#maya forstater | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

pronoun-fucker · 2 years

Text

A researcher who lost her job at a thinktank after tweeting that transgender women could not change their biological sex has won her claim that she was unfairly discriminated against because of her gender-critical beliefs.

Maya Forstater suffered direct discrimination when the Centre for Global Development (CGD), where she was a visiting fellow, did not renew her contract or fellowship, an employment tribunal found on Wednesday.

The tribunal also ruled that Forstater, the executive director of Sex Matters, suffered victimisation with respect to the removal of her profile from CGD’s website.

Its decision comes after Forstater successfully brought a test case to establish that gender-critical views are a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act. She initially lost that case at an employment tribunal in 2019 but won a landmark decision on appeal last year, with the judge stressing that while gender-critical views might be “profoundly offensive and even distressing to many others … they are beliefs that are and must be tolerated in a pluralist society”.

The case was then sent back to the tribunal to decide whether Forstater’s claim had been proved on the facts. It upheld two complaints of direct discrimination and one of victimisation. Two other complaints of direct discrimination and one of victimisation were unsuccessful.

The judgment stated: “Absent an explanation from the respondents, the facts are such that the tribunal could properly conclude that the tweets were a substantial part of the reason why Ms Forstater was not offered employment; and the respondent’s evidence, far from proving the contrary, supports the finding that they were …

“We reminded ourselves that it would be an error to treat a mere statement of Ms Forstater’s protected belief as inherently unreasonable or inappropriate.”

The tribunal examined a number of tweets by Forstater, including tweets in which she drew an analogy between self-identifying trans women and Rachel Dolezal, a white American woman who misrepresented herself as black, and another in which she said: “A man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material reality.” It concluded that the tweets asserted her gender-critical beliefs.

It said the same of one that described self-identification as a woman as “a feeling in their head”, rejecting the suggestion that it equated self-identification with mental illness.

The tribunal also considered tweets in which Forstater said she was surprised people could say they believed that males could be women, and that they are “tying themselves in knots”.

It said they were “fairly mild examples” of mockery, adding: “Mocking or satirising the opposing view is part of the common currency of debate.”

The three-member panel, led by the employment judge Andrew Glennie, said a description of a Credit Suisse executive, Pips Bunce, who identified as a woman for part of the week, as a “part-time cross dresser” could have been put in “more moderate terms”.

But two of the three panel members said it “did not amount to an objectionable or inappropriate manifestation of Ms Forstater’s belief, given the context of a debate on a matter of public interest; the fact that Pips Bunce had put themself forward in public as a person who is gender fluid and who dresses sometimes as a woman and sometimes as a man”.

Responding to the decision, Forstater said: “My case matters for everyone who believes in the importance of truth and free speech. We are all free to believe whatever we wish. What we are not free to do is compel others to believe the same thing, to silence those who disagree with us or to force others to deny reality.”

She also thanked JK Rowling for standing by her. The Harry Potter author tweeted: “Every woman who’s been harassed, silenced, bullied or lost employment because of her gender critical beliefs is freer and safer today, thanks to the warrior that is @MForstater.”

Stonewall, the LGBTQ+ campaign group, said: “Today’s judgment … does not change the reality of trans people’s workplace protection. No one has the right to discriminate against, or harass, trans people simply because they disagree with their existence and participation in society.”

Amanda Glassman, chief executive of CGD, said: “We are reviewing today’s judgment, which found in favour of Ms Forstater on some claims, and dismissed others. CGD’s primary aim has always been to uphold our values and maintain a workplace and an environment that is welcoming, safe, and inclusive to all, including trans people.”

Remedies will be determined at a later date.

Link | Archived Link

#radical feminism #gender critical #transgender #trans activism #Maya Forstater

490 notes · View notes

coochiequeens · 11 months

Text

Tide is turning.

#UK #sex Matters #maya forstater #Save Women’s Sports Saturday #Only less than a quarter of British people think biological men should be allowed in women’s sports #Equality Act

29 notes · View notes

professorbussywinkle · 9 months

Text

I have to weigh in on the TERF situation you guys and remind everyone in the queer community that TERFS are not the be all end all villains of trans liberation

JK Rowling and Maya Forstater and Posie Parker are not the final bosses of transphobia for gods sake

Gender criticals are simply useful idiots who put a concerned female face at the forefront of reactionary and transgressive politics, that are predominantly organized, legitimized, and implemented by Right Wing Men

Ultimately it will be Right Wing Men, that will put gender critical theory, into brutal practice

Its also good to be aware, that there's a prominent misogynistic tendency in popular culture to choose a proper "female villain" when we try to explain who the "proper" person is who we should attack and feel justified attacking

Back in the 1970's it was Anita Bryant and Phyllis Schlafly

In 2023 it's JK Rowling and Posie Parker

These women are basically all dollar store Eva Braun's and they aren't actually the ones that are gonna fuck our world and communities up, like come on now guys...

focus...

18 notes · View notes

the-land-of-women · 10 months

Text

#maya forstater #radfem safe #gender critical

18 notes · View notes

boricuacherry-blog · 1 year

Text

Of course I'm not saying all trans people are predators. I'm a straight female and I know not all men are predators. But I also know that all a predator wants is access, and to open the doors of changing rooms, rape centers, domestic violence centers- to open the door to any man who says, 'I am a woman, I have a right to be here,' It will endanger women and girls. It's with no pleasure that I say this has happened. Karen White, a man in England, used a trans persona to violently attack and rape women in a female jail. He had not physically transitioned. Predators can and will exploit any loophole that they can. And for someone growing up during the rise of British feminism, TERF sounds like just another way to silence women. People like to say it's not 'up for debate,' the stock phrase, 'no debate.' That alarms me. I can't think of anything more authoritarian than, 'no debate.' In fact, that is the argument of the fundamentalists: 'I am righteous, I don't have to explain my righteousness. And I am entitled, therefore, to bully you, to harass you, to silence you, to take away your livelihood, all the way to attacking you. Like when Dr. Erica Anderson, a trans clinical psychologist, voiced her criticism and was herself shut down, or Maya Forstater, a researcher who was fired because of her critical thoughts on the issue. Because of things like this, people are terrified of speaking up. I joined the public conversation because I saw women being shut down. It seemed there was always a way to shut down womens' voices. There are tons of women who are forced to not speak because they literally won't make rent. I wanted to speak earlier than I did, but there were women begging me not to, as they saw what happened to other public figures. But I feel a sense of moral obligation to speak, especially for the women who don't have the insulation I am privileged to have. The attempt to intimidate and silence me is meant to serve as a warning to other women. I've written a whole series of books that had a central theme about bullying behavior and how authoritarianism is of one of the worst social ills perpetuated on people. And I feel protective of those people. If there is one thing I stand against more than any other, in my books and in my life, it's authoritarianism - and that cuts through all political persuasians.

-JK Rowling

#jk rowling #quote #censorship #authoritarianism #authoritarian #rights #harry potter #lgbt #lgtbq #maya forstater #karen white #dr. erica anderson

17 notes · View notes

cisthoughtcrime · 2 years

Text

#maya forstater #yes!

128 notes · View notes

bitterkarella · 8 months

Text

Midnight Pals: Back in the Fold

[mysterious circle of robed figures] JK Rowling: hello children Rowling: sssay hello to graham lineham Linehan [wearing tinfoil hat]: freemasons run the country Jesse Singal: but mommy Rowling: i know we were all pretending he didn't exisst for a while Rowling: that changes now

Rowling: sssee hiss extreme levelsss of divorcednesss usssed to be a liability to our hate movement Rowling: but now that being extremely divorced hassss gone mainssstream Rowling: he'sss an asssset! Elon Musk: eyyy you know da jews, they maka my wife leave me

Rowling: to think that only a few yearsss ago, cccyberssstalking, death threatsss and appearing drunk on live televisssion were consssidered gouache Rowling: but today, there'sss no bottom! Rowling: and itsss all thankss to your tirelesssss effortsss! Rowling: well done, graham!

Linehan: don't worry, i have a new plan against the trans Rowling: yesss? Linehan: i'm going to rally father ted fans Linehan: see, if you liked a sit com back in the 90s, then you're obligated to join my hate movement Linehan: there's no better way to connect with today's youth

Linehan: Father Ted fans will flock to my aid Linehan: there's no one more likely to be on board with hating queers than someone who liked a comedy that made fun of catholicism

Linehan: after all, think of the success that you had turning all your harry potter fans into loyal terfs Rowling: uhhhh Linehan: i mean, they did all fall in line right? Rowling: Rowling: Rowling:

Rowling: look, i don't need harry potter fansss Rowling: i have new fanss Rowling: fanss of me Rowling: the adoration of the world'sss children meansss nothing to me compared to the adoration of 12 mumsssnet possstersss named rossemary

Rowling: i might have given up the love of the world'ss children but look what i gained Maya Forstater: i'm gonna get that cartoon alien one of these days, i promise dark lord!! just watch! Julie Bindel: [red tape across mouth] mmm Rowling: yeah i Rowling: i really gained a lot

Allison Bailey: [sweating, desperately clutching briefcase] i won't drop it... i won't drop it Tatsuya Ishida: i'm drawing communist lesbian joe biden with a huge dick Elon Musk: mama mia dissa post issa banned for not being racist! oh!! Rowling: yeah Rowling: really gained a lot

#midnight pals #the midnight society #midnight society #jk rowling #graham linehan #julie bindel #jesse singal #elon musk #allison bailey #maya forstater #tatsuya ishida

347 notes · View notes

mighty-meerkat · 2 years

Text

maya forstater when she realises that a genderfluid alien has been teaching british kids about science, history and sociology for nearly sixty years:

#tala the storyteller #terf bullshit #doctor who #maya forstater #anti-terf #uk politics #marginally

39 notes · View notes

alwaysahiccupandastrid · 2 years

Text

There is… a lot to unpack about this. Just a reminder that this is someone JK Rowling regularly defends and supports.

First of all, the implication that the father bear reading to a baby bear is unusual, that mostly mothers read to their kids… I’m calling bullshit on that. If you think for one second that fathers don’t read to kids, you’re a fucking moron. My dad read to me and my little sister more than my mum did, and when we stayed with my paternal grandparents, it was my granddad who told my sister pony stories to help her sleep after my nan tucked us in. That’s not to say my mum and nans weren’t nurturing, but saying it’s weird for men to spend time with their children or read to them is flatout stupidity.

And then there’s this tantrum over a fictional mascot that’s an alien… why is she so concerned about what gender this alien is? Why is she so obsessed about how does it reproduce??? TERFs talk a big game about how they’re not the ones obsessed with genitals and that they’re concerned that the “trans agenda” sexualises kids, but then they’re the ones debating over how does a fictional reading mascot reproduce.

Newsflash: kids don’t care! Kids don’t think about that for one second! The four year olds I work with, their understanding is literally “baby came out of mummy’s tummy”, they’re not thinking about private parts or how do parents reproduce! Even when they play with baby dolls and strip them to change their fake nappies, they don’t give a bit of notice! Because they’re innocent and literally don’t give a shit!

I just find it so ironic that a male transphobe yesterday was threatening to find out my name/workplace so they could report me as a “safeguarding concern”, meanwhile these freaks are out here obsessing over alien genitals and reproduction.

#fucking yikes #anti terf #anti transphobes #anti radfem #maya forstater

26 notes · View notes

fuckyeahilike · 8 months

Text

MATT OSBORNE

AUG 9, 2023

After conferring with colleagues and the LGB United board, I am pleased to announce that The Distance is now offering a £1 million prize for this elusive citation. We are naming it for Steve Wardlaw.

We say that the much-ballyhooed quote does not exist.

We contend that Mr. Wardlaw, and the Dunning-Kruger chorus of progress flag-waving critics of Rowling who attribute “anti-trans” views to her perfectly reasonable statements, are all telling on themselves.

Rowling’s views are decidedly pro-woman. If pro-woman is “anti-trans,” then Mr. Wardlaw, and everyone ‘pro-trans,’ is anti-woman.

To win the Steve Wardlaw Prize™, an entrant must demonstrate that the cited statement by J.K. Rowling does not involve a rights conflict. That is, the cited statement must materially detract from the human rights of ‘transgender people’ without simultaneously arguing for the rights of another group, such as women, children, or people with faith traditions.

For example, Rowling has funded a rape crisis shelter for women in Scotland. Males are simply not allowed there, no matter how they ‘identify,’ because (Rowling argues) women have a right to heal from sexual trauma in a place that is physically free of males. Wardlaw is free to argue otherwise, but Rowling’s statements about it are clearly referring to a conflict of rights and therefore do not qualify for the prize.

Here are some fictional statements that would absolutely qualify for the £1 million Steve Wardlaw Prize™. To our knowledge, Rowling has not uttered anything like them. Which is ironic, since all of these things have actually been said about, or actually done to, people deemed guilty of transgender-related wrongthink:

‘Trans people are inherently dangerous to other people’

‘Trans people should be denied health care or other services’

‘Trans people should not be allowed to have bank accounts’

‘Trans people should not be free to speak their views in public’

‘Trans people should be fired from their jobs, have limited opportunities’

Rowling has discussed her views at length in a recent podcast. She has written an essay on her website. She has tweeted about her views and unlike Mr. Wardlaw, Rowling has never had to delete a tweet over factual inaccuracies. With such a wealth of sources, someone ought to be able to locate just one J.K. Rowling quote on the above lines, but no one has succeeded.

One proviso: we are not taking bets on the future, here. Rowling has been accused of making these sorts of statements already. If anyone can find Rowling saying anything like the above prior to the date of this post, they can claim the £1 million Steve Wardlaw Prize™ by contacting us. All entries are subject to an authentication process commensurate with findings of fact according to the laws of the United States, because that is where we live.

As mentioned at the beginning, Wardlaw was reacting to a piece by Hadley Freeman about an interview that she did not get to do. Sting, the musician, apparently wanted a different interviewer, since Freeman’s views are unacceptably TERFy.

Wardlaw thinks that this is fine. He thinks that women should be punished for their opinions. He does not realize yet that he and Sting are the ones completely out of step with broader public opinion. He does not think of himself as a woman-hater.

In his mind, Maya Forstater is guilty of harassing colleagues at work simply by having her unacceptable views. She did not have to voice them aloud in her workplace to be held responsible for them at work. Just having them was a crime.

Of course, British employment law begs to differ: the Forstater decision found that her opinions are “worthy of respect in a democratic society” and awarded her compensation. Her precedent is already empowering critics of gender ideology to push back all across the UK. Employers, services, and police departments have all exposed themselves to damage claims by following the fashion of the times and the bad advice of Stonewall.

J.K. Rowling was right. Maya Forstater was right. Hadley Freeman was right. Steve Wardlaw hates that they were right. He hates, hates, HATES them all for being right. He hates them so much that he has earned the right to have his name on this prize.

The £1 million Steve Wardlaw Prize™ is waiting.

#transgenderism #misogyny #feminism #jk rowling #hadley freeman #sting #maya forstater #pinned #lgb #lgb united #matt osborne #steve wardlaw

3 notes · View notes

homosexuhauls · 1 year

Text

On Gender-critical disputes - Maya Forstater

LINK

Helen Joyce comes up with really good allegories and mental models at the rate of about one a week. But the one that I keep coming back to is one she told me the first time I met her, when I was still scrambling to keep my job at CGD, and trying to understand how it was that my smart and normally convivial colleagues had succumbed to repeating and enforcing irrational, circular nonsense.

1=0

Helen (a mathematician by training) said that pretending that human beings can change sex is like saying 1=0, and that the rules and laws we use for sense-making and decision-making are like a series of interconnected equations. When the 1=0 untruth proliferates through them it breaks things: single-sex becomes mixed-sex, fair becomes unfair, truth becomes lie. It works like kryptonite on safeguards, and causes organisations to operate in direct opposition to their purpose. People who need or want to remain inside those institutions create layers of argument (which may be impenetrable even to themselves) in order to protect the untruth and avoid being cast out.

On the sidelines of FiLiA in October, Helen and I had a long conversation with Jane Clare Jones about our respective positions in the internecine feminist wars.

I’m a feminist in the Rebecca West sense. I don’t claim to know precisely what feminism is; “I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat, or a prostitute.” I subscribe to the radical notion that women are full human beings, but I don’t subscribe to radical feminism, because I think it’s fundamentally wrong about human nature. Still, I am happy to work with people with whom I disagree where we have common goals.

I have co-founded a human-rights organisation, and I think that the human-rights framework is the way to resolve the question of how society should treat people who identify as transgender (respect their basic human rights and liberties, but don’t respect their fantasy).

Pretending that 1=0 harms everyone’s human rights. It harms women and girls (and, as Julie Bindel points out, it hurts the most powerless women and girls first and hardest), but also parents and children, religious people, people who care about truth and people who care about science. Ultimately, it harms anyone who wants to be able to do their job with integrity, and the people who depend on institutions acting with integrity (which is everyone, but again the least powerful most of all).

So I will talk with everyone who cares about this truth, and who is not seeking to destroy basic human rights (the principle of being “worthy of respect in a democratic society”).

Like most ordinary women in this fight, I think that Woman’s Place UK has done an amazing job in holding indoor events and articulating left-wing arguments, and I think that Standing for Women does an amazing job in holding outdoor events where any woman can speak. The cross-party working with parliamentarians by political activists of all stripes is also crucial.

In our long discussion with Jane in Cardiff, I encouraged her to take her beef with those she disagrees with off Twitter and to write it in long-form, focusing on the principles rather than the interpersonal conflicts and hurts. She and her colleagues at Radical Notion have had a go at that this month.

https://theradicalnotion.org/gender-critical-disputes/

The essays and articles are long and winding (some of the footnotes are long enough to be blog posts in their own right). They add up to a broadside against people who work with anyone, the religious (Christians specifically), conservatives, and those with an evolutionary understanding of human psychology and society. Mary Harrington, Helen Joyce, Kellie-Jay Keen and Kathleen Stock all come in for personal criticism (Kellie-Jay Keen most of all).

I am she-who-cannot-be-named, but clearly I am one of the women doing-feminism-wrong.

I attend Standing for Women events and wear their merch; I follow @troonytunes; I view men dressing as women as a form of “womanface” (this is racist, apparently); I want to defend the word and concept of woman, not just female; I think Matt Walsh made a good film. I don’t think men who think they are women are oppressed, and I do think they can be laughed at.

Worse than this, I have taken part in events with Alliance Defending Freedom, and have even gone for a drink with them afterwards. I refused to denounce Kellie-Jay Keen because Hearts of Oak came to the Standing for Women event in Brighton and made a video. All this puts me outside the narrow bounds of acceptability defined by the Radical Notion team. Fair enough, that’s their party. I never applied to be part of the sisterhood. I don’t see much hope for it having mass appeal, though.

The criticisms of Kellie-Jay Keen, Kathleen Stock, Helen Joyce and Mary Harrington are long, personal, wrong and tedious (I just don’t recognise much of what they are describing and it would take me far too long to explain why). The articles vacillate incoherently between “we are not the same movement” and “we are mobilizing as a collective”.

Blame it on the Patriarchy

I think the reason the authors end up making long-winded and unsatisfactory arguments is because they start out from an idea about the world that is fundamentally wrong.

The editorial piece by Rose Rickford spells out the 1=0 statement in its first line: “Patriarchy is not universal, and it is not inevitable. It was developed by people through historical processes for the material purpose of controlling and appropriating women’s bodies and labour.

I think the idea that the thing called “patriarchy” was overlaid on top of (and after) the evolution of human bodies and minds is just as untrue as the idea that men can become women, or the nonsense that the “binary system of gender” is a Western, colonial export.

Every human being who was ever born was gestated inside the body of a woman (and until 1983 that woman was in every case the biological mother of that child). A foetus “appropriates” its mother’s body progressively from the moment of conception, stripping the calcium from her teeth and bones if it needs to, squashing her organs and stretching her pelvis. A baby may kill its mother on its way out. The whole process is primal and brutal. It is inevitable, universal, and in no sense man-made. “Patriarchy”, if it means appropriating women’s bodies for the production of children, is baked-in.

We share the basics of this with other animals, but human beings have some specific features: hidden ovulation (and therefore uncertain paternity) and long, dependent childhoods. It is our long and labour-intensive childhood that enables our species to be uniquely versatile in the ecological niches it occupies, and devastatingly creative in the problems we solve and create for each other. Human behavioural and intellectual flexibility, big brains, long dependent childhoods, painful birth, uncertain paternity, intensive parental involvement and sexual politics are inherent to humanity (it’s what the Bible seeks to explain in the story of The Fall).

The mother-child dyad and the mother-father-child triad are essential parts of who we are, in the same way that women are the “big gamete” people and men the “small gamete” ones. And this is not just about infancy. For a child to survive to reproductive adulthood, it must “appropriate” resources (food, energy, attention and protection), almost always from its mother and usually from its father too, for 15 years or more. Social structures co-evolved alongside the bodies and minds built to do this (men built for the small-gamete route to the future and women for the large-gamete one).

There are no societies that do not view nuclear family relationships as centrally important. The emotions that underpin them — lust, love, shame, sexual jealousy, the parent-child bond, guilt, anger, pride and so on — are evolved and universally recognisable.

There are no societies where women are not vulnerable to rape, or where men are not capable of it. There are no societies where women do not bear the risks and physical impacts of pregnancy, and the responsibility for their infants. There are no societies where men are not on average stronger, faster and more powerful than women. There are no societies where the question of who is the father of the child, and the role of the father in providing for that child, are not viewed as important, or which lack social norms, status and structures reflecting this.

The idea that these features of “patriarchy” did not co-evolve with our big-brained, creative, flexible, language-using species is as improbable as people being “born in the wrong body”.

While I recognise the painful split that Jane describes, her division of the two teams into “true feminists” and “gender-critical identitarianism” is off the mark.

I think what we are seeing is the contradictions of a philosophy that does not make sense (it envisages a world where male violence is universal, but not biological; where women and men’s interests are negotiated on a “sex-class” basis; where family can be replaced by collective, and where prosperity exists without capitalism). It is another case of when ideology meets reality.

By contrast, what might be called “Mumsnet feminism” focuses on the messy material reality of mothers, fathers (good and bad, present and absent) and children, who need care and protection. It may be low on theory but it can see gender ideology and queer theory for what it is; an attack on the social structures that protect children (many of which are derided as part of the patriarchy by those who see the world this way).

A key theme running through criticisms of the “populists” in the magazine is disapproval at calling-out the behaviour of male sexual deviants in dresses, and at “othering” people who pretend to be the opposite sex.

But this is the dark heart of what we have not been allowed to talk about. Pronouns are rohypnol. Language is an evolved, hard-wired risk-appraisal protocol. So too is the ability to see things, say what we see and recognise patterns. The moral disgust reflex is part of this. So too is laughter and ridicule.

Jane argues that we should try to repress feelings of distaste, disgust or mirth at men in women’s clothing (and sometimes that is the polite or prudent thing to do). But encouraging people to repress the tools of pattern recognition and risk appraisal, and cast-out those who don’t is how the gender ideology movement works. It make things unsayable and lowers people’s barriers. Men in women’s spaces should raise alarm. This is the practical truth that the thought-control and language-control has been trying to obscure.

Freedom of expression, the ability to make arguments and observations in plain, simple language is crucial. So too is the ability to mock and laugh (which is a means of saying that something isn’t right). None of this should be forbidden.

I hope that when the battle for clarity about biological sex in law and policy has been won, a new Darwinian feminist synthesis might develop. Understanding how we came to be does not mean accepting that we cannot change anything.

Right now, though, I am busy trying to work with and communicate with whoever is concerned by gender ideology. Jane Clare Jones and her colleagues may choose to work with a smaller circle that doesn’t include me, or Helen, Kellie-Jay, Kathleen Stock or Mary Harrington, or religious women and men, or conservative women and men, or so many ordinary people who just want to say men are not women, and children need protecting.

In a choice between being part of an ideologically pure sisterhood and pragmatic and effective impact, I would chose impact.

#maya forstater #radfems please interact #radfem safe #radical feminism #gender critical #idk what tags we use in this era lol

13 notes · View notes

coochiequeens · 1 year

Text

Feminists hold a conference and not only does a TRA assault a woman but one of the protesters is a violent ex-con TIM, yet TRAs claim to the victims of hateful ideology.

A conference held in support of women’s sex-based rights was protested by trans activists yesterday. Among them was a violent convict known for having been England’s longest-serving transgender inmate.

University College London hosted a one-day conference yesterday centered around panel discussions on education and women’s rights. The sold-out event was organized by the UCL Women’s Liberation special interest group and Women’s Place UK, with support from Southall Black Sisters and FiLiA.

Among the event’s participants were many known for their vocal critiques of gender ideology, including Sex Matters’ executive director Maya Forstater, journalist Helen Joyce, and writer Julie Bindel.

Shortly after the conference began, reports emerged that protesters had gathered outside of the UCL lecture hall where the event was taking place.

A crowd of approximately 20 trans activists began banging on the windows and screaming expletives in an effort to interrupt the women inside. Counter-protestors similarly gathered to support the event, recording the trans activist rage at the conference continuing.

“You try to deny our existence, well — f*ck you!” One activist screamed into an amplified microphone. “Literally f*ck you. This is our university. This is our space. You are not welcome here. We will make sure you will never ever be here again!”

As the conference began, two lecturers who co-direct qUCL, a campus research group focused on queer theory, released a statement comparing it to “eugenics.”

Hours into the event, women’s rights advocate Katy Worley, also known on social media as DJ Lippy, was assaulted by a trans activist who aggressively wrangled her phone from her as she had been filming the protestors. Worley was interviewed by police on the incident, who reportedly left her feeling “blamed” for her own assault.

“The police were pretty useless, actually,” Worley told Reduxx. “The guy attacked me as I was out of the main college [campus]. I was actually just about to go home. He tried to get my phone off of me… he threw it over a wall, and I just grabbed ahold of him by his rucksack because I didn’t want him to leave. I told him ‘you can’t do this, it’s unacceptable.’ I started screaming for security.”

Worley says police arrived about one hour after the incident, and began questioning her on the attacker’s motivations.

“They asked me ‘why do you think he did that?’ It’s like they wanted me to prove motivation. And it’s not really a victim’s job to provide motivation to the police.” Worley says she tried to tell the police about the protest, but became emotional as she interacted with them due to their apparent lack of concern for her. But as she continued with them, a group of women who had hosted a workshop at the conference came to her aid.

Kate Coleman, director of Keep Prisons Single Sex, as well as another woman who was a former police chief superintendent, butted in to help Worley in her conversation with police. No arrests were made, and Worley doesn’t believe anything more is being done with her report.

“I doubt anything will be done. They didn’t even take a description of the assailant until I prompted them.”

According to social media updates provided by her significant other, Worley was left with dark bruising on her arm and swelling in her hand from the attack.

This is not Worley’s first time being assaulted at such an event. In November of 2022, a similar incident occurred during which Worley was manhandled by a trans activist who attempted to stop her from recording with her phone camera. Worley was interviewed by police, and the assailant was taken into custody.

While many of the trans activists at yesterday’s protest claimed to be students at UCL, there were outsiders within the crowd. Among them was a notorious convict known for being England’s longest-serving transgender inmate.

Sarah Jane Baker, born Alan Baker, spent 30 years in prison for multiple violent crimes. Baker was initially sentenced for kidnapping and torturing his stepmother’s brother, but received additional time after attempting to murder a cellmate.

While incarcerated, Baker became vocal on the issue of trans-identified males in prison, often claiming to be the victim of systemic mistreatment for being kept in the male prison estate.

In 2013, Baker made headlines when he first began identifying as “Sarah,” billing taxpayers £10,000 for what media referred to as his “sex change.” Baker once boasted that he never wanted to be freed, describing himself as a “professional prisoner.”

During a 2009 hearing, he claimed to be quite pleased with his time in custody, stating: “I am happy to be locked away. Doing bird is the one thing I excel at. I have no responsibility, free food, laundry, healthcare, a job and my Open University course costs me nothing.”

Baker was released in 2019, after which he began to brand himself as both a trans rights activist and a prison abolitionist. Baker has turned up at multiple protests intended to denigrate women who oppose gender ideology. In June of 2021, Baker was photographed at London’s Pride Parade holding signs which read, “Be Trans, Do Crime.” Another sign in an identical style which read “Kill JK Rowling” was placed on the Bomber Command Memorial, prompting speculation that Baker was responsible for the death threat.

During Saturday’s protest at UCL, Baker was seen wearing his characteristic red beret and hurling abuse at the women’s rights advocates.

“Trying to make us scared? You f*cking c*nts!” Baker was filmed yelling. “Trying to make us afraid? To walk on our own streets?”

Baker has stated his intention to be “the next transgender member of parliament” for the Richmond Park district in London, and will be putting his name forward in upcoming elections.

By Anna Slatz Anna is the Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief at Reduxx, with a journalistic focus on covering crime, child predators, and women's rights. She lives in Canada, enjoys Opera, and kvetches in her spare time.

#University College London #UCL Women’s Liberation #Women’s Place UK #Southall Black Sisters #FiLiA #Maya Forstater #Helen Joyce #Julie Bindel #Police don’t do shit to protect women #Sarah Jane Barker is Alan Baker #Trans people and DARVO

7 notes · View notes