Advancing the Human Rights of Women & Girls
A 13-year-old girl who objects to sharing changing rooms with transgender pupils has been granted permission by the High Court to take landmark legal action against her local council over its schools
Source: Girl launches changing room privacy case | News | The Times
Sex Reassignment Surgery Market valued at USD 316 million in 2019 and is forecast to grow with a CAGR of over 25.1% during the projection timeframe. Increase in research as well as public awareness related to the gender reassignment surgery will enhance the market demand.
Favourable government policies associated with gender transition surgeries is one of the major factors driving the industry demand.
The market for sex reassignment surgery in Australia held a significant revenue share in 2019 and is estimated to witness 25.8% CAGR over the analysis timeframe. The high growth is owing to the growing number of transgender population in the country coupled with growing number of surgeries. Moreover, Medicare as well as private health insurance cover the gender reassignment surgery in Australia. Thus, this will help the patients to undergo surgeries with lower cost, resulting in attracting a greater number of patients across the country. Hence, the above-mentioned factors will play vital role in augmenting the market growth.
Source: Sex Reassignment Surgery Market Statistics 2020-2026 Global Report
Maya Dillard-Smith was pushed out of the ACLU for asking questions about trans rights. Now she has reemerged, apologizing for her past. What happened?
It is possible Maya thinks she will make a difference later, when she has more influence. So many people stay silent in the face of injustice and wait to acquire the power it will take to make a difference later – or so they tell themselves.
But these are not casual moments in a life, these crossroads. You pay a price for your silence when you have opportunities like Maya had and you don’t keep speaking. The rest of us are still paying that price. We are all still silenced and brought to heel by the Transgender Lobby.
Source: Maya Dillard-Smith: Born for the Senate or Just Another Sell-Out? – Uncommon Ground
In 2019, the world was horrified when a trans activist from Langley, British Columbia took 16 mostly-immigrant estheticians to British Columbia’s Human Rights Tribunal for refusing to wax her male scrotum. Today, a large part of this sordid saga came to an end.
In November of 2019, Yaniv was struck down by the BCHRT, with the tribunal finding the suits Yaniv had launched against the salon workers had been based in racial animus and a calculating, extortionary self-interest to monetarily benefit. Yaniv was ordered to pay $2,000 to each of three salon workers who Yaniv’s conduct had been considered inappropriate. Yaniv was also prevented from filing any additional suits through the BCHRT until which time the money had been paid.
Today, Jessica Yaniv tweeted out a photo of a cheque made out to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms in the amount of $6,000. The JCCF is a collective of pro-bono lawyers who had been representing some of the salon workers at the BCHRT.
In a strange turn of events, shortly after posting the photo of the $6,000 cheque, Jessica Yaniv was suspended from Twitter.
While it is unknown what led to Yaniv’s suspension and whether Yaniv will be returning to the platform, many questions about the future of Yaniv’s vexatious litigation still remain.
Jessica Yaniv is currently engaged in five lawsuits—one of which against a female Post Millennial freelance reporter who Yaniv claimed sexually assaulted her in a courthouse bathroom. Amy Eileen Hamm is suing Jessica Yaniv for defamation of character.
Official Post from Despatches From The Matriarchy: First presented Brisbane Meanjin IWD, 2020With thanks to the committee for their generous invitation to speak.
From a transsexual perspective, biological reality is all too apparent. Denying the existence of male and female bodies helps nobody.
It strikes me as both curious and counter-productive; these people who claim to be women yet seem to hate them so much. Unless, of course, they bow down and supplicate before them: ‘yes, yes, yes. Of course you are a woman. Even you with the beard and the testicles. Even you with the penis bulging from your tight skirt’ (and yes, that really did happen).
And what I feel equally curious is that the principal target of ‘trans activists’ is women, particularly those women who stand up for their rights in the face of some pretty spiteful name-calling and threats of physical violence (‘shut up terf’ is a frequent meme on Twitter). Yet the most serious threat to their personal safety comes from men, it’s men who beat up ‘trannies’ on the streets of the UK, it’s men who rape and murder ‘trans’ sex workers in the shanty towns of South American cities, men who get kicks out of ‘she-male’ pornography. Women represent virtually zero physical threat to transwomen, but transwomen, certainly those who retain their male genitalia will always be a danger to women. And when they’re found guilty of assaulting women, they’ll insist on their right to be housed in a female prison.
They’re setting the clock back thirty years or more, to a time when people like me were ridiculed and held up as freaks. I’ve worked hard to get to the position I find myself in today, I’ll be damned if I let any cult undermine it.
Source: As A Transsexual, I Support Dr Eva Poen – Uncommon Ground
Peer review means something, or at least it used to before the recent proliferation of dodgy journals, faked peer reviews and extreme control corporate sector exerts on research itself. Corporate interests have now infiltrated universities and teaching hospitals to such an extent, that profit-driven research is indulged by intimidating doctors into overlooking methodological flaws on account of ideological correctness, while important research is being activelly suppressed, such as the research into escalating number of detransitioners.
So while there’s no shame in transactivists not having the knowledge and skills required to critically appraise medical research, their ignorance makes them susceptible to easily believing erroneous conclusions, and the ideological indoctrination within transgender community makes them impervious to any information that doesn’t validate their world view.
In that sense, they are no different from flat Earthers or any other political group that’s simultaneously completely scientifically ignorant and convinced they can argue with scientists on equal footing. And in the case of gender ideology, they are proving to be ideal foot soldiers who can be trusted to relentlessly promote false narratives and, thanks to their ample presence on social media, to drown any voices that dare question the transgender dogma.
The largest international law firm IN THE WORLD and a mammoth media, tax and law conglomerate are advising transgender campaigners to be stealth in what they are trying to accomplish. What campaigners are attempting to accomplish, under the veneer of “gender identity” (no such thing exists in material reality) is allowing children to legally present as the opposite sex, to procure medical treatment with no medical diagnosis. The guide states that the UK should “eliminate the minimum age requirement at which children can change their legal gender on their own volition, without the need for medical diagnoses or court determination”.
Most people think the “transgender” or “gender identity” movements are about accommodating people with a debilitating condition. What is actually emerging is an industry that creates medical identities out of sex, while simultaneously deconstructing sexual dimorphism within the law.
The dangers of this deconstruction, when instituted legally, beyond what we are already seeing happen to women’s sports, crime statistics, medical statistics, sex equity in the workplace, women’s safety in prisons and shelters, and the abomination of medical experiments on healthy children, was expressed brilliantly in a recent tweet.
Source: Dentons Law Firm Scrubs Website of Pro Bono Work for IGLYO
Stonewall’s big policy shift came in 2015. In its “Vision for Change: Acceptance without Exception for Trans People” document, it argued that trans people have the right “to determine their own gender” rather than leaving “intrusive and demeaning” medical panels or legal experts to decide for them. It simultaneously lobbied to have an inner feeling of gender identity (in Stonewall terminology: “a person’s innate sense of their own gender, which may or may not correspond to the sex assigned at birth”) replace gender reassignment as a protected characteristic in the Equality Act; and to have non-binary identities (roughly, an inner feeling of being neither man nor woman) legally recognised. Perhaps most controversially of all, it lobbied to have exemptions for single-sex services and spaces removed from the Equality Act, so that there could be no space or resource designated only on the basis of biological sex. Goodbye, “exclusionary” bathrooms, changing rooms, and sport—or so Stonewall hoped.
A glossy Stonewall document entitled “Delivering LGBT-inclusive Higher Education” tells universities that inviting “anti-LGBT” speakers who deny “that trans people exist as the gender they say they are” causes LGBT people “to feel deeply unsafe”.
The Diversity Champions scheme now allows Stonewall to exert a chilling grip on free thought and expression about gender identity. While the government consults the public on whether to reform gender laws, it simultaneously pays Stonewall to lobby to change them.
Source: Sticks, stones and lawsuits | Kathleen Stock | Standpoint
