Baumgarten and eSafety Commissioner (Guidance and Appeals Panel) [2025] ARTA 59 (5 February 2025)

(a) On 29 May 2024, the applicant posted a tweet on the social media service X (previously known as Twitter), the contents of which are not presently relevant (‘Post’).

(b) The eSafety Commissioner (‘Commissioner’)[1] did not make a decision which was expressed to be the giving of a removal notice under s 88(1) of the Online Safety Act 2021 (‘OSA’)[2] in respect of the Post. That is because the Commissioner determined that not all of the statutory preconditions for the giving of such a notice were satisfied. It is not in dispute that, had a decision been made to give such a notice, it would have been a reviewable decision under s 220(2) of the OSA.[3]

(c) However, the Commissioner made a decision to send to X a written communication (described by the Commissioner as a ‘complaint alert’[4]) which, having regard to its objective features, amounts as a matter of fact to a removal notice requiring X to remove the Post even though it was not a legally effective removal notice under s 88(1) of the OSA.

(d) X interpreted the Commissioner’s communication as a legal requirement to remove the Post, and withheld it within Australia.

(e) The applicant made an application to the predecessor of the Administrative Review Tribunal (‘ART’ or ‘Tribunal’), namely the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (‘AAT’), for review of the Commissioner’s action on the basis that it constitutes a reviewable decision under s 220(2) of the OSA, namely, ‘a decision of the Commissioner under section … 88 to give a removal notice’.

(f) The Commissioner has contended that the AAT did not have jurisdiction to review her action.

  • The sole question currently before the Tribunal is whether the Commissioner made a reviewable decision in respect of which the Tribunal has jurisdiction.
  • For the reasons set out below, I have concluded that that question should be answered in the affirmative.

Source: Baumgarten and eSafety Commissioner (Guidance and Appeals Panel) [2025] ARTA 59 (5 February 2025)

Australian universities ‘capitulated’ on transgender medicine, scholars say | Times Higher Education

Australian universities have been “pathetic” and their senior leaders “culpable” for eschewing the public debate around youth gender medicine, according to academics who endorsed a call for a pause on chemical and surgical transitions among children and young people.
The wider academic community’s silence on the issue was “a failure of moral courage” – albeit an understandable one, given the “inevitable blowback” and threats to “job security or personal safety”, they said.
Twenty-four academics were among the 112 doctors, politicians, lobbyists and others who signed the 29 January open letter to prime minister Anthony Albanese and other key politicians.
Academic signatories to the Australian open letter said they had harboured concerns over the issue for several years. “I would not offer an opinion on which side is right in the clinical debate over youth gender medicine, although it seems to me as a non-expert that the Cass review takes a sensible position,” said Clive Hamilton, professor of public ethics at Charles Sturt University.
“I have expertise in the power of ideologies to damage evidence-based policymaking, especially in the climate change arena, and that is why I was asked to put my name to the letter.”
Cordelia Fine, professor in the history and philosophy of science at the University of Melbourne, cited longstanding “uncertainty” about clinical approaches to gender dysphoria. “Even while scientists and clinicians were grappling and debating this very difficult issue, the gender-affirmative model of care was being embedded within institutions and dissent was being labelled ‘transphobic’.”
Hamilton said universities had been “pathetic in this debate, in some cases throwing their scholars to the wolves. There are plenty of savages in the ivory towers.”

Source: Australian universities ‘capitulated’ on transgender medicine, scholars say

Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports – The White House

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to protect opportunities for women and girls to compete in safe and fair sports, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Policy and Purpose.  In recent years, many educational institutions and athletic associations have allowed men to compete in women’s sports.  This is demeaning, unfair, and dangerous to women and girls, and denies women and girls the equal opportunity to participate and excel in competitive sports.

Moreover, under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 (Title IX), educational institutions receiving Federal funds cannot deny women an equal opportunity to participate in sports.  As some Federal courts have recognized, “ignoring fundamental biological truths between the two sexes deprives women and girls of meaningful access to educational facilities.”  Tennessee v. Cardona, 24-cv-00072 at 73 (E.D. Ky. 2024). See also Kansas v. U.S. Dept. of Education, 24-cv-04041 at 23 (D. Kan. 2024) (highlighting “Congress’ goals of protecting biological women in education”).

Therefore, it is the policy of the United States to rescind all funds from educational programs that deprive women and girls of fair athletic opportunities, which results in the endangerment, humiliation, and silencing of women and girls and deprives them of privacy.  It shall also be the policy of the United States to oppose male competitive participation in women’s sports more broadly, as a matter of safety, fairness, dignity, and truth.

Source: Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports – The White House

Choking during sex: many young people mistakenly believe it can be done safely, our study shows

Around 50% of Australian young people have engaged in choking, or strangulation, during sex. This practice involves one person putting pressure on the neck of another, restricting breathing or blood flow (or both).

Strangulation during sex carries a variety of risks. These range from effects such as bruising and vomiting to brain injury and death.

Although rare, strangulation is the leading cause of death in consensual BDSM play.

There’s no evidence there is any safe way to undertake strangulation. Notably, strangulation can cause injury without leaving any marks and sometimes negative consequences don’t develop until well after the choking episode.

In a new study, we’ve found part of the reason why strangulation during sex is so common may be because many people mistakenly believe that, while risky, it can be made safe through moderating pressure and appropriate communication.

But stopping blood flow to the brain can take less pressure than opening a can of soft drink. And research shows strangulation can result in serious harms even when it’s consensual.

Source: Choking during sex: many young people mistakenly believe it can be done safely, our study shows

Harvard sued over letting trans swimmer compete against women | Australasian Lawyer

Harvard University was sued by three former swimmers at the University of Pennsylvania who claim they were discriminated against when a transgender teammate competed against them in the Ivy League championship in 2022.

The federal lawsuit claims that Harvard, Penn, the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the Ivy League violated federal law protecting equal opportunity by allowing Lia Thomas, a “trans-identifying male swimmer,” to compete. Thomas won the 500- and 200-yard freestyle races, as well as the 200-yard freestyle and the 400-yard freestyle relay, setting league records.

The lawsuit asks a judge to declare that Harvard, Penn, the NCAA and the Ivy League violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which bar discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities. It also asked the judge to declare that Thomas was ineligible to compete on Penn’s women’s team and to vacate her Ivy League records.

Former swimmers Grace Estabrook, Ellen Holmquist and Margot Kaczorowski filed the complaint Tuesday in Boston federal court.

The case is Estabrook v. The Ivy League Council of Presidents, 25-cv-10281, US District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston).

Source: Harvard sued over letting trans swimmer compete against women | Australasian Lawyer

Aussie Women’s Rights Campaigner Hit With “Apprehended Violence Order” By Trans-Identified Male She’s Never Met – Reduxx

A trans-identified male soccer player in Australia has successfully petitioned a New South Wales court to obtain an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) against a women’s rights campaigner he had never met. Stephanie Blanch, a male who plays on a women’s soccer team, told the court he felt “threatened” by the knowledge of women’s rights campaigner Kirralie Smith’s views about men who participate in women’s sports.

In a December 2024 ruling on the AVO, the District Court emphasized the fact that Smith had declined to refer to Blanch by his chosen pronouns, writing that she “repeatedly referred to the Appellant as a male, a man, a bloke and ‘he,’ where the Appellant does not refer to herself that way.”

The judge continued by acknowledging that while the relevant laws do not mention “misgendering” as a violation, it could be considered “sufficiently harassing.”

Source: Aussie Women’s Rights Campaigner Hit With “Apprehended Violence Order” By Trans-Identified Male She’s Never Met – Reduxx

She was 15. He was 26. Sonia Orchard’s Groomed proves her abuser was wrong: age isn’t ‘just a number’

S – as Orchard refers to him – was 26 when he met the teenage Orchard at a Melbourne nightclub and, one week later, started having sex with her. The relationship, which began at the end of 1985, lasted almost a year. It took the author three decades to recognise what had happened to her.

“I believed that I had been in a romantic relationship,” Orchard writes. “I managed to skip over what I believed to be an inconsequential detail – that I was a child.”

As a teenager, Orchard believed she was in love with her abuser. Like many victims of sexual grooming, she felt adored as never before.

Through a combination of control tactics and coercive techniques, S manipulated the 15-year-old into believing that theirs was a regular relationship. “Age is just a number,” he would tell her.

With unflinching honesty, Orchard shows how “abuse is the most potent when it is interlaced with love.” She tells how S ridiculed her, ordering her to lose weight, calling her “a hopeless kisser”, and casually informing her that she needed see a doctor because he had an STD.

In New South Wales, only 7% of sexual assaults reported to police result in a guilty conviction. Orchard asks: “Is it worth going to the police on the chance you might be one of the 7 per cent?”

Source: She was 15. He was 26. Sonia Orchard’s Groomed proves her abuser was wrong: age isn’t ‘just a number’

Full article: Critiques of the Cass Review: Fact-Checking the Peer-Reviewed and Grey Literature

Abstract

The Cass Review’s final report, published in April 2024, made recommendations to the UK’s National Health Service regarding structuring of services for minors with gender-related distress. It recommended cautious use of hormonal interventions in this population and use of research protocols. Some clinician-researchers disagree with the Cass Review’s recommendations and have written critiques. A critique of the Cass Review posted on Yale Law School’s website in July 2024 has received extensive media coverage. Its references identified three other critiques. In these papers, there were multiple claims that were incorrect or that lacked essential clarification/contextualization. These claims involved (1) the Cass Review’s contents and processes; (2) the pediatric transgender healthcare evidence base; (3) existing clinical practice guidelines, including claims that there is international medical consensus; (4) evidence-based medical practice and guideline development; and (5) conclusions regarding the validity of the Cass Review’s findings. The Cass Review’s careful, balanced investigations and judgments were a comprehensive, evidence-based response to the controversies in this pediatric clinical arena. Recently-published critiques of the Review have contained incorrect or inadequately contextualized claims. Because accurate information about medical interventions is essential to informed consent, it is important to correct errors in potentially influential publications.

Source: Full article: Critiques of the Cass Review: Fact-Checking the Peer-Reviewed and Grey Literature

Why Do Transgender People Hate Their Bodies? | Genspec

I have written previously about the possibility that the minority of surgeons who carry out radical experimental procedures on misinformed, physically healthy people do so because they enjoy the work, and because nobody stopped them.

The case documented by Kasten (2024) added self-amputation to the list of treatments which progressive society no longer seems willing to question.

The male patient described in Kasten’s study was transgender and referred to using the ‘she’ pronoun in the published paper. This patient “was affected by BID and felt the need for amputation of both legs approximately 20 cm below the knees. No medical or psychotherapeutic therapies were sought; she was too embarrassed to express this need to a doctor or therapist.”

Kasten’s research subject perceived their feet as “false meat.” The paper does not judge the patient, and verges on admiration: “Since the amputation, she feels free and enjoys the appearance of her own body and is proud of having successfully mastered this challenge… there was no therapy, nor was there any recommendation for or against the dry ice method she used to get rid of her feet.”

Kasten’s paper includes a lengthy self-report by the patient studied, described as “exciting,” which is illuminating and worth quoting at length:

“At about the age of twelve, I watched the film “Robocop.” I was fascinated by the thought of losing an unwanted limb yet preserving function with a mechanical device… I then had a bit of an epiphany — what if I was a woman with no feet. This immediately felt right. Everything about this thought fitted with my ideal image for myself.”

. . .

“I cooled my feet with iced water and then managed to freeze them in dry ice. It took around 6 hours. I had guessed about a 50–50 chance of dying or achieving a successful outcome. I was so frustrated that these odds were acceptable. I stayed at home and went to bed with frozen feet. I don’t remember much after this, but I woke up in hospital… I underwent surgery and achieved bilateral below knee amputations. It was amazing… I was so much happier and also nobody had questioned my sanity! I was worried that I was going to be locked in a mental health facility, but no one noticed.”

“Then the problem struck. I was arrested by the police… they discovered that I had seen videos of an extreme pornographic nature and that I had arranged my own amputations. I was therefore investigated for possession of extreme pornography and insurance fraud… The benefit of being “discovered” is that I am now addressing my gender issues and have started feminizing hormone therapy. I am out to my friends as a transwoman.”

Let us recap that the DSM-5-TR and ICD-11 BID have categorically stated that the desire to remove body parts, sexual characteristics and gender dysphoria are unrelated. The psychiatric profession no longer stigmatises the most extreme manifestations of sadomasochism, let alone the everyday practice of sexual cruelty.

The patient in this case study went on to write about his wife: “It took her a while to understand (she did some research herself online which helped). She does see it as a “mental illness,” and I think the fact that all the psychiatrists and psychologists I have seen have said that I am otherwise sane has helped her.”

Source: Why Do Transgender People Hate Their Bodies?