TERF Co-host of the SpeakEasy Sisters spaces https://xitter.cf/t.co/GdzVi75zh2

Australia
Joined August 2019
Against the basic tenets of Trans Ideology that: - - a man becomes a woman when he claims he is a woman, and - that his subjective 'gender identity' should override sex in institutions, medicine, education, and law, and - that there should be legal protections that treat gender identity as equivalent to or superior to sex, consider the following 10 points: - 1. Biological sex is binary, dimorphic, and immutable in humans; gender identity is a subjective feeling that is changeable - not a material equivalent. a) Sex in all mammals, including humans, is defined by the type of gametes an organism is organised to produce (small or large). b) Human sex is binary for reproductive purposes, with disorders of sexual development being rare developmental variations, not a spectrum that erases the categories. c) No reliable evidence shows a “female brain in a male body” (or vice-versa). d) Treating self-declared gender identity as legally and socially equivalent to sex renders objective reality secondary to unfalsifiable feelings and creates unresolvable conflicts with sex-based rights.⁠ 2. The evidence base for medical transition in minors is weak to non-existent, as found by the Cass Review (among others). The independent Cass Review (NHS England, 2024) concluded that gender medicine for youth rests on “remarkably weak evidence.” Systematic evidence reviews found no high-quality studies supporting puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones for gender dysphoria outcomes, mental health, or suicide prevention and there is consistent moderate-quality evidence of risks to bone density and height, plus unknowns around cognitive/psychosexual development and fertility. Puberty blockers do not “buy time to think”, and progression to cross-sex hormones is extremely high. Most international guidelines for 'gender transition care' have been rated low quality or non-independent.⁠ 3. Long-term data show elevated suicide and psychiatric morbidity after surgical transition. The Swedish population-based cohort study (Dhejne et al., 2011) of 324 individuals who underwent sex-reassignment surgery found post-surgery mortality nearly 3 times higher than matched controls, and (perhaps most shockingly considering the claims of TRAs) suicide death rates were approximately 19 times higher. Psychiatric inpatient care and suicide attempts were also substantially elevated. The authors noted that surgery may alleviate dysphoria, but it does not resolve underlying psychiatric risk, and argue for better mental health care rather than treating surgery as curative.⁠ 4. Childhood gender dysphoria has high natural desistance rates, and many of those children when checked as adolescent no longer meet the diagnostic criteria a few years later. Older clinic-based studies of pre-pubertal children found roughly 60–90% desistance by adulthood without medical intervention (with high rates of eventual same-sex attraction among those who desisted). A 2024 analysis of German insurance data covering millions of insured persons found that after five years, only approximately 36% of youth with a gender-identity-related diagnosis still carried it, with the lowest persistence rate among adolescent females. Social transition, on the other hand appears to lead to higher persistence with a 'gender identity', which strongly suggests that 'trans' affirmation turns what is likely to be a temporary stress into a more fixed one.⁠ 5. The rapid rise in adolescent-onset cases (especially in girls) tracks with social contagion rather than a fixed and novel innate identity. Referrals have shifted dramatically from predominantly early-onset boys to adolescent girls, often with no childhood history. This happens most often in peer clusters, and correlated with social media exposure. Lisa Littman’s 2018 parent-report study described “rapid-onset gender dysphoria,” with high rates of pre-existing mental health issues, trauma, and friend-group or online influences. This pattern differs from classic gender dysphoria and aligns with other social-contagion phenomena (e.g., eating disorders, self-harm clusters). 6. Male puberty confers large, irreversible athletic advantages. Male puberty produces 10–30%+ advantages in strength, speed, power, and aerobic capacity depending on the sport (larger in upper-body and explosive events). Studies of men who claim they are women after testosterone suppression show incomplete reversal of these advantages even after 1–3 years, proving residual male advantages remain substantial relative to females. Men (however they identify) in women's sport undermines the rationale for sex-segregated sports and creates fairness and safety problems for female competitors. Pre-pubertal boys and girls are far closer in performance, but there are still issues of safety, opportunity, enjoyment and a potential lifetime interest in sporting excellence to be considered. 7. Self-identification policies compromise women’s single-sex spaces and undermine safety. Male-pattern strength and criminality persist regardless of identity. UK Ministry of Justice data and case reports (e.g., Karen White) show elevated rates of sexual offending among male prisoners who identify themselves as women, with documented sexual assaults after transfer into women’s prisons. Similar incidents have occurred in the US and elsewhere. Women’s prisons, shelters, changing rooms, and sports exist because of average sex differences in strength, aggression, and victimization patterns; self-ID erodes the ability to maintain those boundaries.⁠ 8. Gender dysphoria shows high comorbidity with autism, trauma, and other mental health conditions, suggesting it is often secondary. Meta-analyses find autism spectrum diagnoses or traits several times more common in gender-dysphoric populations (approximately 11% formal ASD diagnoses in one pooled estimate, with even higher trait rates). Elevated rates of anxiety, depression, trauma, and same-sex attraction (especially historically among male-onset cases) are also documented. Affirmative care models that treat the dysphoria as the primary issue risk missing or medicalizing underlying neurodevelopmental or psychiatric condition. 9. Irreversible interventions on minors raise serious consent and ethical problems given the evidence gaps. Puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries can produce sterility, sexual dysfunction, and other permanent effects. Adolescents have incomplete neurological maturity for long-term decision-making, and the evidence that these interventions improve long-term mental health or reduce suicide is weak. The Cass Review and related European policy shifts (NHS England restrictions, similar moves in Sweden, Finland, Norway) reflect growing recognition that the Dutch protocol was extrapolated beyond its original narrow criteria and low-quality evidence base. WPATH internal documents and guideline processes have also been criticized for activist influence over evidence standards. 10. Legal protection of gender identity systematically conflicts with sex-based rights, free speech, and parental authority. Self-ID regimes and gender-identity discrimination laws create practical and legal conflicts with women’s sports, prisons, shelters, and facilities (as recognized in the UK Supreme Court’s 2025 biological-sex interpretation of the Equality Act and subsequent EHRC guidance). Compelled speech (pronouns), institutional capture, and social penalties for dissent suppress open scientific debate. Parental rights are sidelined when schools or clinics affirm without consent or evidence of benefit. These protections treat an unfalsifiable internal state as overriding material sex, producing conflict, family alienation, ongoing stress and hang-ups about sex, and even legal action against concerned parents. All the points (1-10) above depend on clinical data, systematic reviews, long-term cohort studies, and observed policy outcomes, whereas counterarguments typically emphasize short-term satisfaction surveys, suicide-risk claims based on weak or uncontrolled data, and the assertion that affirmation is the only ethical path. The irreversible nature of interventions for minors and the material and devastating consequences for sex-based rights, services and mitigations is unconscionable. But the supremacy of 'Trans' and 'Gender-Identity" continues to be imposed on unwilling societies, and we are all being forced under threats of violence, legal consequences, isolation, job loss and more to go along with it. It must come to an end. It must be rooted out of all laws and political campaigns. Our institutions must be forced to rid themselves entirely of trans and gender-identity DEI policies and procedures. It is not normal to prioritise an obvious and dangerous lie over objective and clear truths. No man is a woman. No human is in the wrong body. Recognising and accounting for sex is the only chance human societies have to function as fairly and safely as possible. #RepealTheGillardAmendments
2
8
2
21
3,492
Janet Inglis retweeted
I don’t think the coaching helped. 🤷🏻‍♀️ It’s still state sanctioned perversion.
9
27
1
81
1,406
Janet Inglis retweeted
Replying to @ThatAussieWoman
She's right to worry about being denied treatment. Here in the US, a 60-year-old woman suffering from breast cancer was denied treatment for objecting to a transgender flag displayed in the oncology waiting area. fox11online.com/news/nation-…
3
27
614
Janet Inglis retweeted
Any man can take drugs that stimulate a discharge from his nipples. Nothing about that means an infant should be encouraged to suck on his nipples. Not even if he claims he's a woman.
2
3
18
445
Janet Inglis retweeted
Replying to @ThatAussieWoman
Welp, he chose the right country to be able to practice his AGP fetish against unwilling participants. Australia puts predatory men's demands above women's rights.
2
8
281
Janet Inglis retweeted
Replying to @ThatAussieWoman
This happened to a friend of mine but the "woman" was a male gynaecologist. This is coercive control by both the male doctor and the medical practice.
1
3
28
477
Janet Inglis retweeted
Replying to @ThatAussieWoman
Smirk
1
4
93
PREMIERING NOV 5th The debate we’re not supposed to have! whodecidesfilm.com #Auspol #WhoDecidesFilm
19
270
27
773
77,229
Janet Inglis retweeted
This is a documentary about gender ideology in Australia. From the perspective of people who are gender critical, many of whom have suffered dire consequences for speaking up. It should be fascinating.
PREMIERING NOV 5th The debate we’re not supposed to have! whodecidesfilm.com #Auspol #WhoDecidesFilm
10
145
2
526
7,118
Any man can take drugs that stimulate a discharge from his nipples. Nothing about that means an infant should be encouraged to suck on his nipples. Not even if he claims he's a woman.
2
3
18
445
Janet Inglis retweeted
Not all women are mothers or can breastfeed. But ONLY women can be mothers and breastfeed.
18
140
5
1,471
8,124
Janet Inglis retweeted
Legal scholar & podcast host Melissa Murray tries to mock West Virginia’s brief defending female-only sports by reading it in a sarcastic tone. Instead, she accidentally highlights just how solid the case really is. Or do I think that just b/c I’m no professor of law at NYU?
60
53
11
584
36,020
Janet Inglis retweeted
New from me Link ⏬
13
37
8
217
51,076
Janet Inglis retweeted
Glenna did an unusual thing that people typically don't do: she checked a citation in a law review article to see whether the citation said what the authors claimed it did. She found that the citation said the opposite of what the authors claimed it did. She then asked the editor of the law review for a correction. The editor did not reply to the request. She then asked the authors for comment on the incorrect citation. The authors acknowledged that the citation was erroneous and regretted the error. The authors then insisted that the citation did not matter to their actual argument because nothing in their argument depended on the citation being right. Glenna then wrote a post explaining why the erroneous citation was in fact important to their actual argument, and why the erroneous citation also exposed a wider ignorance of the subject on which the authors were writing. (She claims, convincingly, that it's important to know what sex is in order to understand what sex discrimination is, and that being able to define what sex is is an inextricable aspect of knowing what sex is.) I consulted with some lawyer friends in a chat group who helpfully explained to me that no one ever reads footnotes, no one checks the underlying references, and no one cares if they are correct or not because law review articles like the one Murray and Shaw published are merely political advocacy masquerading as legal scholarship that no one reads, and therefore not to expect the Supreme Court Review to issue a correction for a citation that the authors are on the record admitting was erroneous. Do I have all that right, @williambaude?
New from me Link ⏬
28
224
7
1,269
32,157
Janet Inglis retweeted
Australia’s national regulator of health practitioners is refusing to identify which clinical guidelines it uses to detect misinformation and distinguish between truth and falsity in the contested domain of gender medicine. Doctors have been warned by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) and the Medical Board that they may face disciplinary action if their social media posts spread “false or misleading information”. After an Ahpra investigation, the Board can refer doctors to a tribunal with the power to cancel their registration. In one instance, the Board used its emergency powers to suspend a primary care doctor for his social media use, including one post which the board judged harmful because it was “likely to arouse contempt towards practitioners enabling gender-affirming care”. Link to full article below ...
4
22
59
1,119
Janet Inglis retweeted
Get gender out of our legislation. Legislate positive rights for women and children. Federally and in all states and territories. It must be removed. Women and children must be protected. That our legislators are only now waking up to the harms being done to women and children in the dangerous cause of trans after being warned of exactly this for decades is disgraceful! They caused this. They gave legal sanction to the worst of men to perpetrate their abuse on the most vulnerable right across this country. And they discounted the many many women who tried to warn them. They have allowed our courts to interpret their really awful legislation in the most extreme way possible. They stood by while women desperately tried to get them to see exactly what they were ignoring. It's disgraceful that our legislators have to see the harms perpetrated on vulnerable women and children - and yes, men - before they will even stir themselves to take notice. Babies. Schoolchildren Women in prison Men in the grip of mental disorders Rape victims Women living with abusers We have been telling you for decades. Stop talking about it and take action. This is not a culture war. It is a political and legal assault on the rights, safety and dignity of the most vulnerable people in Australia. And you are all complicit.
Tonight, Sex Discrimination Commissioner Dr Anna Cody confirmed that biological men who induce lactation are protected under breastfeeding discrimination laws. This is nothing more than State sanctioned perversion. A biological man cannot breast feed. It’s time to end this madness and put the interests of children first.
1
15
57
626
Janet Inglis retweeted
It is so insane. The only way that think they can pull off the lie that humans can change sex is to change the language and insist we use it. They go to extraordinary lengths to physically appear like the opposite sex and yet no one is fooled. All of this to satisfy their fetish.
1
5
75
Replying to @ThatAussieWoman
Theodore "Beth/Lis" Upton said under oath during Sandie Peggie's tribunal that if a patient asked for a female doctor he would treat them. He also said that sex was a "dogwhistle". I've had the pleasure of briefly meeting Sandie - a wonderful woman.
1
4
31
708
Janet Inglis retweeted
Replying to @ThatAussieWoman
1
5
57
Last night SDC Anna Cody told Senate Estimates breastfeeding protections for women extend to “induced lactation in a biological male”. That’s despite her telling a previous hearing she didn’t understand the term “biological male”. theaustralian.com.au/nation/…
23
61
4
253
4,077
Janet Inglis retweeted
Consider this scenario... You are a woman in Australia. You call a doctor's surgery for an appointment and request a woman doctor. The person making the appointment assures you your doctor will be a woman. The day of the appointment finally arrives - it can take weeks for an appointment in many areas of Australia - and you sign in at the desk when you get there, then take a seat and wait. Half an hour later a man pretending to be a woman calls your name and leads you to an empty consultation room. You follow because you assume this is not the Doctor, but an assistant at the surgery - because you've been told you will be seeing a woman doctor. He lets you into the room first, then comes in after you and closes the door behind him. It's only the 2 of you in there, and that's when you realise he's the woman doctor assigned to see you. What do you do?
Can a woman who only discovers the doctor intending to treat her is a mentally unstable man pretending to be a woman when she is first confronted by him at her hospital beside, or when she walks into his surgery, truly give consent to be treated by him when the consequences are that she may not be treated at all? And that she will likely be marked out as a 'transphobic bigot' for refusing his treatment? Being told you will be treated by a doctor called 'Elizabeth' only to have a man doing his best approximation of 'woman' walk in to treat you removes a woman's ability to give informed consent.
36
38
1
213
6,394