Transiness

Both Peggy, and nursing in particular, will be forever tainted. By direct abuse, and by the lack of bystander intervention in what was clearly an abuse of power against Beth, and against all other minorities.

💜 And sadly it remains the choice of the judiciary to completely de-gender her and remove all her pronouns, not only in court, but in its summary.

It cannot claim impartiality without de-gendering the claimant as well, and yet Peggies pronouns remain as a stark contrast, and underlining inequality.

Gonna take a pause here (we're 13% through!). Thank you everyone for your insights, thoughts and reflections as I wander through this 💜🏳️‍⚧️

This exactly describes one of a range of behaviours that someone who *is* intimidated exhibits. [The second respondent being Beth, the transitioned woman]

You see, this is the part that really underlines who is at risk from whom, and who needs protecting. While poor Beth was literally sobbing, and her colleague walked her to her car because she was so distressed, Peggy was completely unflustered.

GC ideology enables abuse.

That Peggie's tirade continued into Christmas Day is unsurprising for someone so thoroughly indoctrinated in GC ideology.

If you're intimidated by someone, the LAST thing you do is strike up a conversation, abuse them, and demand to know their "chromosomes".

This is not a normal response to "feeling intimidated."

"Asked the second respondent if the second respondent..."

The word you're looking for is SHE.

Here's where the tribunal judgment is happy to use pronouns for Peggy, but not for Beth.

Furthermore, any woman can call any other woman "a man", merely by having a "belief". E.g - "everyone with facial hair is a man".

This is seriously dodgy GC territory which has been normalised by courts.

"Birth assigned sex"?

2) Peggies belief that "biological sex" is immutable is undermined by ... biology.

Apparently, no-one was confused by the repeated misgendering of Beth, or of rendering her correctly. Therefore, the court's excuse for "not appearing to be biased" loses its validation. Furthermore, if the court were to be impartial, it should have also refused pronouns for Peggy.

Not to mention, that the reason for physical and social transition is to fix the distress of being seen and read as your birth sex, and the distress of being forced into that social role.

It was, in effect, state/court sanctioned abuse, as it was likely highly distressing.

So I'm reading the whole judgement about the racist transphobic nurse, and there are some glaring issues with the way the court handled things.

1) De-gendering, as in the removal of pronouns, of transitioned women is not a neutral act. The point of goodwin was to not uphold an intermediate state.

You'd probably want a biochemist rather than a phlebotomist, who is an expert at taking blood, but not interpreting the results. It IS extremely dangerous, health wise to talk about transitioned women as "biologically male", because that's provably false.

so Beth Upton was - very publicly - put through hell, monstered, harassed, abused by the press, by politicians, by her opponents lawyers and by the most rabid, fanatical online hate movement for... nothing

I completely agree, Michelle. What the tribunal does not understand is that by kicking Beth out of the toilets, that will immediately out her OR make it look like she is a "predator under investigation", and that decision causes significant harm.

The GC intent is always: to cause harm.

I’ve already defined the term in the clinical sense. Repeating the question doesn’t create ambiguity, it avoids the evidence about harm. I’m not circling this loop again. Thanks for the chance to lay out the facts so clearly. I’m leaving it here. 💜👋

Clinically, ‘gender identity’ is a young person’s stable internal sense of themselves - an operational term. And speaking as someone whose identity never changed, and for whom HRT and surgery were lifesaving, definitional spirals don’t alter the evidence: forcing unwanted puberty harms young people.

Under-16 surgeries are exceptionally rare and need years of assessment, safeguarding and Gillick consent. It’s not ‘how many’, it’s clinical criteria. As someone who’s transitioned, this panic is projection, and inserting yourself into young people’s care is a harmful kind of entitlement.

Clinically, we’re talking about young people whose gender identity is persistent, consistent, and insistent - the same criteria used worldwide. But that’s a distraction: the point is that forcing an unwanted puberty on them causes demonstrable harm.

Bringing us back on track: we were talking about reversible blockers.

Adolescent surgeries are extremely rare and bound by strict safeguarding and Gillick-competent consent.

I support evidence-based care and protecting young people from toxic ideology that shames them and denies them healthcare.

bsky.app/profile/tran...

Stay with me here.

Transition touches everyone: infant to toddler, student to academic, lover to carer.

And that’s the tragedy of gender-critical ideology - watching people subconsciously transition into the very thing that once wounded them.

Isn’t that what most survivors fear?

I finally realised why GC interactions felt like dealing with blokes: masculine-coded dominance wrapped in feminine-coded moral virtue.

When someone shifts into dominance mode, my instincts treat them like the men they’re performing.

Real women, real connection, real safety feel nothing like this.

Gender critics: “biological male!”
My bloodwork: “sweetie… where? Be specific.”

Endocrine profile? Female.
Cardiometabolic profile? Female.
Liver, kidney, RBC indices? Female.
Testosterone: Undetectable

Amazing how “biology is immutable” collapses the moment you look at, you know… biology.

Sorry to not relate directly to the content, but with such pretty hair!!! I love it.

We *can* do that when we're regarded as sensitive, emotional, kind humans, but we're far, far away from that. But modelling that with conversations here? That's a big win.

The safe place for emotions is far from the public gaze right now. There is so much to heal from already 💜

It's always *so* important to collect everyone's views on how something is handled in a *constructive* way. People treating it as a "threat to their authority" or other such power games really irks. Yes, I totally agree, there is nothing to be gained from emotional reasoning in that way.

I’ve said everything I came to say. Thanks for your input, I’m heading off now! 😁👋