020, noted in a feedback review that it should use Stonewall to review “all HR policies”, a service offered free of charge to all diversity champions.
Oh just arrest a few women for talking back, that will take care of it.
