Women must not have jobs, because they have to have babies so what are we all supposed to do while they have those babies???

A prominent retired surgeon has claimed too many women are doing medical degrees, which is causing problems for the NHS as “women have got to have babies” and many end up working part-time.

Dr Meirion Thomas, a former professor of surgical oncology at Imperial College, said the gender balance has swung too far in favour of female medical students.

Asked what was wrong with having more female doctors in training, Dr Thomas told Times Radio “the fact of life is that women have got to have babies”.

Ok, so then they take leave and someone else fills their positions.

Dr Thomas said women often end up working part-time or job-sharing, which he claimed was impacting NHS services.

No, see, because then what you do is you hire people to fill those gaps. If the women are working part-time then they’re getting a part-time salary, so the NHS can hire people to fill up the bottle.

Pressed on why that would be a problem, Dr Thomas said: “The one problem is that medical schools now are taking 60 to 70 per cent women as medical students. It’s a huge imbalance, huge imbalance and that should be reduced to 50-50 for sure.” 

But when there’s a huge imbalance in which men are the majority that’s fine, amiright?

Boswell Today reports:

At the centre of today’s testimony was a simple, disquieting question: could the notes that formed the basis of allegations against Sandie Peggie have ever existed as described? The tribunal heard from two digital forensic experts – Peter Donaldson and Jim Borwick – who, despite differing styles, reached a chilling consensus: the data doesn’t add up.

Peter Donaldson was the first to fold. Pressed on the chronological ordering of Google Keep notes – particularly a now-infamous “weird incident” entry from August – he conceded he could not confirm that the note appeared in the position it did by creation date. Screenshots showed one thing; Google metadata suggested another. Donaldson couldn’t verify which notes were original or which were later interpolations. “Can’t recall.” “Can’t remember.” His evidence was a fog of qualification.

Then came Jim Borwick. He brought something rarer: certainty.

Borwick had recreated scenarios using Google Keep, setting his phone to airplane mode, delaying syncs, even manipulating device clocks. None produced what he and Donaldson observed in the NHS Fife screenshots: notes showing edit dates preceding creation timestamps. As Borwick told the tribunal, that outcome was “not possible.” Google’s servers simply don’t work that way. In forensic terms, it would be like printing a page before it was written.

Worse still, Borwick explained the one remaining scenario: deliberate manipulation. The screenshots may have been superimposed – faked, in effect – to suggest an evidentiary timeline that never existed. This isn’t conspiracy theory. It’s the only remaining technical explanation when every natural mechanism has been exhausted.

He showed how one note had supposedly been edited on 21 August but carried a creation date of 26 October. No version history existed to support the earlier event. Another note referenced “aluminium mesh from Halfords” – a mundane entry, yes, but hardly one requiring deception. Unless, as Borwick dryly noted, “that’s a hobby [Upton] keeps secret.” The tribunal laughed; the implications were deadly serious.

If these notes were not contemporaneous – and every sign suggests they were not – then they are not evidence of Peggie’s behaviour in real time. They are reconstructions, post hoc justifications dressed in digital timestamp. More damningly, the edit histories were changed after Peggie had already raised her objections. This is not contemporaneity. It is narrative.

Aka storytelling aka lies.

The Telegraph raises an eyebrow at the “safe with me” campaign.

A BBC presenter has provoked a row over a scheme to help transgender people access lavatories in schools. Dr Ronx Ikharia, a “black, queer, transmasculine, non-binary” medical doctor who has hosted children’s shows for the BBC, is behind the new “trans allyship” scheme.

It will distribute bright yellow “trans allies” badges to schools which state “Safe With Me”. Those wearing the badges will be expected to help “accompany trans+ people to their preferred facilities if asked”.

In other words, “those wearing the badges” will be children who will be expected to help protect “trans+ people” to use the wrong toilets. The doctor’s fun scheme is to tell children to protect adults who want to use the wrong toilets.

In addition to escorting people to their facilities of choice, badge-wearers will also be expected to commit to “active allyship” and “trans+ safety, dignity and joy”.

Dr Ikharia, who fronted the CBBC show Operation Ouch, hopes to roll out the badges in schools, and also “shops, offices and public spaces” across the UK with the intention of encouraging “safe” access to toilets. The doctor has cited personal experience of the issue, writing: “As a transmasculine, non-binary person, I’ve faced abuse, exclusion and humiliation in public toilets. I’ve skipped water to avoid them. I’ve begged shops to let me use their facilities. I’ve run into disabled toilets and out again, heart racing. I’ve needed friends to accompany me, just to feel safe.”

So she wants to recruit children to act as security guards for gender-confused adults.

Blithering stupidity scores another new personal best.

The Herald on today in court:

A number of rows erupted between the legal team’s during Thursday’s hearing.

The first occurred after Ms Russell KC objected to Dr Upton being referred to as “he” by Ms Cunningham. The NHS Fife lawyer argued that it had caused the witness, Ms Glancey, to use the term “he” in her evidence, quickly following it up with “sorry, she”.

Ms Cunningham has consistently referred to Dr Upton using he/him pronouns throughout this whole tribunal.

It’s still so bizarre to see grown-up people in a courtroom demanding that everyone lie about what sex people are. Upton is a he. Furthermore, that’s what the case is about. It’s both absurd and outrageous that Team Upton are trying to force everyone to lie about his sex.

Ms Russell stepped in today, however, stating that she had checked the equal treatment benchmark from May 2025 which agreed counsel’s should use the preferred pronouns or use gender neutral ‘they’ to avoid “offence”.

But in avoiding “offence” they’re wallowing in confusion, specifically confusion of everyone in the courtroom.

She said: “I am concerned about the fairness of the proceedings with Ms Cunningham’s misgendering which is creating a hostile environment for the witnesses and is confusing them.”

What kind of environment would calling that large smug confident man “she” create for the witnesses? We keep getting caught in this same infinite regress. He’s not a “she” and pretending he is and forcing others to pretend he is a “she” is how everyone got to the courtroom.

Not even half an hour later and the row between the pair was reignited.

Naomi Cunningham had suggested that there were attempts to punish Ms Peggie because the nurse “was guilty of heresy” by maintaining that Dr Upton is a man. Ms Russell strongly interjected. She said it was not heresy and was merely “equal treatment”. 

She said: “Dr Upton is not a man. For Women Scotland doesn’t say so. I am very concerned about the latitude being given to Ms Cunningham to be so offensive in court”.

Siiiiiigh. This is what the case is about. Of course Cunningham calls him a man. 1, because he is one, and 2, because that’s why they’re all in court. Russell whining about it is just asking for the court to declare Upton the winner right this second, case closed.

Circle circle circle

Using male pronouns to refer to a transgender doctor who used a hospital’s female changing room is “offensive”, a tribunal heard.

Stupid Telegraph left out the “male” part, thus making its own lede confusing instead of informative. The “transgender doctor” is a male transgender doctor. The Telegraph reports on the brutally enforced taboo on calling males males by refusing to call a male a male. Nice going.

Jane Russell KC, Dr Beth Upton’s lawyer, argued that nurse Sandie Peggie’s legal team were “confusing” those giving evidence in the tribunal by referring to the doctor as “he” and “him”.

Ms Russell claimed the witnesses in the case, which centres on the medic’s use of a women’s hospital changing room, were “not used” to hearing Dr Upton being referred to as male.

Well of course they weren’t, because there’s this viciously enforced taboo! Which even the Telegraph obeys!

But Ms Cunningham continued to refer to Dr Upton as male as she cross-examined a witness who investigated Ms Peggie after the nurse complained about the doctor’s presence in the changing room.

The barrister said Ms Peggie was “guilty of essentially the same heresy that has so exercised Ms Russell in being prepared to say that Dr Upton is a man”.

This prompted Ms Russell to object again, insisting that “Dr Upton is not a man” and she was “very concerned about the latitude being given to Ms Cunningham to be so offensive”.

But this insistence that it’s offensive to call a man a man is how we got in this mess!

Men are men, and women have an extremely basic need to know which are which.

Ms Cunningham accused Ms Russell of having “indulged in repeated futile objections to my use of correct sex pronouns for Dr Upton”. She said Alexander Kemp, the employment tribunal judge, had already ruled on the matter and Ms Russell had not submitted “any grounds” for revisiting that decision.

In January, Mr Kemp rejected an NHS Fife request to impose an order that would have prevented the use of male pronouns or terms to refer to Dr Upton, who was born male but identifies as a transgender woman. The judge said at the time that forcing Ms Peggie and her lawyers to use terms they consider “inaccurate” would be unfair.

Wildly unfair. It would make the whole case all but impossible to win.

So it turns out it was a systematic stich up. Boswell Today:

It began with an email. On 29 December 2023, just hours after a fraught exchange in the women’s changing room, Dr. Kate Searle sent a message to every consultant in the Emergency Department. Sandie Peggie, the nurse who had asked Dr. Beth Upton why he was changing clothes in a female-only space, was portrayed in that email as the aggressor. Searle thanked DU for his “composure” and suggested that other, unspecified incidents involving Peggie existed. No such incidents had ever been formally recorded.

Today at the tribunal, cross-examination dismantled the scaffolding on which this claim was built. Naomi Cunningham methodically unpicked the story of a so-called “log” of previous events. When asked directly, Searle admitted she only learned of those other alleged episodes on 29 December – the same day her email to colleagues implied an established pattern. There was no log, no independent corroboration, no risk assessment – only an eagerness to frame Peggie as a serial problem.

Why? Why the eagerness?

My guess is the chance to play a role in a Significant Drama. The maudlin story of Trans Oppression is still a hot ticket, so I suspect that Searle was not unhappy to get a chance to step on that stage. It’s an understandable feeling, and not a bad one provided you are careful to get the facts right. The trouble is that the feeling can make it tricky to get the facts right. It seems that Searle didn’t even try.

That impulse metastasised into the Datix incident report filed by Searle shortly after. Here, the language escalated: Peggie had, it claimed, behaved akin to someone comparing a colleague to a convicted rapist. Yet Searle admitted today, under oath, that Peggie had never used the word “rapist” and had never mentioned Isla Bryson by name. It was an inference – one that transformed an interpersonal disagreement into a formally logged hate incident.

Because a formally logged hate incident is a drama. Get your costume on, Kate, quick, the star is puking her guts out and you’re on in ten minutes!

This isn’t a technical failing. It is narrative manipulation under the guise of safeguarding. Where the facts didn’t suit, interpretations were slotted in to fill the gaps, then weaponised through internal reporting mechanisms. A nurse with 30 years of service was re-cast as an abuser based on the offensive impact that others imagined, not on what was actually said.

The imagination makes it all so much more dramatic and exciting.

I’m not just being flip here; I think this has to be part of the story, because otherwise it makes no sense. I think people have been trained for years to see “transphobia” everywhere, and trained to see it as one of the worst possible things, and trained to consider it the height of righteousness to fly into action at the first hint of “transphobia” within a 5 mile radius.

Cunningham highlighted that the “Datix heat” intensified only after Upton refused to leave the changing room. Peggie had said, repeatedly, that it was a women’s space and Upton was male. For that, she was suspended, interrogated, and accused of bigotry – not by patients, but by colleagues whose language around Upton bristled with reverence.

The tribunal also heard today how Searle convened what one might call an inner circle of sympathy. Her group emails were selective, curated to exclude dissenting views. Peggie was not permitted to discuss the incident with co-workers – a restriction never applied to Upton or his allies.

At every turn, the machinery bent to accommodate a single perspective. Internal procedures became tools of enforcement, not investigation. No one asked why a trans-identifying male was changing in a female-only space without prior policy or consultation. Instead, they asked how best to silence the woman who said no.

Or we could also (or instead) see it as a religious movement. Trans is sacred; women are of the earth earthy and the opposite of sacred. Upton is an ascended angel; Goody Proctor Peggie was seen with the devil.

Dennis absolutely nails it.

There’s visibility and then there’s visibility.

What a good idea: training children to “escort” adults to toilets for the opposite sex.

SW Londoner has the exciting details.

A BBC TV presenter has launched a new campaign calling on UK workplaces and schools to make visible commitments to trans inclusion.

Dr Ronx Ikharia’s ‘Safe With Me’ initiative invites allies to wear a yellow badge with bold black text, signalling to trans+ individuals that they are safe to approach, especially when using public toilets or navigating other gendered spaces.

How does the doc know that wearing a badge=safe to approach? How does the doc know that sane people won’t wear the badge and then ask the men who want to barge into the the public toilets for women what the hell they think they’re doing?

Launched by Dr Ronx – a Black, non-binary, transmasculine emergency doctor and BBC presenter – the campaign responds to the Supreme Court’s judgment that ‘sex’ in the Equality Act refers strictly to biological sex, a decision that campaigners say has heightened fear within trans+ communities.

Dr Ronx said: “I have often been kicked out of toilets because people don’t know where to place me. But when I’m with someone, it happens less. This badge is about making allyship visible. It’s non-confrontational. It’s a signal to a trans+ person that they can come up to you and feel safe doing so.”

And it’s a signal to women that you’re eager to help men barge into their toilets. Thanks, Dr Ronx.

The campaign encourages badge-wearers to accompany trans+ people if asked, without needing to speak or intervene, and to simply be present as a silent form of solidarity.

Dr Ronx added: “Most people aren’t trying to deny our humanity, they just don’t understand what being trans+ means or how to help. This is a way for people to step out of the shadows and into visible support.”

But Dr Ronx, denying that a man is a woman is not denying his or your humanity, it’s just denying that he is the sex he is not. This would apply to any such magical claim. If you say you’re a rabbit and we say you’re not, that’s not denying your humanity. It’s denying your lagomorphity, and affirming your humanity. Accuracy in naming is not an attack on anyone’s humanity.

They suggested that many institutions have used the Supreme Court’s judgement, the practical implications of which can be found here, to justify excluding trans people or failing to protect their safety at work.

Yap yap yap. Always with the carefully vague wording. To justify excluding trans people from what? You know what, which is why you carefully don’t say it.

JKR nails it.

The Sandie Peggie employment tribunal is currently exposing, as perhaps no court case to date has, the issue of class as it relates to the top-down imposition of gender identity ideology in the workplace.

‘Diversity officer’ Isla Bumba has now admitted in court that she didn’t bother consulting the 1992 regulations guaranteeing single-sex spaces when she told a trans-identified male, Dr Beth Upton, to use the female changing room at the hospital where he was working. Bumba justified this decision with comments that I assume sounded really clever and convincing, inside her own head.

‘I don’t know anything about Beth’s body. I didn’t at the time. I don’t now. I don’t need to know. But it wouldn’t be something that I would ever have the information of exactly what she is made of, biologically.’

Kate Searle, a consultant in emergency medicine, backed Bumba up, expressing outrage on the witness stand that anyone would be so insensitive as to ask about Upton’s chromosomes.

‘I could only imagine how upsetting and invasive a question that would be for Beth, and also not relevant to a colleague to ask another colleague. Beth identifies as female, and it does not matter what her chromosomes are to her.’

In Bumba and Searle’s world, a belief that gender identity trumps biological sex is proof you’re intellectually and morally superior to women like Sandie Peggie, so I’d imagine it’s come as a shock to discover, in a blaze of public and press scrutiny, just how idiotic and cruel they appear to people outside their dinner party circle.

When Upton, a 6′ tall, 28-year-old ex-rugby playing male, claimed that a petite 50-year-old female nurse was making him feel ‘unsafe’, his word appears to have been taken as gospel. Searle, Bumba and management fell over themselves to coddle the middle-class doctor who shared their voguish post-modern views on gender. What did Sandie matter? She’s just one of those ghastly uninformed bigots who still thinks sex is real and important – so embarrassingly gauche and simplistic! Whisper it – she probably drinks red wine with chicken, too.

According to @tribunaltweets, an emotional Searle blurted out on the stand ‘I am kind.’ This is not something genuinely kind people need to say. Genuinely kind people don’t find themselves compelled to explain in court why they helped whip up a witch-hunt against a woman whose only crime was wanting to change her clothes without a man watching.

Well, the nurse who was supposed to shuffle off in disgrace wasn’t having it. Sandie Peggie refused to be sacrificed on the altar of elitist ideologues who believe themselves to be higher and better than she is. She fought back, for herself and for every other woman who’s currently being silenced, persecuted and punished by a smug management class that preens itself on its virtue while imposing rampantly misogynistic policies on its workforce.

Sandie Peggie is a heroine. The woman NHS Fife thought they could treat abominably without any consequences to themselves has succeeded in shining the brightest spotlight yet upon the brain rot and compassion deficit suffered by supposedly intelligent people when they embrace gender identity ideology. Women everywhere owe her a debt of thanks. Whatever the outcome of this tribunal, Sandie Peggie has already won.

Yes yes yes and yes. The smugness, the preening, the self-admiration, all at the expense of women who just don’t want to give up all our rights when we’ve only even had them for a few decades. “A smug management class” is the perfect description of these ratbags.

It was all her fault.

A veteran nurse was viewed as “misbehaving” for refusing to share a female changing room with a transgender doctor, her lawyer has claimed in a landmark tribunal.

Dr Kate Searle, an A&E consultant, recalled being told about two occasions when Sandie Peggie left the women’s changing facilities at Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy, when Dr Beth Upton entered, causing the doctor to feel “uncomfortable”.

Isn’t that classic? Man bounces into women’s changing facility and it’s the woman who leaves who is causing discomfort. Classic classic classic. “You bitch, your nose hurt my hand when I punched it.”

She said that Peggie could have been reported to her manager, but Upton, who is biologically male but identifies as female, deciding against pursuing the matter further.

Awwww, isn’t he generous.

But of course he did not decide against further forcing himself on women in their changing rooms.

Peggie confronted Upton on the third occasion on which they met in the female-only space, on Christmas Eve 2023, claiming the doctor had no right to be there.

Not claiming but pointing out. Obviously he had no right to be there.

Searle was Upton’s line manager and, giving evidence on Tuesday, said that the doctor had informed her about the two occasions, in August and October 2023, in which Peggie had left the changing room when Upton entered, without saying anything.

Documentation showed that Upton had been given the option by Searle to “take the matter further” in late October that year.

That is, Searle, a woman, encouraged Upton to punish a woman for not staying in a changing room after he entered it. A woman wants women to stay in spaces where they are vulnerable if a man comes in. What next? Holding their legs apart so that he can rape them more easily?

“At the time you discussed this with Dr Upton both you and he [Upton] considered Sandie’s choice to remove herself from the changing room if he was there, to be misbehaving, didn’t you?” Naomi Cunningham, Peggie’s lawyer, said. “She was behaving badly and making him [Upton] feel uncomfortable.”

Searle replied: “Beth felt uncomfortable that Sandie appeared to not want to engage, she was the only one behaving like this and that was why Beth felt uncomfortable with someone behaving differently like that. I don’t agree we would have classed it as misbehaviour.”

Why did Searle not worry about Sandie’s feeling uncomfortable? Why is it only “Beth”‘s discomfort that matters? Why is Beth so very important while Sandie is so very insignificant?

The consultant said she had checked when introducing Upton to the department, in August 2023, that the doctor was comfortable using the female facilities.

Searle agreed with Cunningham that she had proceeded on the basis that it wasn’t “anyone else’s business” whether Upton, who began transitioning to live as female in January 2022, was going to use the women’s changing room or not.

Because women who aren’t men just don’t matter? It’s only women who are men who matter? When did we decide this? Why did we decide this? How can we undecide it?

“Beth identifying as a female has every right, under the Equality and Human Right Commission Act [sic] to use the facilities under the gender in which she identifies,” Searle said.

Every right? Moral as well as official? I beg to differ.

However, she went on to admit that many women may feel uncomfortable about taking their clothes of in the presence of a man.

But oh well, tough shit, sucks to be them, doesn’t give them the right to tell him to get out, or even to leave themselves.

Cunningham put it to Searle that her suggestion that she might have facilitated a conversation between the nurse and Upton “about why she wasn’t willing to take her clothes off in a room that he was present in” would have been “a very long way from kind or compassionate” to Peggie.

A very very very long way.

Searle added: “That’s not how I would have directly approached them nor how I did directly approach it. I was suggesting ways that you might manage a situation when two parties are uncomfortable.

“We would have discussed, if Dr Upton felt very uncomfortable and it was affecting them in coming to work, then it would have been appropriate to take it further, whether it’s just a discussion between parties to say how can we work through this together, with compassion and kindness and to make sure everyone is safe.”

Cunningham put it to Searle that Peggie was clearly feeling uncomfortable with sharing facilities with Upton, after being told about the two occasions in which the nurse self-excluded from female changing rooms.

The lawyer asked: “What steps did you take to offer her any compassion or kindness?”

Searle replied: “I didn’t make that approach.”

Exactly so. WHY NOT????

The tribunal about an hour ago:

[NC is Naomi Cunningham; KS is Kate Searle, the doctor who helped Upton make a big stink; Pete is the star of a thought experiment about women telling an obvious man to get out of their space]

On the one hand you have Pete, a man, and yes women are allowed to tell Pete to get out of their space, and on the other hand you have Upton, a man, and no women are not allowed to tell Upton to get out of their space because…uh…uh…uh…

It’s about god damn time.

U.S. Olympic Officials Bar Transgender Women From Women’s Competitions

The United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee quietly changed its eligibility rules on Monday to bar transgender women from competing in Olympic women’s sports, and now will comply with President Trump’s executive order on the issue, according to a post on the organization’s website.

The new policy, expressed in a short, vaguely worded paragraph, is tucked under the category of “USOPC Athlete Safety Policy” on the site, and does not include details of how the ban will work.

How did the non-ban work? How did the ban work before trans ideology came along and shot holes in everything? What “details” do you need of how men staying out of women’s sports would “work”? Do we need details of how keeping hungry bears out of the Olympics would work?

The committee’s new policy means that the national governing bodies of sports federations in the United States — which oversee sporting events for all ages, from youth to masters’ competitions — now must follow the U.S.O.P.C.’s lead, according to several chief executives of sports within the Olympic movement. The U.S.O.P.C. did not respond to a request for comment.

U.S.A. Fencing, for example, posted a new policy for transgender athletes on Friday, to be effective on Aug. 1. Those new rules still allow trans women to compete, but only in the men’s category. The policy says that nonbinary athletes, transgender men and intersex athletes will also be limited to competing in the men’s category.

Good. It’s about god damn time. It should never have been otherwise.

The International Olympic Committee has been struggling for years with the issue of transgender and intersex athletes in sports, coming up with various rules at various times, including sex testing, in an effort to balance fairness with inclusivity.

This is sports we’re talking about. Sport at the elite level is all about exclusivity. There are winners and losers. That’s how competitive sports work. If they become so inclusive that nobody ever wins, they’re a different kind of thing.

Big Trans is Watching You.

The Australian Greens’ new ­leader, Larissa Waters, is resisting calls to intervene in the widening row over the minority party’s ­embrace of transgender rights and halt a purge of members who don’t toe the line.

The expulsion of Greens co-founder Drew Hutton has brought to a dramatic head tensions around the alleged hounding of those who question the party’s pro-trans platform.

It’s not all that alleged when we can see it happening in real time.

Mr Hutton said upwards of 30 former Greens members had reached out to him about being expelled for challenging the party’s position on gender. Most were women. Many more quit after being subjected to harassment for voicing reservations about trans people accessing ­normally segregated spaces such as public and school toilets, changing rooms or in sports where transitioning boys competed against girls.

…

Cheryl Hercus, 70, who ­proudly identifies as a lesbian woman, said she was forced out of the Victorian Greens after posting links to articles that were critical of gender identity theory on social media. She resigned her membership rather than contest the complaints made against her.

“We were basically painted as being fundamentally racist if we believed that biological reality was reality,” she said. “It just became obvious to me that the whole of the party had been captured by this ideology and to try and fight it from within was just huge.”

Sounds all too familiar.

A poignant bit of the testimony:

Asked why she told colleagues before Christmas Eve that she would speak to Dr Upton directly, Ms Peggie said: “No one appeared willing to speak to Beth on behalf of myself or my colleagues.

“I hoped that by speaking to him personally, he might be able to realise he was making us feel uncomfortable by changing in a female changing area, and the reason why, in the hope he would understand and change elsewhere.”

…

She said the incident lasted just two minutes and that she hoped the conversation might help Dr Upton understand.

Asked why she didn’t report the matter, Ms Peggie said: “I was hopeful that Beth would accept my concerns and the reasons why I felt uncomfortable.

“I tried to give him an example so he could appreciate the severity of the situation. I told them I had a difficult history with men. I didn’t think it was necessary to speak to anyone, because I was hoping, on reflection, Beth would understand.”

She said she was “upset that the interaction did not seem to have had any influence on the way Beth felt, and I realised from his reaction that he did not seem to care about the stress he was causing me.”

She thought he might understand if she explained it. She thought if he understood he would have some empathy.

But no. He didn’t care. He cared only about his own feelings. The much more reasonable, reality-based, of the earth earthy feelings that women have around men and bodies and menstruation and safety are just so much fluff to him, while his feelings about pretending to be a woman are rock-solid and massively important.

Thank fuck some of us know the basics.

Srsly. A medical doctor, under oath, saying what sex babies are is a “decision” and that she’s not an expert.

From the Upton/Peggie hearing today:

Dr Searle says she first met Dr Upton in August 2023 and is her “educational and clinical supervisor”. She says she is the main point of contact for junior and resident doctors in her line of management and to support career progression and wellbeing support. She says she has known Ms Peggie since she started working at the emergency department at Victoria Hospital.

Dr Searle says she was not aware that Ms Peggie held gender critical views before the incident on Christmas Eve 2023 or any issues with these views.

That is…Dr Searle says she was not aware that Ms Peggie knew the difference between women and men before Christmas Eve 2023.

Wouldn’t you kind of think all medical staff at a hospital would be expected, or indeed required, to know that? Isn’t it pretty basic information in a medical setting?

Dr Searle is asked about what discussions she had with Dr Upton about using the female changing rooms. She said: “I checked that she knew where the female changing room was and was happy to use it and had used it previously used it in another job. That was the extent of the discussion.”

She then added: “Beth had used the female changing rooms in her previous job as a doctor and was happy and felt comfortable doing so, so I didn’t make any further suggestion.”

Fabulous. As long as the man is happy, it simply doesn’t matter what the women feel. Might they be unhappy? Might they feel not so comfortable? Meh. Doesn’t matter.

Dr Searle said she was “concerned for Beth and her welfare” when she received an email on Christmas Day 2023 about a “very upsetting” incident which had left Dr Upton “distressed”…

She is asked what she thinks of Dr Upton being told by Ms Peggie she cannot be in the changing room because “it’s wrong”. Dr Searle said: “I was very concerned and I knew it was upsetting and distressing for Beth and I knew there was no NHS Fife policy on this.”

She is then asked what she thought of Ms Peggie telling Dr Upton “she wasn’t a woman”. Dr Searle said: “Again I was very concerned for Beth because I knew it was an upsetting thing to say and also under NHS Fife’s hate policy this was verbal harassment for her.”

All the concern is for “Beth.” None of the concern is for Ms Peggie. Why is that? Why is this dogma so massively watertight that not an atom of concern for women is ever allowed to sneak in? How does that work? Would Searle enjoy having to take her clothes off while Upton watched her?

She is then asked if Ms Peggie questioning Dr Upton’s chromosomes was appropriate. Dr Searle said: “I can only imagine how upsetting and invasive a question that would be for Beth and it is not relevant for a colleague to ask another colleague.

“Beth identifies as female and it does not matter what her chromosomes are to her.”

But it does matter to women what sex people are when they’re cozily gathered in a take your clothes off room. What matters to “Beth” is not the only relevant criterion here.

Dr Searle said Dr Upton was “extremely shaken and distressed” when the pair discussed what had happened with Ms Peggie in the changing room. She said they went through the NHS Fife hate incident policy together and agreed that a datix needed to be completed, which Dr Searle and Dr Upton did together. They also discussed reporting this to the policy and Dr Upton said she would think about it. They then looked at Dr Upton’s shift patterns to see if she felt safe to come into work.

I think that must be “They also discussed reporting this to the police” – which is new information to me at least. A new low. Yes go complain to the police that a female nurse doesn’t want a male doctor in the room where she has to take her clothes off. With any luck she’ll resist arrest and they’ll have to get violent. What fun for everyone except her.

There was this:

And then there was this:

(I would suggest the majority in Scotland do) – are ‘right wing bigots’ is not only insulting, it’s probably defamatory, and it is definitely not good politics. I have no idea if Ms Bardell wishes to re-enter politics (she lost her Westminster seat last year) but if she and her party are serious about winning support, then I suggest she stops insulting women who believe in material reality. And FWIW Jo Cherry is one of the smartest, charismatic, empathetic women I know. I may disagree with her on independence, but if I ever needed help I know I could depend on her.

So there.

Anything missing?

No mention of women.

So naturally he knows what JK Rowling should be talking about better than JK Rowling does.

Women are in fact allowed to talk about issues and policies that affect women.

Nailed it.

I’m naturally 5’8” as long as I’m wearing four inch heels. pic.twitter.com/TxqvEZEeGG

— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) July 20, 2025

A couple of things…

One, who the hell takes a jet plane to MINOT, NORTH DAKOTA? How does Minot, North Dakota even have an airport? We’re not talking Minneapolis here, we’re not even talking Fargo, we’re talking Minot. The one in North Dakota.

Two, more seriously, wtf?

The pilot of a commercial airliner has said he needed to make an “aggressive maneuver” to avoid colliding with a US air force B-52 bomber as it landed in Minot, North Dakota, on Friday.

The SkyWest airlines pilot said he had been cleared to land on a trip from Minneapolis-St Paul (MSP) to Minot when he spotted the vast nuclear-capable bomber on his right side and was told to go around.

Well sure, I’m confident he was more than happy to go around, but he’s supposed to know to do that with plenty of time to spare, not seconds before the two planes collide and everybody dies. I think all parties prefer it that way.

“So, sorry for the aggressive maneuver,” the pilot said. “It caught me by surprise, and it’s not normal at all. I don’t know why they didn’t give us a heads up, because the airbase does have radar, and nobody said, ‘Hey there’s also a B-52 in the pattern.’”

The pilot described the experience as “not a fun day at work”.

I don’t know, maybe all the aircraft control people have been drafted to round up more immigrants.