The Times:

The House of Commons has been forced to apologise after allowing a transgender woman to use female-only lavatories on the parliamentary estate despite the recent Supreme Court ruling that protects single-sex spaces.

I do wish the news media would not bow to the trans rules and thus mislead readers/listeners. The reality is he’s a man, who claims to be trans, and thus a woman. The basic fact is that he’s a man, and he has no right to bounce into the female-only lavatories.

Robin Moira White, a trans barrister who is a biological male, was directed to use the ladies’ loos in Portcullis House last week after attending a meeting of the women and equalities committee in which the landmark judgment was discussed.

But he’s not a trans barrister, he’s a real barrister.

White, 61, said parliamentary employees had been told that swift access to the lavatories was required because of the barrister’s health condition. White was then shown to the closest ones to the Thatcher Room, where the committee had met.

Really? He just happens to have a “health condition” that requires him to use the women’s toilets? Meanwhile he’s not just a man, he’s a very burly man with a very deep voice – in short, intimidating. A decent man would see that as a reason to be less demanding and obnoxious rather than more so, but trans activism doesn’t work that way. It’s the height of progressivosity to make even huge rumbling men poster boys for fragile vulnerable trans girls.

The barrister was questioned outside the lavatories by two women’s rights campaigners, Kate Harris and Heather Binning, who had attended the same hearing, and said White should not be using female-only loos.

Gosh, they said a man shouldn’t be using female-only loos? The nerve.

Now look here, if you’re going to call yourself an LGBT station you had damn well better be an LGBT station. You can’t just idennify as one and then kick back and relax, you know, it simply won’t do.

The head of a Belfast LGBT radio station has called a ruling that it does not broadcast enough programmes for the LGBT community “truly baffling”.

The broadcasting regulator Ofcom found Juice Radio to be in breach of some of its “key commitments” of service.

Ofcom said Juice Radio aired “a very limited amount of specialist programming for the LGBT+ community, rather than a service specifically for that community”.

Being on the other side of the planet, I don’t quite see what’s at stake here. What even is an “LGBT” radio station? Is it just that they call themselves that? Does it matter? Does it need regulating?

In 2022, Ofcom had previously ruled that Juice “was not meeting its requirement to broadcast LGBT anthems as part of its music output,” and was instead a “dance music service”.

Anthems? There’s a requirement to broadcast anthems?

Juice is a community radio station based in Belfast which broadcasts online and on FM. It was set up to serve “the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in Belfast,” according to the commitments in its licence.

“Juice exists to create a community for people of all ages who identify as LGBT to showcase and discuss the aspirations, concerns, successes and issues affecting them,” its commitments state.

What more do you want? They say they exist to create a communinny. Job done! Call yourself a communinny, you are a communniny. Next case?

But Ofcom ruled that the vast majority of Juice’s output could not be distinguished from a “mainstream” radio service. “The speech content we listened to consisted heavily of presenters announcing the music being broadcast within the hour,” the regulator’s judgement said.

“A small amount of content was clearly for the station’s target community,” Ofcom said, but “there was little to no content to signpost to the listener that service was specifically targeted at the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in Belfast. It was not clear from listening to the content on-air that the service targeted the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in Belfast.

“This therefore suggested that Juice FM Belfast was a general service broadcasting a very limited amount of specialist programming for the LGBT+ community, rather than a service specifically for that community.”

Do we think they said the C word enough times?

H/t Acolyte of Sagan

Snippets from a dialogue:

Judith Butler said it, therefore it is true.

Honestly it’s so pitiful. Because she seems (to the naive) to be saying something technicalish and difficult, therefore she is a genius and to be believed without question. It’s smoke and mirrors, people. It’s pseudo-difficult. It’s bullshit dressed up in fake profundity.

Updating to add another choice snippet of bufoonish hero-worship.

Now why would Trump hate Chicago in particular?

The state of Illinois and Chicago on Monday sued the Trump administration over its move to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago as the White House targets Democrat-led cities amid weeks of protests against the federal government’s immigration enforcement campaign.

The lawsuit opens a new front in the legal battles the White House is waging against state and local officials, coming just hours after a federal judge blocked a similar deployment of the guard to Portland, Oregon.

“Defendants’ deployment of federalized troops to Illinois is patently unlawful,” the lawsuit says. “Plaintiffs ask this court to halt the illegal, dangerous, and unconstitutional federalization of members of the National Guard of the United States, including both the Illinois and Texas National Guard.”

…

The lawsuit asks the court to order the administration to stop federalizing or deploying any National Guard troops to Illinois, and to declare the federalization of National Guard troops more broadly as unlawful. Trump, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Department of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are among the defendants named.

In a statement, a White House spokesperson said the president “will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities.”

Selected American cities. Chicago seems to annoy him particularly.

Could that be because it’s due north of Mississippi, and thus a mecca for the Great Migration? In other words is it too black for his taste?

The complaint, filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, argued the deployments are politically motivated, claiming Trump has a long history of making “threatening and derogatory” comments about Chicago and the state of Illinois, dating to at least 2013.

Among other examples, it calls out a September 6 social media post by Trump in which he said Chicago would “find out why it’s called the Department of WAR,” referring to the president’s rebranded name for the Pentagon.

He’s still furious that the Central Park 5 were not executed.

Today in Trumpofascism:

A federal judge on Sunday night blocked the Trump administration from deploying hundreds of out-of-state National Guard troops to Oregon, even as President Trump turned to the Texas guard in a widening hunt for military forces to send to Democratic cities.

The Trump administration had tried to send hundreds of California National Guard troops to Portland, Ore., while mustering hundreds more from Texas, despite a stern ruling from Judge Karin Immergut of U.S. District Court in Oregon just Saturday that sought to block military forces.

Judge Immergut, an appointee of President Trump, called an emergency hearing Sunday, then broadened her restraining order to cover “the relocation, federalization or deployment of members of the National Guard of any state or the District of Columbia in the state of Oregon,” telling Justice Department lawyers that the president was ”in direct contravention” of her order.

The blizzard of moves by the Trump administration, from Texas to California, Illinois to Oregon, has left governors and the courts scrambling to keep pace. First, the administration tried to sidestep Judge Immergut by turning to California. Then the president ordered as many as 400 members of the Texas National Guard to deploy for “federal protection missions” in Portland, Chicago and potentially other cities, according to a letter released by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, on Sunday night.

In plain English he’s acting like a dictator, and it’s hard to see what can stop him.

But hey, there are about 70 protesters protesting, so SEND IN THE NATIONAL GUARD even after a judge ruled you can’t.

The president’s repeated depictions of Portland as “on fire” diverged from reality, the judge found, citing a month of reports from the Portland Police Bureau showing that the size and intensity of the nightly ICE protests ebbed in August and September.

On Sunday, residents and tourists in the city were largely reveling in a sunny fall morning, playing fetch with their dogs in neighborhood parks, standing in long lines for brunch and crowding downtown sidewalks to cheer on runners in the annual city marathon. Outside the ICE facility in Southwest Portland, two miles from the central city, about 70 protesters chanted, barbecued and passed out bottled water as passing motorists honked in mutual disapproval of the Trump administration.

70.

That would be a lot of people if they were all crowded into a single living room, but hanging around outside a federal building? It’s not exactly the Russian Revolution, is it.

Owen Jones is not what you’d call a sharp thinker.

“Muslim” is not a race.

It’s not legit to pretend it’s a race and just go on from there. It’s not legit and it’s a very bad idea. Why? Because Muslims are not a race but adherents of a religion, and religions have content, and religions tell believers what to do. That matters.

Why does it matter? The quickest explanation might be just the single word “Afghanistan.”

Lynsay Watson in the news some more.

Last month, the comedy writer Graham Linehan was arrested at Heathrow airport by five armed police officers for comments he had made on social media.

At the time of his detention, Linehan was returning to London from his home in the US to defend himself in court against accusations by a young trans campaigner of harassment and criminal damage, both of which he denies.

In an entirely separate case, The Times reported that a retired police superintendent had discovered that Lincolnshire police had recorded a “non-hate crime incident” against her without her knowledge.

Cathy Larkman had been flagged for tweets rejecting the idea that trans women were the same as biological women and so should have access to their private spaces.

I am so tired of people being persecuted by the police for refusing to pretend that people can change sex.

Linehan and Larkman both claim to have been reported to the police by a trans activist named Lynsay Watson.

It has been revealed that Watson — a transgender former police officer — has made a series of complaints against individuals who, like Larkman and Linehan, express gender-critical views.

Three of those who say they were subject to complaints have come forward to this newspaper to allege the experience has had a destructive effect on their lives and mental health. They have also spoken of their anger at the police for entertaining Watson’s allegations and failing to investigate the former officer for what they say are “vexatious” complaints.

Watson, you will be astonished to hear, says his complaints are not vexatious.

Along with the police complaints, Watson is known to have instigated court actions against institutions including the British Transport Police Federation, Greater Manchester police, Leicestershire police and Police Appeals Tribunals.

And then there’s Sandie Peggie.

There had been safety concerns relating to Peggie’s legal team after it emerged that a social media account believed to be run by Watson had encouraged members of the public to make a citizen’s arrest of the lawyers defending Peggie, as well as the judge.

Vexatious enough yet?

Watson had also been making complaints about Miller to Lincolnshire police — the force that policed the area where he lived — alleging harassment and hate speech in relation to gender critical tweets he had posted. Those complaints were not upheld.

In November, Miller was questioned under caution by Lincolnshire police after another complaint by Watson about a social media post that welcomed the force’s decision to sack her. Miller was also accused by Watson of misgendering in an article he had written about his ordeal with her for The Critic magazine. Again, Miller was released with no further action.

Don’t call him “her”. One, it’s a lie, and two, it simply acts to legitimize his loathsome bullying.

Charlotte Cadden, who served with Greater Manchester police as a detective chief inspector until January this year, said she had been called in front of her superior officers in February 2024 after a complaint from Watson.

Cadden, who founded Police SEEN UK, a campaign group for serving police officers with gender-critical beliefs, said she was informed by her line manager that she had been accused of “spreading transphobia” across the UK. She said the complaint put her under serious stress, making her fear for her job.

The complaint was not taken any further but soon afterwards she began getting abusive tweets from the account named SEEN Police Official Open Public Network on the social media site Bluesky. One message, which the security minister Dan Jarvis MP was copied on, accused her of starting a “secret society for anti-LGBT bigots”.

…

Cadden believes that Watson is behind the SEEN police Official Open Public Network account, and after that post she decided to report the trans activist to the police.

In a witness statement to Greater Manchester police in April this year, she described the toll the alleged “harassment” was having on her. She said: “I live alone with my disabled son and I feel that the harassment of me by Lynsay Watson that started in February 2024 is now escalating.

“It is causing me anxiety and affecting my sleep. The recent threat to start targeting my partner has increased the anxiety that I feel.”

However, she claims her complaint was simply passed between Greater Manchester police and Lincolnshire police and that neither took any action.

Same old same old. The police spring into action at every trivial complaint from Watson and ignore his genuine harassment of others. Why??? What is it about trans ideology that melts people’s brains so fast and so thoroughly?

There’s a lot more; read the whole thing.

Fascism spreading like a fire.

Sirens blared and orange flames audibly crackled as a thick plume of black smoke streamed out of Circuit Court Judge Diane Goodstein’s Edisto Beach home during a fire that blazed on Oct. 4, video shows.

The home, located off Planters Retreat in the Jeremy Cay Community, is partially surrounded by trees and a marshy area of Edisto Island. That made it particularly difficult to rescue Goodstein’s husband, a former state senator, after he jumped out the back of the house to escape the blaze, a neighbor said.

Resident Tom Peterson was near the couple’s home midday on Oct. 4 when he noticed a plume of smoke that was visible in a video of the fire that was provided to The Post and Courier on Oct. 5.

Peterson spoke with the judge, who told Peterson that she had been on the beach walking her dogs at the time her home caught fire. She informed him that her husband was injured and stranded in a marshy area behind the home.

Rescuers got him out but he and two other people were hospitalized with injuries.

The judge made headlines a few weeks ago.

A South Carolina judge has temporarily blocked the state from giving the U.S. Department of Justice its entire voter database after a voter sued, arguing that releasing such sensitive personal information would violate state law and her constitutional rights.

Judge Diane S. Goodstein of the First Judicial Circuit issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) Tuesday, stopping the South Carolina Election Commission (SCEC) from releasing the data until at least a Sept. 10 hearing in Aiken County. 

The order came in response to a lawsuit filed by Dr. Anne Crook, a registered voter in Calhoun County, after the DOJ demanded the state’s entire statewide voter registration list, including every voter’s full name, date of birth, residential address, driver’s license number and Social Security numbers.

Hmmmmmm.

Wait what? I seem to be in the wrong species. We’re told that queuing for hours = pleasure.

It’s just before 06:00 on a Friday morning and on a busy central London street a queue is growing by the second. It’s dark and chilly, but I’m told the people at the front of this line have been here since 20:00 last night.

Christina Spence is waiting with hundreds of other people who want to be the first shoppers at Korean cosmetics retailer Skin Cupid’s first store. The 16-year-old, who is here with her sister and mum Cheryl, could just buy the products online – but she wants to be part of the queue.

You what? People started to line up at 8 pm and are still there at 6 am and they say it’s because they like doing that?

“Queuing up is exciting and exhilarating – the build up of walking in, and thinking ‘I’m finally here,'” Christina tells me.

After – assuming the shop opens at 9 – standing in the street for 13 hours most of which were in the dark and cold?

I mean you could do that anyway. You could stand outside your house or apartment block or dormitory from 8 pm to 9 am. There’s your excitement and exhilaration right there.

Twenty-six-year-old Maryam has been standing in line since 05:00. “I get to meet new people and have a really nice time,” Maryam explains, as she wraps her arm around someone she first met this morning.

This is only the second time Maryam has queued for an event like this. The first was for the opening of another Korean cosmetics retailer earlier this year.

So is the attraction the queuing or the Korean cosmetics?

Is there something special about Korean cosmetics? Why wasn’t I told?

“There’s a sense of camaraderie – we’re all here together,” Cheryl tells me. She and her daughters will brave all weather for a queue, she explains, exchanging waiting stories with those in the line.

Well, yes, but have you thought of maybe queueing inside a nice all-night Starbucks or fish and chips shop or hospital waiting room? Chairs, lights, roof and walls, warmth.

Others, like Shannon Louise Brown, have gone a step further by creating a “little community” with like-minded people. Gesturing to the people next to her, the 26-year-old explains she is with people she met at previous queues and with whom she keeps in touch.

“It’s really good to meet new people from different backgrounds,” Shannon Louise says, “where a city is so big, here, you get to make and meet friends”.

But aren’t there numerous other, more comfortable ways of doing that? With the added advantage of something more in common than a passion for Korean cosmetics?

Dr Nilufar Ahmed, a psychologist at the University of Bristol says the “anticipation” of what is to come when queuers reach the front of the line – the “reward” – plays a big part in why people do it.

Queuing for “pleasurable activities” – like shopping for luxury items, a bargain, or delicious food – creates a “distinctly different” feeling to queuing for something more mundane like buying your groceries, she says. “The anticipation of receiving a reward leads to the release of dopamine…which makes us feel good.”

This is why I say I must be another species. Under no circumstances could I get a nice little dopamine hit by standing in a line in the street for hours (or minutes). There are few things I hate more.

Adding to the appeal, Dr Ahmed adds, is when the queue is for something that is “hard to get”, or if a person has the “opportunity to be one of the first people to experience something”. Recent examples of this include queues of people snaking around high streets to get their hands on limited edition Labubu plush toys – which are usually sold out online.

“[This creates] a sense of excitement and buzz for the novelty and exclusiveness of the reward,” Dr Ahmed says.

Well, to put it bluntly, only if you’re seriously stupid. “Ooh I’m one of the few people who stood in line for 12 hours to buy a plush toy, how exhilarate.”

People are nuts.

The lust for public humiliation continues.

An FBI agent has reportedly been suspended because they refused to participate in a “perp walk” of the bureau’s former director James Comey, US media reports. The agent was suspended for insubordination, according to the BBC’s news partner CBS, after the agent found the plan to be inappropriate.

Mr Comey was indicted in Virginia on two federal charges days after Donald Trump called on law enforcement to more aggressively investigate his political adversaries, including Mr Comey.

FBI leadership has discussed sending “large, beefy” agents in Kevlar vests to bring Mr Comey to his court arraignment in Alexandria next week, CBS reports.

Trump is so ungrateful. It’s possible that without Comey he wouldn’t have been elected in the first place. Her emails yadda yadda.

The ACLU talks maudlin nonsense on its pet subject yet again and does it dishonestly yet again. The author is one Gillian Branstetter, communications strategist. I would say her strategy is crap.

Over the last five years, politicians across the country have targeted transgender people and our families. 

Ah. “Our” families; so Gillian is trans; so he’s a he.

To the point: it’s not “targeting” men to tell them to get out of the women’s toilets and stop taking women’s jobs and prizes. If anybody is “targeting” it’s men who pretend to be women and take all the women’s stuff.

They’ve banned our health care, censored our speech, and made schools less safe for transgender students. One of the most consistent focus areas for many of these politicians has been the rights of transgender student athletes, specifically the right of transgender girls, to play with other girls. While the overall number of transgender athletes is extremely small–most states have fewer than a handful of transgender students playing sports among 10s of thousands of student athletes– politicians have introduced hundreds of bills over the last few years targeting their ability to play.

Blah blah blah. Not even worth pointing out, it’s so obvious. Boys don’t have a right to play “with other girls” because boys are boys. The fact that there aren’t (yet) many boys cheating girls this way is not a reason to let them keep doing it.

Now, the Supreme Court will hear our challenge against a state law that categorically bans transgender students from girl’s teams.

Liar. The issue is not “transgender”; the issue is boys.

Politicians hope to use the case to legitimize a broad range of discrimination against transgender people (and all LGBTQ people), excluding us not just from sports teams but from civil rights protections and pushing us further out of public life altogether.

Liar again. It’s not about “transgender people” and it’s not about pushing them out of public life. Telling boys they can’t cheat girls is not pushing them out of public life.

Becky Pepper-Jackson of West Virginia is just like any other 15-year-old. She loves spending time with her friends, playing with her brothers, and is active in her school’s band and track & field team, throwing discus and shotput. But under a ban passed by the West Virginia state legislature, Pepper-Jackson would be prohibited from playing on the girls’ team. “She likes to do the best in everything, be it algebra or running or shot put or discus,” her mother told NBC News. “She tries to excel in everything that she does, just like any other kid.”

Except she’s a he, so trying to excel in the girls’ shot put or discus is cheating, and unfair to the girls he’s cheating.

With the help of Lambda Legal and Cooley LLP, the ACLU and the ACLU of West Virginia filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pepper-Jackson and her mother challenging the ban on the grounds it violates her rights under Title IX – the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in public schools – and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

I hope they lose. I really really hope they lose.

Zack Polanski really is a horrible man.

Newman: Well you said the Greens should be a broad church, but that all churches have walls, I mean your walls are potentially keeping women out of your conference aren’t they?

Polanski: Well I think they’s lots of women, including thousands of women who are inclusive feminists, who reconnize that trans rights are human rights –

Newman: So feminists are not welcome, only “inclusive” feminists.

Polanski: Well it depends on how you define yourself as a feminist, I would say if someone doesn’t support trans rights, if they don’t support the LGBT comunniny, if they want to be transphobic or demeaning to trans people, then no.

Newman: So are gender critical feminists welcome at your conference?

Polanski: Well anyone is welcome at the conference based on their beliefs, this is about how people behave, and no, no one is allowed to behave in a way – and I’m not talking about these people in particular, I’m talking more widely – in a way that is transphobic, I stood on a trans-inclusive ticket, I think that anyone who takes any notice of politics would accept that [if] there is a leader who stands for one thing they have an entitlement to say this is who is and isn’t welcome at the conference.

End of clip.

But as always the question arises: how are we defining “transphobic”?

It’s not phobic for women to know that men are not women, and it’s not even phobic for women to say that men are not women. It’s kind of more the other way around, frankly. It’s misogynist for men to insist on being in women’s spaces and taking women’s jobs and prizes on the spurious grounds that they are “trans women.”

Men like Zack Polanski will never admit that though.

No no no no no. Wrong.

No no no. Conversion therapy is trying to “convert” same-sex attracted people to straighthood. That is not the same as telling people that it’s not possible to change sex.

Same-sex attraction harms no one. Gender ideology harms its adherents and women and, ironically, same-sex attracted people.

I wonder what would happen if gender ideology faded out to be replaced by an ideology that says people who identify as airplanes are airplanes. I wonder what the explanations and justifications and purported rights would be.

Now wait just a damn minute here.

Then why haven’t I been sent some? Even just a little? A token amount?

It’s interesting that the rival monotheisms are so hostile to each other. There is only one god and it’s NOT the one you’re bending the knee to. Bang bang.

The number of people arrested in the wake of the Manchester synagogue terror attack has risen to six as the attacker “may have been influenced by extreme Islamist ideology”, police have confirmed.

Jihad Al-Shamie drove a black Kia Picanto into worshippers at the Heaton Park synagogue and stabbed congregants on Thursday.

Two men were killed and three seriously injured in the terror attack which took place on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar.

And we’re thinking maybe just possibly it might have something to do with Islamist ideology? Excuse me, sorry, I mean extremist Islamist ideology – because there’s definitely a nice kind mild form of Islamist ideology, where they say “excuse me” before killing you.

What could possibly go wrong?

When the Vienna Regional Court for Civil Matters permitted the enforcement of an arbitration ruling based explicitly on Sharia law, the decision passed largely without international notice.

Yet its implications are profound – not merely for Austria, but for Europe as a whole. At stake is nothing less than whether the continent retains its secular constitutional foundations, or whether it drifts into the dangerous territory of legal pluralism, where parallel systems of justice compete against the law of the land.

Parallel but not comparable. Allah hates women; Quranic law is not fair to women, to put it mildly.

Critics are right to warn that this ruling risks legitimising “parallel societies.” For decades, European leaders have wrestled with the failure of integration policies. In cities from Malmö to Marseille, segregated communities have emerged in which religious authority often supplants the secular state. Informal Sharia councils already exist in parts of Britain, where Muslim women in particular have been pressured to submit to tribunals that deny them equal rights. The danger is not hypothetical – it is happening within the EU.

Sharia councils can be “informal” and still treat women like garbage.

Supporters of the ruling may argue that it is a harmless recognition of cultural diversity. If two consenting adults wish to settle disputes under Sharia, why should the state intervene? But this framing is profoundly misleading. Law is not merely a private contract; it is the foundation of citizenship. To permit religious codes to replace civil law is to suggest that citizens can opt out of the social contract altogether.

Also there’s the question of those “two consenting adults.” How consenting is the woman? How will any outsider know? How free will she be to refuse to consent?

Get serious. Men who want Sharia are not likely to see their wives as a consenting adult; they’re far more likely to see them as the inferior half of the couple and the source of the all-important sons, who must be fiercely watched and disciplined less they spread their legs for an outsider which the men will be tricked into raising. Can’t have that.

Cultural differences…

On a visit to New Zealand, FBI Director Kash Patel gave the country’s police and spy bosses gifts of inoperable pistols that were illegal to possess under local gun laws and had to be destroyed, New Zealand law enforcement agencies told The Associated Press.

Such a thoughtful present. How about an electric chair next time?

Inoperable weapons are treated as though they’re operable in New Zealand if modifications could make them workable again. The pistols were judged by gun regulators to be potentially operable and were destroyed, New Zealand’s Police Commissioner Richard Chambers told AP in a statement Tuesday.

Weird: people who don’t love guns. How can anyone not love guns?!

From The Times last March:

Doctors will be banned from giving transgender children a new NHS record after it emerged that biological sex had been erased from official data.

Wes Streeting, the health secretary, said it was wrong that doctors were changing the NHS numbers of children if they changed gender. He has told the health service to stop giving out new NHS numbers to under-18s.

A review ­commissioned by the last government and ­released on Wednesday found that the word “gender” started to replace “sex” in the collection of data in the 1990s and that for the past ten years ­“robust and accurate data on biological sex” had been lost.

That’s what happens when you tell lies about what sex people are.

Cancer referrals were missed and previous convictions were overlooked because biological sex had been erased from official data on health, crime and education. In medicine, adults and children have been able to request their gender is changed on their medical record. When this happens, a new NHS number and, therefore, medical record would be created.

The review, led by Professor Alice Sullivan of University College London, reported how in one case a paediatrician said that a child had been brought up in the preferred gender of the mother, which was different to their birth sex.

Oh really?! What happened to people are who they say they are? Now they’re who their mothers say they are, even if that means they are the opposite of what their mothers say they are? Parents can now stick their children with a fake “gender” of their choosing? In infancy???

“[The mother] had gone to the GP and requested a change of gender/NHS number when the baby was a few weeks old and the GP complied. Children’s social care did not perceive this as a child protection issue,” the doctor ­reported.

How does that even work? We are told and told and told that what’s in the gender-haver’s mind is what counts, not what anyone else perceives. How can a parent possibly “know” that an infant is trans? Does it fill its diaper in a peculiarly gendered way?

Unbelievable.

Sturgeon: “Trans women are women but in the prison context there is no automatic right for a trans woman – “

Interviewer: “There are contexts where a trans woman is not a woman.”

Sturgeon: “No there is” – nervous laugh – “there is circumstances in which a trans woman will be housed in the male prison estate, because [inaudible].”

WAIT WAIT WAIT.

Why?

You say trans women are women. You firmly slap down any suggestion that they are not. If trans women are women then how in HELL can there be “circumstances” in which they’ll be housed with the men? How can that possibly make any sense if they are women?

Game over.

The Green Party doesn’t want women defending women’s rights.

Women’s rights campaigners have claimed they are victims of discrimination after being banned from the Green Party conference.

Invidious discrimination, they mean.

The Green Women’s Declaration (GWD), a group advocating for sex-based rights for women, were told two days before the party’s conference that their stall booking was cancelled and they would not be allowed to recruit members. The group said the move “undermines the rights of women to advocate for single-sex spaces, services, and sports — rights that are protected under UK law”.

Sometimes protected. Other times, as we see, not protected.

The ban is the latest argument between those in the party who believe in sex-based rights and those who have made transgender rights a priority.

Those in the party who believe in women’s rights and those who believe that men are entitled to idennify as women and help themselves to women’s rights.

Zack Polanski, the new Green Party leader, has repeatedly spoken about his support for transgender people. He said this week that the party’s policy would remain that transgender people should be able to self-identify as whatever gender they wish.

But the issue isn’t really ability to self-idennify or not, the issue is forcing everyone else to endorse the self-idennifying. The issue is what follows from the self-idennifying. Nobody cares what other people think they are inside their heads; it’s when they act on it that things can get tricky.

In a letter seen by The Times, Jon Nott, the Greens’ chairman, said the party had “considered feedback from concerned members about the possibility of GWD attending, who described the hostile and demeaning encounters they have had with GWD in the past (including at previous conference)”.

He said: “They also noted the confrontational and derogatory ways in which some of GWD’s leaders and supporters have campaigned on issues of sex and gender identity, including online.

“The view taken is that there is a real likelihood that GWD would behave in a similar way at conference this year, and that in any event their presence would deter other members from attending and so would inhibit our ability to run an effective, inclusive event.”

And this is all entirely the fault of women. The men who claim to be women and shove women aside and tell women to get out are not at all a deterrent to other members, it’s only the women who object to being shoved aside who are the problem. It’s not the men in lipstick who deter others from attending, it’s those bitches who deter. It’s those bitchy mean demanding women who inhibit the Green Party’s ability to run an inclusive event, so kick them the fuck out, ok? Women are the problem no matter what; men who pretend to be women are their victims. That’s the rule.

A party spokesman said: “The Green Party will always offer a safe and welcoming space. The party decided that GWD’s presence at the conference would risk undermining that commitment and deter members from attending.”

Safe and welcoming for men, that is. Not for women. God no. Who cares about women? They’re a tiny minority, they’re pests, nobody cares about them. Welcome to our safe and welcoming space.