They seem curiously invested

The suspense continues.

Apparently to refer to Mr XX’s inverted penis as a ‘wound’ is sufficiently morally culpable to mean I have no article 10 protection.

I repeat: inverting your penis to line a surgically created cavity is not a ‘vagina’. It is a wound that will require persistent dilation so it does not close up. This is a fact. It is not harassment nor morally culpable to acknowledge this fact.

I will now forward this complaint to @SpeechUnion and await the BSB decision. Anything other than a dismissal will be challenged by me.

82 paragraphs is a lot of paragraphs.

Comments

3 responses to “They seem curiously invested”

  1. maddog1129 Avatar

    “harm”

    Misgendering = correctly sexing

    Deadnaming = stating accurate historical information

    Who tf is gaslighting whom?

  2. Lady Mondegreen Avatar
    Lady Mondegreen

    I think the complainant is the noisome “Sophie Molly” (?)

  3. Ophelia Benson Avatar

    Yes that’s the consensus. I recommend reading everything Sarah Phillimore has been saying. I’d share more of it here but I don’t want to be greedy.