Trans Activists Smoke Bomb UK Newspaper Offices In Gender Recognition Terror Attack

London trans activists mounted a ferocious protest against major news outlets which culminated in them blocking the exits to Northcliffe House, before lighting smoke bombs at the doors. The building houses the offices of the Daily Mail, the Metro, and the Independent newspapers. Terrified employees tried to evacuate but were blocked from exiting the smoke filled building.

Trans activists were angry that reporters included coverage of feminist groups in news reports leading up to the closure of the Gender Recognition Act Public Consultation, which the government issued to gather perspectives on proposed changes to the 2004 Gender Recognition Act [GRA]. The GRA allows individuals who identify as transgender to retroactively change the sex on their birth certificate, which changes their legal sex. The legal fiction created by the GRA allows individuals to claim recognition as the opposite sex so that males, for example, can apply for women-only scholarships and shortlists designed to promote equality for those born female.
The GRA certification also modifies the relationship of the holder to protections under the 2010 Equality Act. The Equality Act prevents discrimination under two relevant characteristics for transgender people: “Gender Reassignment” and “Sex”. Therefore, a male who identifies as a transwoman is protected from discrimination both on the basis of undergoing (or intending to undergo) medical gender reassignment procedures and he is also protected from discrimination on the basis of his sex (male). Males who obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate under the GRA are protected from discrimination both on the basis of gender reassignment, and on the basis of his (legal fiction) sex (female). This legal fiction allows him to access all rights, privileges, and sex-segregated spaces intended for women only (for example, he would be recorded as female and placed in a women’s prison if arrested).
In order to obtain a Gender Recognition certificate under the 2004 GRA, an individual must provide letters from two medical doctors proving a diagnosis of “gender dysphoria”, and they must prove that they have lived two years “in role” as the other sex (usually proved by a gendered name change or other proof of embracing stereotypes of the other sex).
The government proposes, under pressure from transgender lobbying groups, to change the GRA to allow individuals to obtain certification as the other sex on the basis of their own declaration alone, with no objective requirement to undergo medical diagnosis, hormone treatment, or any change in social presentation/role. This is called ‘Sex Self-ID”. Any man could simply declare himself female for whatever reason, and the government would change his legal sex without question. Trans activists maintain that all men should have the “human right” to be legally recognized under legal fiction as female under any circumstances and for whatever reason they see fit, and that men’s rights to do so should take priority over women’s rights to protection based on their actual sex.
Women’s Groups have objected to these proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act on the grounds that they would remove certain women’s rights, namely these:
Removing the legal right of women to organize politically against sex-based oppression by males
Removing the legal right of women to assemble outside the presence of men
Removing the legal right of women to educational programs created for women outside the presence of men
Eliminating data collection of sex-based inequalities in areas where females are underrepresented
Elimination of sex-based crime statistics
Eliminating athletic programs and sports competition for women and girls
Removing the legal right of women to be free from the presence of men in areas of public accommodation where nudity occurs
Elimination of grants, scholarships, board and trustee designations, representative positions, and affirmative programs for women
Removing the legal right of women to create reproductive clinics, rape crisis services, support groups, or any organizations for females
Eliminating media and all public discourse specific to females
Removal of the right of journalists to report the sex, and history, of subjects
Eliminating the legal right of lesbians to congregate publicly
Elimination of lesbian-specific organizations and advocacy groups
Removing the legal right of women to free speech related to sex roles and gender
Elimination of the legal right of women to protection from state-enforced sex-roles (appearance/behavior/thought)
Elimination of the legal right of girls to protection from state-enforced sex-roles in public education
Elimination of the patient right of dependent females to hospital/facility bed assignments separate from males
Elimination of the right of dependent females to prefer female providers for their intimate personal care requirements
Elimination of the human right of female prisoners under state confinement to be housed separately from male prisoners
The consultation was scheduled to end yesterday, but HAS NOW BEEN EXTENDED UNTIL 12 NOON MONDAY 22, 2018.
Click here to register your views:


67 thoughts on “Trans Activists Smoke Bomb UK Newspaper Offices In Gender Recognition Terror Attack

  1. So they threw smoke bombs (in a town that’s had many terrorist attacks) then prevented people from leaving. Dear God they must have been terrified. In what way was this not a terrorist attack? And why weren’t they arrested for preventing egress in an emergency situation?

  2. Well this is a surprise….NOT. After all, the brigade says they are not violent,do not harm others, are kind to those who they want to emulate, they are peaceful and that any felonious acts are done, in the name of ‘survival’ in a phobic society. Of course…all of that is BULLSHIT.
    These motherfucking mutts are criminally insane. In committing this act, they have shown that many are less worthy of compassion and understanding and more or rather, better suited for lives behind bars. In a separate wing of a supermax.
    Here is hoping that none of the press in the UK [outside of the BBC] knuckles under to these thugs, like what has happened here in the states.Lest one wants to have a media that caters to Norman Bates or the Springer specials. [which has been ramping up, in advance of the mid-term elections].

  3. This is awful, and an assault on free speech. Women all over the world where pro-transgender laws are taking hold should be wary after this attack. This isn’t the work of females who support transpeople. This is the work of entitled men who apparently don’t believe born females should have any rights. This can be considered a terrorist attack. The British government should be investigating it as such.

  4. One can only hope that the general public will see this for the cruel and stupid act that it is.

  5. Needless to say, the parallels with the UK men’s/fathers’ rights movement people are more than apparent. Does anybody remember the “direct actions” of Fathers 4 Justice back in the day? There was the foiled attempt to kidnap the five-year old son of then Prime Minister Tony Blair in January 2006, the assault upon U.K. Education Secretary Ruth Kelly a month later, just as she was arriving at court to testify about an earlier Fathers 4 Justice assault against her in April 2004. Then there was the group’s storming of a family law conference in October 2004 with smoke bombs and flares. Sound a little familiar?

  6. Trans just love smoke and fire and sticks and baseball bats wrapped in barbed wire. In fact, the more the better. At the last Philly Pride, a pink haired transwoman tried to set a flag on fire. It was some kind of pro-police flag. I’m against police brutality of minorities, but this was really stupid. He was dressed in all black, had a bandana to cover his face, and a big can of paint thinner and flares. Lighting things on fire in a crowded area in the middle of the summer with a lot of flammable things around is not smart. There is a time and place for everything, and this wasn’t smart at all.

    Trans woman arrested at Philly Pride for allegedly attempting to set fire to ‘Blue Lives Matter’ flag

    TransDykes did a hella damage at the riots at Berkeley that turned violent.
    As to this latest incident, it’s not very wise to light a smoke bomb in a crowded city. I watched the video of blue and purple smoke rolling out of entrance to the building. A lot of people could mistake it for some kind of terrorism or a fire inside the building. Since they blocked the entrance, where could panicked people go? London has a history of terrorists attacks.
    “London trans activists mounted a ferocious protest against major news outlets which culminated in them blocking the exits to Northcliffe House, before lighting smoke bombs at the doors. The building houses the offices of the Daily Mail, the Metro, and the Independent newspapers. Terrified employees tried to evacuate but were blocked from exiting the smoke filled building.”
    It’s mean and transphobic for women to publish anything in a newspaper that isn’t officially trans approved. Before they open their mouths, women must first get permission from trans activists. If they don’t, everyone must be punished, not just the mean “TERFs”.

  7. But notice the smoke is in lovely blue and purple colors. That’s how you can tell their penises are girls.

  8. The trans cult includes mra and incels whose hate is palpable. There’s a group of Transexxuals who are supporting gender critical women vociferously. The actual consultation has been extended to midday Monday as the web site has been unable to handle the volume of traffic. Whether that’s good or bad for women, I don’t know, but now women are speaking up and leafleting so the public is getting some idea of the effect of GRA on women and children.

  9. What I heard yesterday on Twitter was that the protest was against a giveaway transit newspaper called Metro UK and they were mad at it because it ran a really great ad by one of the gender critical groups. Either women’s place UK or Fairplay for women. That explained what self ID was. But I don’t know for sure if that’s accurate.
    Also in Britain a grocery store chain has demanded a billboard that’s across the street from them, that just says the dictionary definition of ‘woman’ be removed. And somebody commented on Twitter do they really think the blue hair non-binaries can keep them in business when women stop shopping there? 😆

    1. Lmao @ that twitter comment
      Unless they get one helluva trickle-down from the trans billionaires, best of luck staying afloat on a subculture that worships GoFundMe.

    2. “And somebody commented on Twitter do they really think the blue hair non-binaries can keep them in business when women stop shopping there?”
      Their assumption is probably that women aren’t allowed to stop shopping there, just as TRAs assume women aren’t allowed to purchase advertising space if they don’t agree with the message. I suspect a lot of people default to viewing women in general as they do their own mothers, so if there’s a choice between offending their mother or offending their weird and/or male friends, they feel that their friends might not forgive them but their mother has to. That might also explain some of the rage we see in response to women setting hard boundaries in this debate, because to some–entitled and emotionally immature–people, that conjures up feelings of “Mommy’s being mean!” to which they respond like spoiled children, throwing tantrums and settting off smoke bombs.

  10. This is awful and disgusting. Thanks for reporting; I hadn’t seen it anywhere else yet.
    I have a question about one of the points in the list of women’s rights that are threatened by the GRA. Could someone explain what is meant by “Elimination of the legal right of women to protection from state-enforced sex-roles (appearance/behavior/thought)”? The rest of the list was pretty clear to me, but I just can’t clearly see the implications of this one, and I couldn’t figure out how to google up an answer.

    1. By it’s nature, the Gender Recognition Act (and Gender Identity laws generally) establishes legal “sex roles”, which is exactly what laws against sex discrimination are supposed to prevent. The result is the codification of sex stereotypes (“femininity”, “masculinity”) into governmental law. What does it mean to “live as” a woman beyond simply being female? It means performing sex stereotypes, such as changing one’s name from Julian to Julie, etc.
      The state should be protecting women and men from the enforcement of different arbitrary social norms based on their reproductive function (example: employers requiring female employees to shave their legs). Gender laws do the opposite. They cement these stereotypes into law.
      The Price Waterhouse vs. Hopkins ruling in the United States is a good example of how sex stereotypes are sex discrimination:

      1. “What does it mean to “live as” a woman beyond simply being female? It means performing sex stereotypes, such as changing one’s name from Julian to Julie, etc.”
        Exactly…….that’s all my ex has done. The psychologists/lawyers applying for his “sex-change” cite a liking for girls toys as a child and dressing up in women’s clothes (usually his mother’s or mine) as proof that he was born in the wrong body. Also exfoliating……don’t forget that. Right girls?

      2. Thank you, GallusMag. I get it now. That’s actually pretty frightening, that the definition of a woman could be codified into law as a collection of stereotypes, instead of being based on, you know, material reality.

  11. The TRA “damage control” on the Independent tweet is something to behold. At least one of them is claiming they were flares, not smoke bombs… so instead of just a breathing and visibility hazard, it’s a fire hazard in front of a building with blocked exits?
    If you wrote this as satirical fiction, it would be too heavy-handed.

  12. In this country we suffer from what I call the “rationalist fallacy”. We assume that if someone – an upper middle class person with a nice job – froths at the mouth against “Fucking Tories, murdering the poor and the disabled”, then the “fucking Tories” must really have done something awful to provoke such a (supposedly) rational person into apoplexies of rage. Logic goes out of the window, the fact the Tories are not “murdering” the poor or disabled goes out of the window.
    Similarly if a bunch of entitled TRAs blow off smoke bombs in front of the Daily Mail offices – the “rationalist fallacy” tells us they must be rational, the wicked Daily Mail must have driven them to it – Squealer Jones will bore us all to death and completely lack any context in telling us about that ‘Hurrah for the Blackshirts’ headline in 1934. No-one will twig that they’re the absurd irrational cretins here.

    1. The “rationalist fallacy” only applies to males, though.
      Male society says that males are always perfectly behaved unless provoked. Males only rape when woman ask for it. Males are only violent when women drive them to it. Males are permitted all manner of violence because it is never their fault or responsibility.
      Women say no to males, and that is TOTES LITERAL VIOLENCE and it is forcing males to become irrational, which they never, ever do, but they had to grab their fiercest handbag, fill it with smoke bombs and sashay on down to the news office because these uppity bitches that say no to penis has just made them crazy. Just more manchildren blaming us for the actions that they choose.
      Being male is having all of the power but none of the responsibility. We have no power but somehow everything is still our fault. Male supremacy in action.

  13. Looks like the Trump admin is floating the adoption of a legal definition of sex based on objective factors instead of individual “gender feelings” (Gender Identity). Namely, sex as noted at birth to be contested only by chromosomal testing (i.e. in cases of intersex).

    According to the NYTimes, legal recognition of biological sex will “Define Transgender Out Of Existence”, which is absurd, because transgender people can easily be protected by legislating to protect individuals from sex stereotyping (i.e.. preventing discrimination of trans people on the basis of failing to conform to the sex stereotypes traditionally associated with their sex), in fact there is quite a bit of case law already doing this (example Tronetti vs. Healthnet Lakeshore Hospital 2003 and Glenn vs Brumby 2007, among others)
    Transgender people could easily be protected under sex discrimination laws without eliminating legal sex status for women but they would have to give up the legal fiction of “changing sex”. Instead they would be protected as gender nonconforming (sex stereotype nonconforming) people. According to Erica L. Green, Katie Benner and Robert Pear of the NYTimes, doing this would “define transgender out of existence” as it is apparently their view that protecting transgender people on the basis of being gender nonconforming instead of the legal fiction of reproductive sex transubstantiation would “eliminate” transgenderism. Makes no sense really. But must be good for clicks.

    1. The Atlantic put their head MD on the case; otherwise known as the dude in charge of policing Toxic Masculinity in favor of Happy Fun Time Masculinity. He’s completely out of his depth on the subject but all the right people are cheering him on so he blazes ahead, blurring intersex and trans because “books have been written!” But it’s really easy to act appalled about a genital registry and laugh at anti-science republicans. And so he persists.
      Meanwhile, Jill Soloway has been given a complete media packaged blitz to pave the way for white people who want to revel in their own subjectivities. She’s all over the place.
      What a weekend.

      1. My bad. Part of me instinctively rebels against direct promotion even though I know it doesn’t matter these days.
        “Kamala Harris might be the next president of the US but let’s give the video cover to Cox because ‘she’ wants to talk about how the choice to pass as cis and how being foxy reflects female empowerment! It’s all about the selfie angles!”

        1. Thanks. Yep. The Atlantic guy is out of his mind. He claims that tracking sex demographics results in a “Federal Registry of Genitals”. And he claims to be a scientist. lol. Yeah so I guess we better stop tracking sex discrimination at all, yanno, because genitals are private. It’s amazing how squeamish this porn addicted generation of men become on the topic of sex when it involves tracking equality for women.

      2. thanks to anon male for the Jill Soloway link! Hardy laughter in these parts!
        “What if I’m not female but I’m also not male? What if I’m everything and nothing at the same time?”
        Maybe you don’t exist at all and therefore, logically, shouldn’t make any noise?
        PS: She just helpfully tweeted that “Patriarchy-toppling is an international effort”. (insert eye-rolling emoji here)

      3. Jill Soloway’s world makes no sense. She seems to think women have to change their hair, makeup, and wardrobe before they can discuss politics with men? I get why she’d want to ditch all the fussing with appearance, but that hardly needs a special label, much less the equivalent of a coming-out party.
        Although it’s a good idea to stop catering to the male gaze, I’m annoyed at the implicit classism of economically privileged white women expecting cookies for not meeting the traditional beauty standards of their class, given that many working class women either don’t have the resources for elaborate beauty regimens or are required to maintain a “feminine” appearance to keep their jobs. And the working class women I grew up among certainly didn’t expect to be admired merely for being practical in their grooming.
        Declaring oneself non-binary looks like a new way the privileged can get attention and narcisstic supply for doing what many of the rest of us have always done.
        Also, in that Atlantic article, Hamblin’s automotive analogy seems to be implying that SUVs are intersex? Or maybe non-binary?

      4. @ Oak and Ash
        What on earth is that vehicle analogy? Lol. I’m not sure why he thinks using human-made inorganic machines as an analogy supports his argument but it’s ironically appropriate for trans nonsense.
        (Ignoring that a lot of people use “cars” for all vehicles, up until marketing reached outside the working class, pretty much everyone I knew, as a kid in BFN, called SUVs “trucks.” They’ve started doing this with station wagons too; I read one article where a guy was RELIGIOUSLY arguing that Outbacks are SUVs not wagons. So arbitrarily relabeling for the sake of money and petting the egos/insecurities of consumers… how unintentionally brilliant of you, James.)

      5. I had no idea who Jill Soloway was before reading those links but…wow. I am still laughing about the part in the LA Times article where she brags about fitting in with the dudes, being rich, and DISMISSING the sitter, then says “hey you probably think I sound like a really great man!” No, I think you sound like an asshole.
        There are some great comments on it though.

      6. Gendersick.
        Soloway is recovering (?) from a hideous case of the gendersicks. Her mother worked as a teacher to put her dickhead father through medical (psychiatry) school. Typical autogynephile, he hated women, considered them inferior, treated them like shit, groomed women to fund his exploits, including his secret sexual life attending crossdressing conventions where he and other dudes sat around LARPing what womanhood would be absent all the female elements. That’s gotta affect you.

      7. GallusMag, thank you for that additional explanation. I looked at some of her pictures over the years and…well, yeah, I had a feeling _something_ happened.

      8. What I find amazing about Soloway is how many of her shows even pre-Transparent had full-blown pigs in wigs as characters that the audience were apparently meant to take seriously. There was one in United States of Tara as an example. I still can’t completely figure out if she takes these men seriously. I guess her history with her father means she does?
        Sometimes I wonder if mainstreaming obvious men in drag as “women” in media (Portlandia did this as well, and I’m not talking about Fred Armisen playing female characters; they’ve had outright pigs in wigs on the show) is actually an underhanded way to wake the public up.
        I also find it hilarious that pigs in wigs are *thrilled* to put themselves front and center. They’re so desperate to publicly live their fetishes and scratch their narcissistic itches, they can’t or won’t consider that they’re freaking the normies out.

    2. @ gallus,
      “Transgender people could easily be protected under sex discrimination laws without eliminating legal sex status for women but they would have to give up the legal fiction of “changing sex”.
      True. I could care less how people dress, and I don’t even mind if people identify as transgender. This is the problem that will never go away. Males aren’t female. And, the more they try to push the ridiculous notion that women have a penis, and humans can actually change their sex, the more there will be backlash. And, demanding that any dude in a dress should be able to access women’s spaces (restrooms, women’s locker rooms, women’s homeless shelters, etc.) is not acceptable. It’s not going to fly with the majority of people.
      “By it’s nature, the Gender Recognition Act (and Gender Identity laws generally) establishes legal “sex roles”, which is exactly what laws against sex discrimination are supposed to prevent.”
      Exactly. When a male says he “identifies as a woman”, the only thing he can base that on is sex stereotypes of what society says is feminine. A non-traditional male (doesn’t dress like other men and likes to wear pink) who works in a non-traditional job (ballet dancer, child care, whatever) could always claim sex discrimination. A woman who isn’t stereotypically “feminine” and drives a truck could claim sex discrimination.

    3. “For the last year, the Department of Health and Human Services has privately argued that the term “sex” was never meant to include gender identity or even homosexuality, and that the lack of clarity allowed the Obama administration to wrongfully extend civil rights protections to people who should not have them.”
      Is there any reliable source for this? Because it sounds like their usual ploy to keep leeching off the LGB. Everytime some Wag the Dog nonsense about trans this and that comes out, TRAs start shrieking about how they’re coming for the gays next so you’d better stand by your man non-binary transfemme.

    4. I read the article this morning. As a rational, thinking person I agree with this interpretation of Title IX in the US as referring to sex only. Not that I would ever support Trump. Can’t believe I actually agree with him on something.

    5. I warned them that if they continued to alienate everyone, Trump/Bannon’s flunkies would *see they are isolated* and go in for the kill… THAT is how political activism works, and how extreme radical groups like Weatherman and Black Panthers continued to work *even while underground and on FBI’s most wanted list*: they had connections everywhere and worked *hard* to cultivate and keep them.
      Conversely, its been like watching the Keystone Kops with this crowd….burning their lefty bridges every which-way…. and unlike feminists or the groups listed above, they have been given *every possible chance and benefit of the doubt*; feted and put on a pedestal as the most oppressedest of them all…. and still, they have driven even the most diehard of us (and wasn’t I, Gallus????) far away.
      This is what happens when you alienate the old lefties who’ve been doing this forever and tell us to fuck off. Okay so we fucked off, and now it looks like they saw that you are all alone, clueless and unable to wipe your own asses. Good luck.
      The words “sitting duck” come to mind.
      I’d help you out, but you already told me to fuck off.
      Silver linings: At least there is an even chance our heath insurance premiums will go down after you have to have to finally pay for all this eugenics-crap yourselves.

      1. White male privilege notwithstanding, I don’t believe your regular run off the mill, woman-hating neckbeard alt-right incel could do something like this and not attract the attention of the media, especially in today’s age with smartphones and social media.
        There’s something else going on here.

      2. I’m not saying that some men who do these sorts of things wouldn’t be charged and tried, just that most people don’t call the obviously terroristic actions of white men terrorism.
        It makes sense, in a way, because of the history of “terrorism” as a tool for insurrection, used by those trying to topple hierarchies. White men, especially those with political power and economic privilege, sit at the top of the hierarchy in our society, so their violent actions aren’t interpreted as terrorism.
        And that’s probably also why TIMs get so much mainstream support–they’re not seen as a threat to male entitlement.

  14. Atlantic Article..
    “Against a Federal Registry of Genitals
    A report that the Trump administration plans to define gender based on the appearance of infants runs counter to developmental biology and individual privacy.”
    It appears as if we have a medical doctor who doesn’t know that disorders of sex development (difference of sex development) is not the same as transgender. Or, it’s more likely that the Atlantic went out and found some biased transgender source.
    I wish they would stop co-opting and colonizing the hell out intersex people. Just stop with all the b.s. Transgender is NOT the same as intersex. Intersex are rare genetic conditions that can be verified through genetic testing and other medical tests.
    Notice how they start the article with intersex, and then they slip in gender identity and transgender in the next paragraph. Why in the hell do they do that when they must know transgender and intersex are not the same? Disorders of sex development is sometimes called “difference of sex development”. Fausto-Sterling asserts that 1.7% of human births are intersex. … a significant fraction of the population is neither male nor female, but intersex.
    After the reader is introduced to intersex, they slip in transgender. The majority of transgender identified people have no actual intersex condition, so why do they continue to co-opt intersex. The doctor is either ignorant, or it’s a biased article intentionally conflating intersex with transgender.
    “Much is being made of the proposed policy’s relevance to the 1.4 million Americans who identify as transgender, as the Times story did, reporting that the proposal is an eye to “defining transgender out of existence” and prompted in part by “pro-transgender court decisions.” The implications go beyond this, even. There is also the scientific implausibility and fundamental impossibility of imposing such a definition. Just as it’s overly simplistic for a government to define all people based purely on chromosomes or physical appearance, many genotypic and phenotypic varieties exist outside of the proposed binary.”
    The human species is sexually dimorphic and all mammals and primates reproduce sexually. No primate can change its sex.
    How can sexual reproduction exist in mammals and primates if there are no actual males and females? Identifying people based on sex is rational. Why are humans the only mammals with a “gender identity”?
    The existence or rare intersex conditions does not mean that sexual reproduction doesn’t exist in mammals and primates. Yes, rare intersex conditions, called disorders of sex development or “difference of sex development” (1 to 2% of the population) exist, but intersex is the result of sexual reproduction. Without sexual reproduction, there would be no intersex people.
    Making some exception for intersex people is fine. Acknowledging intersex people (difference of sex development) is fine. Forcing people to believe the ridiculous notion that humans can change their sex is not based on science. It’s utter nonsense.
    This biased article intentionally leaves out a lot of information. The article states,
    “Human-rights organizations have campaigned against genital surgeries for intersex infants, and in 2017 three former U.S. surgeon generals published a report that argued, “While there is little evidence that cosmetic infant genitoplasty is necessary to reduce psychological damage, evidence does show that the surgery itself can cause severe and irreversible physical harm and emotional distress.” A policy from HHS that puts infant genitalia at the center of a person’s identity runs directly counter to this medical advice.”
    I’m glad that the good doctor knows something about history, but he is too lazy to do a little research. Yes, intersex infants were subject to horrendous medical experiments. Apparently, the doctor has no opinion on the sterilization of perfectly healthy children with GnRH analogues and cross gender hormones. Or, the practice of “top surgery” (elective mastectomies with the surgical trimming down or areolas and nipples) on teenage girls and disabled women. We are just discovering that some males who were medically transitioned at a young age, never allowed to go through puberty, have no sexual functioning. It’s a medical experiment on children, and Big Pharma and surgeons make money from sterilizing children and permanently changing healthy anatomy. And, we know that there has been a huge increase in the number of children being medically “transitioned”.
    This article starts out by introducing the reader to intersex, then jumps to transgender, and then goes back to intersex. Close to the end of the article, we are reminded of the history of surgery on intersex infants, which I agree was ghastly.
    The doctor isn’t the least bit concerned about the current transgender approved practice of sterilizing children with GnRH analogues and hormones, and creating males with no sexual functioning. The doctor says, “A policy from HHS that puts infant genitalia at the center of a person’s identity runs directly counter to this medical advice.” Again, the doctor is too lazy to do research. Males who are medically transitioned at a young age, never allowed to go through puberty, have small shrunken male genitalia. In essence, they are physically stunted. They are so physically stunted that surgeons can’t perform the most common type of SRS. Some can’t even orgasm. And, transgender activists support “gender confirmation surgery” (surgically altering healthy genitalia) on 15 and 16 year old teenagers. Yes, with the full blessing of trans activists, 16 year old males have had their genitals mutilated. Don’t talk about genitals even when trans activists are mutilating and deforming healthy genitals on teenagers.

    1. “After the reader is introduced to intersex, they slip in transgender. The majority of transgender identified people have no actual intersex condition, so why do they continue to co-opt intersex. The doctor is either ignorant, or it’s a biased article intentionally conflating intersex with transgender.”
      There’s 2 reasons: it’s a way for them to argue that sex is not as simple as male or female, (regardless of the fact for 99% of humans, it is that simple), so then they can argue segregated by sex is not an effective method. We know why intersex is a flawed argument against there being a sex bianary, but they are hoping others do not.
      Second reason: they are trying to claim being trans has genetic links due to development in the womb… how? By claiming their BRAIN is the wrong sex for their body. Yes, they are pushing the old sexist idea about M/F brains are different from each other; not because the bodies they exsist in, not because of reproduction roles, not because dysphoria is genetic, but because there’s a fundamental difference between the sexes brains, enough to make someone not M or F.
      They base it the theory that we all start female, so these males developed male everywhere but the brain. Even if it had any merit (it doesn’t) it wouldn’t explain “trans men”, or what parts of the brain are telling them they are women, or acknowledge socialization, or explain how a body can feel a different sex, when it never was that sex… (they’ve compared it to amputees feeling a limb no longer there, but thing is, amputees had that limb to begin with. The brain isn’t missing a female shape, or reproductive organs that never exsisted…)
      They’ve co-opted the struggles of several human rights campaigns; race segregation, women rights (are human rights), LGB (born that way, perverted arguments against conversion to justify transing kids), HIV slogans (your apathy is killing me), disability rights, intersex rights, etc., (I’m sure I missed some) and use them all to shut down those opposed. Again, we know better, but they count on the majority not knowing better.

      1. “…they’ve compared it to amputees feeling a limb no longer there, but thing is, amputees had that limb to begin with…”
        Phantom Limb Syndrome is a temporary, self-resolving syndrome that alleviates as brain neurons adjust to recognize the new body configuration. It isn’t something that endures throughout the lifespan.

      2. Crossdressing is not an immutable trait. These mostly men can always leave the clothes, makeup, and wigs at home. Women can’t shed their biology.
        I get so sick of dishonesty by the trans. In honesty, they aren’t a real protected class at all. They are wrapping themselves around “science” to try and give their sexual fetishes or mental disorders a biological basis so they can claim protected status all the while stepping on the rights of half the human race, women.

  15. Skylark you win, “Don’t talk about genitals even when trans activists are mutilating and deforming healthy genitals on teenagers.”
    Great post. Last line is my battle cry.
    Surgically removing healthy adolescent breasts without any evidence of disease is criminal.
    Surgically or chemically turning healthy adolescent boys into pretty castrati is criminal.
    I believed them at first, willingly swallowed their canard, “gender has nothing to do about sex”.
    Gender ID is all about sex, sex, sex. And, now targeted at our children.
    Hell no, gender has to go.

  16. Don’t want to derail this post, but this article in the Daily Mail had me very curious………
    No names mentioned, so who could it be? We already know about Sarah Brown and his formaldehyde pickled balls……….
    Lily Madigan is all about being a sweet trans-lesbian right now who is going to erase period poverty!
    Good old Mumsnet is on the ball (sorry, couldn’t resist the pun). It’s non other than Tanya Love. Who? Exactly, what has he ever done for women to get himself appointed Women’s Officer for Telford?
    Seems like his twitter has been taken down and the poor dear is recovering from mental health issues.

  17. a significant fraction of the population is neither male nor female, but intersex.

    Excellent comment, SkyLark, thanks for all your detailed explications on this. I just have one quibble, and that’s with the phrase blockquoted above. The fact is, intersex people with different chromosomal complements all are specifically male or female, though they may not (or may) be reproductively functional. Anyone with at least one Y chromosome is male, no matter how many Xes they have. XXY, for example, is a Klinefelter Syndrome male. XO is a Turner Syndrome female, XXX a “superfemale”, XYY a “supermale.”

  18. Heres the facebook event page for it
    It says its the metro and the mail they’re protesting
    “The Metro paper, run by the Daily Mail, has sparked outrage over the past week with their transphobia. This includes media coverage demonizing trans people, and in particular, trans women as well as running an ad campaign for the hate group, “Fair Play for Women”.
    There’s been an incredible level of support for the trans community, with thousands complaining about the Metro. Now we are calling on you to come out and picket the Daily Mail to show them they cannot get away with this transphobic hatred. And the Metro are far from the exception – media coverage on trans issues across the board is appalling.
    We know that these attacks on the trans community will hurt the most marginalised – trans women, working class trans people and trans people of colour – who are also the most likely to be in need of the services that such hateful campaigners seek to deny them.
    Join us to stand up for the trans community and stand against transphobia!
    Bring banners & bring friends! Be sure to take security measures such as bringing a face cover, in case of TERF/ police presence.” (bold by me)
    Why tell people to bring a face cover in case of “TERF/police presence?” If what they planned was completely peaceful, why the need to cover their faces? When Julie Bindel was blocked from entering a building, a large man wearing a black bandana covering his face was blocking her way. They don’t want to be recognized if they thump a TERF (Hyde Park incident), or catch something on fire (transwoman at Philly Pride had face covering too).

  19. They are violent extremists and they should have been arrested.Billy Bob at the front with the Joe Dirt mullet is a prime example of these neanderthals.

  20. So, did the police find whoever is responsible for this, yet?
    Because there’s hardly anything else about this on the web, aside from gaystarnews take on this; and I find it to be kind of weird for an lot of news agencies to ignore an obvious act of terrorism.

    1. There could be a couple of factors at play. First, the newspapers may have a policy against allowing hostile players to force coverage of their criticism of the paper(s). After all, it could conceivably encourage further targeted actions against the press by multiple and varied disgruntled individuals and groups. Second, the protest was scheduled for Friday evening. Friday afternoon is traditionally a time for public relations experts to release information that they do not want to receive media coverage because newspapers traditionally take Friday evening off. Releasing information late on a Friday is a good way to avoid news coverage. In fact, employees of The Metro don’t even go into the office on Fridays. Friday afternoon/evening is the worst possible time to seek news coverage of anything.

      1. Well, I guess that your first point explains why gaystarnews kept saying that the protesters “allegedly” threw smoke bombs in there, since they probably don’t want their office to be an recurring target of vandalism or ground zero of an riot.
        And the Friday bit means that the activists were attacking innocent people who happened to be working there, minding their own business.
        So, what happened to the UK’s stance against terroris? Because going by this, it fits the definition; almost like the period when people where detonating bombs in public a few years ago.

      2. They certainly did pick the wrong day to protest. The press and most of the UK was much more interested in the People’s Vote March on Saturday……..700,000 protesting Brexit
        Although I suspect that is how they met up…..probably in London for the march on Saturday and had a few smoke bombs they couldn’t wait to set off.

      1. @anon male–I’ve had the exact same reaction when hearing TIMs whine about the sexist treatment they have to put up with if they pass–how men see them as objects, talk over them, don’t take them seriously, etc. Had they not been paying attention?
        Some trans people seem to have such a strong fantasy of what life will be like as the opposite sex that they ignore all material evidence, and it’s shameful that they’re not given the sort of counseling that would strip them of their illusions–unless, maybe, clinicians are finding those illusions profitable?

      2. “For much of his life, transitioning had not seemed necessary to McBee, who regards the “born in the wrong body” narrative as a reductive media trope, however true it might be for some people. But then, one night in Oakland, California, 29-year-old McBee was forced to the ground by an armed mugger. His partner at the time, Parker, was with him at the time, but McBee was the one at the end of the gun. “I was very boyish and masculine, so I looked like a man,” he recalls. “I don’t think he realised I wasn’t a man until I spoke, and then he went off and shot these two other guys, killing one.” McBee believed he’d been saved because his voice betrayed him, a reprieve that represented, paradoxically, a failure. “I was liberated by this thing about me that felt false,” he says. “It saved me, but it also made me aware that it wasn’t who I was. It was really primal. That was the moment I thought: ‘I need to transition.’”
        Until he began taking testosterone, McBee didn’t have much empathy for men – his own stepfather had abused him from the age of four to nine, and almost all the women he knew had been sexually assaulted, coerced into sex, or raped. What were the challenges for men compared with those for women? He remembered the girl at high school who told him he was like a guy, only better. But he hadn’t realised just how much our notions of gender influence the way we move through the world, or how it alters the way the world moves through us.”
        Dur. Okay. It’s so embarrassing when violent men don’t kill you because they perceive you as a member of the sex class less likely to be a violent threat. How humiliating! Or something. How emasculating!

      3. More incoherent word-salad from Thomas Page McBee.

        People who deny, minimize, or obfuscate the sex-based violence, objectification, dehumanization and oppression of females committed by males will never be capable of coherent analysis.
        What exactly is McBee saying here?
        -Trans people who can plausibly “pass” as the other sex are more valued as public figures.
        -Some of them are able to make a glamorous career of their passibility.
        -Public interest in the spectacle of individuals who can conditionally pass as the other sex doesn’t result in the belief that those people are actually the other sex.
        -Transgender adherents have incredible media visibility and have made astonishing gains in the political recognition of gender ideology.
        -People who identify as transgender have received rapid social acceptance.
        -The resurgence of feminism (“women calling themselves feminists”) and the #MeToo movement has complicated the transgender narrative by objecting to sex-based violence and oppression including the sex stereotypes (gender) that transgender people identify with.
        -Criticism of sex stereotypes/gender is much more “painful” when emanating from informed critics, especially women.
        -Noticing the sex stereotypes inherent in transgender identification is bad because identification with sex stereotypes is inborn and innate and something non-believers could never understand.
        Or something.

      4. @GM – oddly enough, there has been another trans McBee in the news lately- Richard aka “Unique Taylor”, was given a sympathetic feature article in the Colorado Independent in 2014:
        And now back in prison for an aggravated robbery charge, he jailhouse-married a female inmate on trial for killing her boyfriend. That case is getting a lot of (sexist) coverage, with the accused being painted as a femme-fatale type.
        McBee/Taylor is getting a lot of press out of it, and likely loving every minute of it.

    1. But gee….the brigade says this does not happen. It is the evil het or CIS population that engages in this. It is evil phobic students and the administration that does this. BULLSHIT.
      If it is not the rude language used by quite a few…age irrelevant….if something does not go their way in public, it is violence to advance their twisted agenda. And when caught, it is deny, deny, deny.
      Worse still…there are those of color in the brigade who say this does not happen and that THEY are the actual victims of actions, like what is in the video. All one needs to do is read this site…let alone others… see that the pattern of criminality, is more centered in the brigade enacting same towards others. Yes, there are those cases where there is bullying towards brigade members, but those are in the minority [pun not intended] when the records are reviewed.

    2. Watching this video of a violent MAN should frighten all women. He has the strength of a man, and he kicks and punches people in the head while they are on the ground trying to defend themselves. Women, do you want this man sharing a restroom with your daughter? Do you want this violent man in a women’s homeless shelter? Do you think he should be sent to a women’s jail?

Comments are closed.