It seems Australia is making it illegal to say that inducing an imitation of lactation in men and then feeding the pseudo-milk to infants is dangerous to those infants. Nothing must be allowed to interfere with men’s fantasies.

Last week a notice was given to my friend and former breastfeeding counsellor Jasmine Sussex by Twitter, advising her of an Australian law infraction. I met Jasmine in person just over a year ago at a Brisbane radical feminist conference, but she first contacted me in 2021 when I wrote an article in The Spectator Oz titled On “Chestfeeding”.

At this time Jasmine’s long relationship with the Australian Breastfeeding Association (ABA) was ending in some level of pain and bitterness. As I wrote in my article, the ABA was collaborating with an organisation called Rainbow Families. The result was the adoption by the ABA of some gender identity ideology-based practices that Jasmine found problematic and dangerous.

Jasmine raised concerns with the ABA, that the inclusion of men in their purview meant an alignment with very shoddy and experimental medicine, just to name one of the many red flags that she raised. Jasmine lost her position as a breastfeeding counsellor and has become entrenched in activism on the gender identity vs sex issue.

…

Women like Jasmine speak up because they can’t turn from what they see. In the world of breastfeeding, the inclusion of gender identity ideology in women’s support infrastructure, is leading to the assumption that male people can produce milk suitable for an infant, and these males should be supported in the pursuit of feeding an infant from their body by the entirety of the medical profession, including birth and lactation specialists. Apart from the coercion that is required to implement such a practice, the process by which endocrinologists are getting human males to exude a substance from their nipples, seems to be ethically debased and scientifically unsupported.

It’s hard to read about this subject without nausea. “Yay we got some kind of stuff to come out of your manly tits, now go nurse that infant!”

Jasmine Sussex and a Brisbane women’s rights activist recently took to Twitter to highlight the disturbing promotion of males feeding infants through an untested chemically induced process. Both women have received notices that their tweets are in violation of Australian law, and the tweets are now hidden from Australian audiences.

So the wounded fee-fees of men who want to poison infants are more important than the health and safety of infants. Why is that, exactly?

I saw this from Dennis so I hared off to find the details.

Calling themselves “Gold Command” ffs. Apparently it’s a police thing, and Gold is of course the top rank, so they’re like Eisenhower on D-Day. Not that they’re at all stuck on themselves.

So I quested and found the Telegraph:

An investigation into Baroness Falkner of Margravine’s work as the Equalities and Human Rights Commission chairman, which has been condemned by her allies as spurious, was suspended on Friday following a backlash from 54 peers and outcry across the political spectrum.

Officials had filed a dossier of 40 complaints alleging “bullying”, “discrimination”, “harassment” and a “lack of psychological safety”, targeted at both [Kishwer Falkner] and her board of 12 expert commissioners, who have powers in statute to make all its policy decisions on equality law.

…

The complaints began when the EHRC pivoted to settle the transgender debate since Lady Falkner took charge, including by taking gender-critical views into account, which has infuriated trans activists.

Pivoted to settle the debate? It’s not clear to me what that means. The rest of the sentence is clear enough though.

Her allies said it was a “victory for Board over Blob” and called on Marcial Boo, the EHRC chief executive, to resign over the row.

A source close to the EHRC said…

“It’s just tragic. There was an elite group of EHRC people who got together to arrange how they would get rid of her and referred to themselves as ‘gold command’. They came to a consensus view that the only way forward was to get a silk to do an investigation and give the silk all the evidence he would need to find her guilty.”

The dossier, which was said to contain 40 allegedly vague allegations, bemoaned “a lack of psychological safety, i.e. the fear of who will be attacked next” and staff were “worried that the commission is becoming an unsafe place to work”. Another took issue with Baroness Falkner allegedly referring to a trans quiz show contestant as a “bloke in lipstick” in a board meeting, which her allies said was taken out of context.

It looks as if the adults have wrested the controls away from the drunk teenagers…for the moment. Mind how you go; don’t make any sudden moves.

A little compilation for your weekend enjoyment.

Platform number one to Brighton. But of course.

The investigation into Kishwer Falkner has been suspended.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has announced it has “paused” an independent investigation into its Chair Baroness Kishwer Falkner.

On Tuesday, this programme revealed that Baroness Falkner was under investigation by an external barrister after allegations about her conduct from a number of staff. Our report also examined claims of a toxic culture at the Commission, allegations of bullying and harassment, claims that there is a high level of staff turnover and internal concerns about its independence and impartiality. The report sparked a lively debate, with accusations that Falkner was the target of a “hit job” by radical pro-trans activists inside the Commission. Today the Board said it had decided to pause the investigation so that it could seek legal advice on the impact of leaked confidential information. It said it must ensure the investigation’s integrity and that it is fair to all parties concerned.

Interesting.

Let’s look at the Bridges statement in more detail.

British Cycling has just banned us from racing. This was to be announced at 11 am today. But I’m done with this whole conversation being on their terms, and being controlled by them.

They have no authority to control this conversation anymore. Does it surprise me that the same organisation funded directly by a state that ships vulnerable refugees to Rwanda, violently clamps down on any political dissent that they disapprove of, or starves their people?

He lost track of his wording there. He surely can’t be claiming that British Cycling violently clamps down on dissent or starves their people, but that’s what he wrote. He seems to have meant can this organization funded by this state that does these bad things itself do bad things to me, yes of course it can.

At any rate the point is he had the fucking audacity to compare his being prevented from cheating women in sports to actual significant human rights abuses. That takes some impressive entitlement.

British Cycling is a failed organisation, the racing scene is dying under your watch and all you do is take money from petrochemical companies and engage in culture wars. You don’t care about making sport more diverse, you want to make yourself look better and you’re even failing at that. Cycling is still one of the whitest, straightest sports out there, and you couldn’t care less.

So he’s pretending that his participation in women’s cycling would make cycling less white and less straight. How would that work exactly? I’m not seeing the mechanism.

This is a violent act. When the Government is expressing admiration towards Ron DeSantis fascist state which kidnaps children, and is itching to pass legislation to ban us from public life, this is a violent act. British Cycling are supporting this, they are furthering a genocide against us. 

He says preventing him from cheating women in sport is a violent act. What’s violent about it? His cheating is closer to violence than enforcing a rule against cheating is. His cheating is “violent” in the sense that it’s physical: he’s bigger and stronger and that’s why he wins.

He also says it’s “furthering” genocide, which is grotesque on its face. No it isn’t. He can stay alive and compete against men. He may lose races. That’s not genocide.

I know a lot of people will think I’m being dramatic, or overplaying how scary things are at the moment. I’m having to consider an exit plan from this terrible island and figure out what point enough is enough. It terrifies me to exist at the moment, I have friends getting hate crimed all the time, and my reality is that I can’t look ahead to the future or make plans because I don’t know if I’II be allowed to live that long. Do you have any idea what that does to someone psychologically? To constantly see your existence being put up for debate, and the other side openly calling for our eradication?

Do you have any idea how ludicrous all that is? Of course you do. Does he have any idea of the stats on violence against women? Does he care? Of course he doesn’t.

What a thoroughly horrible person.

This.

It’s not “furthering genocide” to keep men (however they identify) out of women’s sports. Men don’t drop dead on being told they can’t compete against women.

It is, in fact, simply another outrage to add to the long list, to appropriate the word “genocide” to name one’s unjustifiable resentment at being told “No you can’t destroy women’s sports.” The egotism and entitlement of it should be glaringly obvious even to the BBC.

Another thing about the reporting on this, by the way…in case it’s not clear enough already…is the way the news media ignore the reason “trans women” are so keen to do this: because it’s cheating. “Emily” isn’t really upset because “transphobia” or because he’s not being “validated” as a genuine authentic really real solid gold woman, he’s upset because he can no longer cheat.

The BBC implies (without actually saying) that it’s all about “trans rights” and incloosion and diversittee and respect and love and idenniny and yadda yadda when it must know damn well that it’s all about gaining an unfair advantage. They’re not children, they’re the god damn BBC, they’re not so stupid they don’t notice the fuss is all about the male cheats, but they pretend otherwise.

Makes me want to puke.

BBC World at One’s reporting on the British Cycling ruling is jaw-droppingly disgusting. Everybody who talks is practically in floods of tears for poor darling fragile victim “Emily” Bridges and other men who want to cheat, and completely indifferent to women who don’t want to be forced to compete against men in their own sport. It’s so bad and unbalanced and just fucking misogynist I can hardly believe what I’m listening to.

The part where a woman voices Bridges’s statement starts at 12:06.

The BBC’s reporting on it is of course ridiculous.

British Cycling is to ban transgender women from the female category of its competitions following a nine-month review and consultation. Under a new participation policy that the governing body said was “predicated on fairness”, such athletes will compete in an ‘open category’ with men. Female races will be “for those whose sex was assigned female at birth”.

The changes will prevent riders such as Emily Bridges potentially being part of the British women’s team.

The Beeb goes on to quote at vast length from Bridges’s “who gives a fuck about women” statement. Oddly enough there is no matching statement quoted at vast length from one of the women harmed by Bridges’s invasion of women’s cycling.

Critics of transgender athletes’ participation in some women’s sports argue that gives them a disproportionate advantage over their peers and limits opportunities for their rivals.

However, others argue there is not enough detailed research in the area, that the science is not clear, and that with very few elite transgender athletes, sport should be more inclusive, with open categories criticised for being discriminatory.

Utter bullshit. We don’t let adults do this to children and we don’t whine that the science isn’t clear that adults have an advantage.

The BBC is helping India Willoughby and Emily Bridges campaign to destroy women’s rights.

And he knows why “Emily” doesn’t sound like that, too. The BBC as a whole knows, but still it’s eager to enforce the fiction and stomp all over women in the process. It’s nauseating.

Willoughby really is leaning into the witch-hunting.

Uproar among men who want to cheat in sports. It’s genocide to stop them, genocide I tell you!

“There is no science” to justify separate sports for women, but there is lots and lots and lots of science that says men who claim to be women are indeed women. Uh huh.

Good old Willoughby. Women should all die by age 37, am I right?

Ah here he is. “Molly” Cameron.

Replies are not…affectionate.