Category: Reproductive Rights

Two Australian Women Told They Broke The Law After Criticizing Trans-Identified Male Breastfeeding Child – Reduxx

Reduxx has learned that two women in Australian have received notices from Twitter informing them they have broken Australian law after tweeting about a trans-identified male who has been breastfeeding a child.

Jasmine Sussex and Standing For Women Queensland (SFWQ) were both contacted by Twitter on May 16, with the platform informing the two accounts that specific content they had posted would be censored to Australian users in order to comply with Australian law.

Twitter sent two emails to each user, the first explaining that the platform had received “official correspondence” from a “government entity or law enforcement agency” which had claimed that their content had violated Australian law. A second email was sent shortly after to each user advising them that the content was going to be withheld in Australia.

Speaking to Reduxx, Sussex explained that she was horrified when she first received the notice from Twitter.

“I was appalled that it was claimed to be in violation of Australian law to criticize what I and most Australians consider to be a cruel and medically dangerous experiment on newborn babies,” Sussex said.

Source: Two Australian Women Told They Broke The Law After Criticizing Trans-Identified Male Breastfeeding Child – Reduxx

Safe Parents Japan – Letter to MFA

To whom it may concern at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,

. . .

Safe Parents Japan, a group of domestic violence and abuse survivors hereby submit this report. Recently, there were reports on the Australian television program 60 Minutes Australia and the daily newspaper The Sydney Morning Herald that contained significant factual errors about our country that would harm our country’s reputation. . . .

There is no such fact as “child abduction is legal in Japan.” Spreading fake news internationally and calling it “crazy” significantly damages Japan’s reputation.  . . .

According to data submitted to the Legislative Council of the Ministry of Justice, the No.1 reason for a parent to leave home with their children is to “protect the children.”. . .

Parental authority is decided based on objective evidence (Medical record, etc.). They assess who has been the main caretaker and who created a secure attachment with the child by evaluating their family life from the point before the child was born to the custodial situation of today. The judgments are made on a case-by-case basis considering various aspects of the family. . .

It is inappropriate to attribute the problem of “82 Australian children” to Japan’s sole parental authority system. For example, the Australian father shown in the program, who seems to be supported by the Australian government, has been arrested in Japan for illegally entering his in-
laws’ home. They are fraudulently blaming Japan’s legal system while the real problem seems to lie in the perpetrator himself. The Australian government should be alerted that they are in fact supporting the perpetrator based on a significant misunderstanding. . ..

Source: Safe Parents Japan – Letter to MFA 04032023.pdf

“Mother” means something | Josephine Bartosch | The Critic Magazine

This week, though, the ECHR made a judgment that even Nigel Farage would find himself raising a beer to. The ruling concerns two German parents from separate families who wanted their children’s birth certificates to recognise their transgender identities, rather than the reality of their relationships to their offspring. The ECHR said, “No.”

In the first case, O.H. v. Germany, a mother who identifies as a transman and her child claimed that designating her the “mother” violated their right to private and family life, as protected by Article 8 of the European Convention. In the second, A.H. v Germany, a father who identifies as a transwoman wanted to be recorded as “mother” on his child’s birth certificate. The Court emphasised in its decision that no human rights violation could be established and that a false entry in the birth certificates is at the discretion of the German state.

Dennis Kavanagh is a legal commentator and director of the Gay Men’s Network. He welcomes the ruling and notes a potential shift in how such issues are addressed.

“The law is increasingly recognising that there is no ethical case for treating children as legal accessories to adult cross sex identification claims,” says Kavanagh. “Rule by case law may be finally abating in this area which is a democratic good.”

At its core, transgenderism is fundamentally anti-human. In its effort to best mother nature, this movement not only cuts into the flesh of troubled people, it seeks to redefine reality in its own image. The truth is simple, and it is clear. Human beings can’t change sex. To sustain the lie that they can involves not only co-opting families, falsifying birth certificates and placing a polite gag in the mouths of co-workers, but suppressing the rights to freedom of conscience, expression and belief.

This week’s ECHR ruling won’t undo the wrongs already enshrined in law at the behest of the well-funded trans lobby, but it will offer some protection to children who deserve nothing less than the truth.

Source: “Mother” means something | Josephine Bartosch | The Critic Magazine

Convicted Child Rapist Behind Surrogacy Empire Now Under Investigation For Baby Trafficking – Genevieve Gluck

A surrogacy empire owned by a convicted pedophile has come under investigation for arranging fictitious marriages, falsifying documents to smuggle babies out of Ukraine, and trading children for profit, according to a Paris-based consortium of researchers.

The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) has released an investigation which links Barcelona-based surrogacy company Subrogalia to a network of corporations controlled by two men, one of whom sexually abused the other as a child and has an extensive history of child rape.

José María Hill Prados, now 62, was 45 years old when he first met Didac Giménez Sánchez at the Casal Dels Infants del Raval center for minors in Barcelona. Prados exposed 12-year-old Sánchez to pornographic films in order to groom him at his home in Cervelló, Spain, where he also sexually assaulted the boy.

In 2007, Prados was sentenced to eight years in prison for sexually abusing both Sánchez and his sister on charges that included raping the children, and for creating illicit pornography of the acts he subjected them to.

Subrogalia has operations in as many as nine countries, including Russia, Greece, and, briefly, Mexico. But the primary source of the company’s revenue can be traced to its clinics in Ukraine. The OCCRP investigation cites a former manager who said that, before the war, women in Ukraine bore approximately 100 babies annually for paying parents, each earning the company around €8,000 (approx. $8,600 USD) in profit.

In order to distance the company from the litigation, Subrogalia Ukraine rebranded as Eurosurrogacy in 2017. Concurrently, Subrogalia Spain was renamed to Gestlife.

Sánchez was also named as the founder of his own Ukrainian IVF clinic in 2017 named InterFiv. In 2021, one of Prados’ sons took over ownership, and that same year the clinic was raided by law enforcement for allegedly arranging fictitious marriages and falsifying documents in order to smuggle babies out of the country.

Prados and Sánchez were also business partners with one of the largest IVF clinic chains in the world, the BioTexCom Clinic in Kiev, which has implanted embryos for about 95 percent of Eurosurrogacy’s Spanish clients.

In 2018, Sergii Antonov, a Kiev-based lawyer specializing in the medical field, told the press that of the estimated 2,000 infants born through surrogacy in Ukraine every year, nearly half were through BioTexCom.

BioTexCom told the press that its management was unaware of Prados’ criminal record when they went into business together. This claim is not entirely without merit: in addition to his surrogacy network, Prados is also the figure behind a shadowy corporation dedicated to burying and erasing incriminating information from the internet.

“We erase your past,” boasts Eliminalia, a business led by the convicted pedophile, which has netted millions in revenue over the past decade for restoring the online reputation of hundreds of clients who have been convicted and investigated in 54 countries for corruption, money laundering, sexual abuse and drug trafficking.

Source: (22) Convicted Child Rapist Behind Surrogacy Empire Now Under Investigation For Baby Trafficking

More than 1000 Australian women commence class action against Bayer

More than one thousand Australian women are commencing a class action in the Victorian Supreme Court today against the manufacturer of a contraceptive device they say left them in extreme pain.

The class action is seeing the women taking on the multinational pharmaceutical giant Bayer, regarding their contraceptive device Essure, which the women say left them in extreme pain, with some needing to go on to have hysterectomies.

Bayer says it continues to stand behind the safety and efficacy of Essure, which it stopped selling in 2017. It has already settled a case with 39,000 women in the United States for US$1.6 billion, with some of the Australian women involved in the Australian case questioning why the pharmaceutical giant hasn’t done more for Australian women who also received the device.

Slater and Gordon claims the device has been linked with a range of serious conditions and complications including choric pelvic and abdominal pain, irregular menstrual bleeding and cramping, the device migrating through the fallopian tubes, corrosion of the device, perforation of the fallopian tubes and other organs.

Source: More than 1000 Australian women commence class action against Bayer

Artificial Wombs Will Change Abortion Rights Forever | WIRED

Ectogenesis—gestation using an artificial womb—is fast approaching reality. Yet without legislation, this innovation also has the potential to cause harm.

Current philosophical literature and legislation on abortion revolve around three debates: the moral status of the fetus, women’s bodily autonomy, and the fetus’s viability. Ectogenesis means that fetuses at all stages will be viable, so the technology’s development will impact all three of these debates.

Under law in many places where abortion is permitted, the fetus’s right to life transcends a woman’s bodily autonomy at the point when the fetus becomes viable.

Successful ectogenesis would render the fetus viable at a very early stage, possibly even from conception. If ectogenesis—even partial ectogenesis—becomes available, it would then be possible for an unwanted fetus to be transferred into an artificial womb to continue developing without harming a woman’s bodily autonomy, depending on how the fetus is removed. In this way, women would be able to end their pregnancy without resorting to traditional abortion. Given this option, if a woman chooses traditional abortion regardless, the abortion will appear more like an intentional killing.

Women should have the right to reject ectogenetic surgery on the grounds of bodily autonomy; otherwise, as Canadian philosopher Christine Overall has pointed out, a forced transfer procedure would be akin to deliberately stealing human organs, which is deeply unethical.

Future legislation will need to guarantee that ectogenesis is a choice rather than a new form of coercion. The right to abortion will need to be recentered in law around the value of reproductive autonomy and the right not to become a biological parent against one’s will, as opposed to fetus viability. As this legal debate gains the attention of politicians, legislators, community leaders, and the wider public, how much people and societies respect women’s right to choose will become more apparent than ever.

Source: Artificial Wombs Will Change Abortion Rights Forever | WIRED

A Surrogacy Convention or a Protocol on Parentage? Why we need to watch closely what the Hague Private International Law Conference (HCCH) is doing. – The Center for Bioethics & Culture Network by Renate Klein

Full article available at this link:

Source: A Surrogacy Convention or a Protocol on Parentage? Why we need to watch closely what the Hague Private International Law Conference (HCCH) is doing. – The Center for Bioethics & Culture Network

Sharon Stone Reveals Why She Lost Custody—But It’s Not What She Thinks

Sharon Stone revealed for the first time Tuesday on iHeart’s Table for Two podcast why she lost custody of her young son—or, rather, why she believes she lost custody.

What she doesn’t realize is that the judge’s stated reasoning for his ruling was just a pretext.

Sharon’s case is unusual in that she was not found to be lying, alienating or mentally ill. Just too sexy. Actually, having acted too sexy.

The judge asked my child—my tiny, little, tiny boy, “Do you know your mother makes sex movies?”

The movie the judge was referring to, Basic Instinct, had come out 12 years before the custody battle even began. Stone became famous for this role, in which she plays a sociopathic, bisexual woman who is a murder suspect.

To think that a judge would take custody away from a loving mother due to an acting role that has no bearing on parenting is incomprehensible. It harkens back to the old witch trials.

But what many Coalition moms know is that is not really why Sharon lost custody. Sure, the misogynistic judge may have disapproved of her acting, but it’s crucial to not be fooled and misdirected by superficial judicial machinations.

Sharon’s case supports the Coalition’s position that the Custody Crisis is not essentially about abuse. She did not claim her ex was abusive to her son or her. In fact, there are plenty of women who’ve lost custody who did not report any abuse by their ex.

As every mom knows, it is the cruelest form of torture to be deprived of your child. Not to mention the trauma a child experiences being deprived of his mother. Sharon was restricted to just one brief visit a month with Roan.

The take away here is that Sharon would have lost custody anyway, whether she had played a too-sexy role or not. The truth is, the system is rigged so women do not have the power to maintain custody. So, women like Sharon, and millions of others around the world, should not feel it was their fault for having lost custody.

The problem is women do not know the Family Court system is rigged until it is too late. And many do not ever realize the real reason they lost custody. Sharon correctly states she experienced “abuse by the system” but does not appear to realize that abuse was a result of systemic male entitlement and it’s counterpart: systemic discrimination against women.

Source: Sharon Stone Reveals Why She Lost Custody—But It’s Not What She Thinks

Melbourne judge tells breastfeeding woman to leave courtroom

A judge has kicked out a breastfeeding mother and her child from a Melbourne court, raising concerns about the mother feeding her baby being a ‘distraction’ to jurors.

On Thursday, the mother was feeding her child and observing a matter in the Victorian County Court when judge Mark Gamble addressed her directly saying, “Madam you will not be permitted to breastfeed a baby in court.”

“It will be a distraction and I’ll have to ask you to leave,” the judge said, according to The Age.

While the woman did what the judge asked and left the courtroom, doctors and advocates have spoken out against the incident, calling it unacceptable.

The Herald Sun reported that the woman did not wish to be identified, but was deeply upset by being told to leave and said she felt “humiliated”. She had been in the courtroom to support the alleged victims during the case being heard.

Pregnant and breastfeeding women are protected by anti-discrimination laws in public areas including work, schools, universities, shops or rental properties.

However, the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission’s website isn’t clear on whether the anti-discrimination laws apply to courts.

Judges are immune from civil liability on the basis of promoting independence and the County Court declined to comment.

Source: Melbourne judge tells breastfeeding woman to leave courtroom