Justin “Riley” Dennis and Nicholas “Stephanie” Blanch are men. They will always be men. The court can't change this fact.

What the hell is happening that one college campus - @Cornell - has 1,200 sexual assault cases in SIX YEARS???? THAT IS 200 SEXUAL ASSAULTS PER YEAR FOR SIX YEARS. THAT IS AN EPIDEMIC.

I never take any pleasure in boosting Matt Walsh but he is 100% correct here. The anthropomorphic form is a result of intentional decisions by the human designers, there is no good reason for it, and it is nefarious. People should be talking about that more.

I have no intention of hiding any longer! 'Dr P' is just how most people now know me. (Thanks Fred/Lyndsay/Tristan, you guys did me a enormous favour by 'outing' me. I cannot describe how liberating it has been). And here is my 'manifesto': Gender dysphoria is a false construct. No human can change sex or has ever changed sex. Transgenderism is a mental illness. ALL 'gender affirming' procedures should be banned, for anyone, of any age. 'Transitioning' children is child abuse. 'Transitioning' within marriage should be immediate an unequivocal grounds for divorce. People on cross-sex hormones should not be in the workplace. People presenting as the opposite sex should not be in the workplace. Commercial surrogacy should be banned. Gender ideology is a Trojan Horse that will destroy Western society. What did I miss?

Notice how the pink man did not point out that it wouldn’t be okay even if he was a woman. This is how men are complicit.

👏🤣🤣🤣 Mr Molly is raging that @GoodLawProject called him a man!! 🤣🤣🤣

Oh. It’s was your party who introduced the £200 shop lifting rule though 🤔

Sandra Macleod, ex-deputy chief executive, admitted to Jamie Dawson KC she did not actually write her own statement. ““All of the answers that you gave are written by someone else.” “They were written by someone else, yes,”” Absolutely unbelievable. thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/557…

When these accounts with little anime girls as their avatars, or bumbling green party MPs, insist we let vulnerable "trans women" into women's spaces, they are talking about this guy. He even has cute kittens on his bikini. Look at this creep. Listen to his contempt for women.

Awful abusive language like “mothers and fathers”. YOU’RE IN A CULT.

Can you seriously not see that your thought-policing is actively helping the far right nutters you claim to deplore? If ordinary people are not allowed to speak plainly by authoritarians like you, who exactly do you think they *will* end up talking to?

Natalie, your party has become a cult. The fact that you’re defending this reveals just how intellectually captured you’ve become. There is nothing respectful about drawing up an Orwellian list of what people can and cannot say. It is the opposite of inclusive. Your party’s policies on gender undermine women’s rights and safeguards and expose vulnerable children to harm. Read the Cass Review. We have subjected children to experimental, Frankenstein medicine while vulnerable adolescent girls are encouraged to believe they were born in the wrong body. There will be a reckoning over this dystopian chapter at some point in the future. And when the full consequences of gender ideology are understood, I believe you and your party will be buried in ignominy for having championed it.

Men who claim to be women are a category of men, on the basis that they are men. Creating a category of men who are exempt from or above the law has been tried many times & always failed in exactly the ways you’d expect. Making it a criminal offense for a woman (@doramoutot) to point this out gives the worst men in society a legal loophole to have power over & punish women. Only the bad men win.

Some coincidence. Cue the elephant in the room: (A) The neonatal unit was downgraded because its ability to provide the required level of care was in serious doubt across multiple documented categories of analysis. Actioned. (B) A nurse was jailed because, in a subset of the same babies, the same clinical environment was treated as sufficiently sound that the collapses and deaths required a deliberate explanation. No documented instance of the nurse actually harming an infant was put before the court. Actioned. The problem here is not that (A) and (B) are logically impossible together. Poor care and deliberate harm can, in theory, coexist. The problem here is evidential separation. Because in this instance the documented Level 2 concerns ran across the same period later treated as the criminal episode: staffing and acuity shortfalls, medical rota risks, transfer risks, governance weaknesses, infection-control concerns, equipment and training issues, and data uncertainties. The crucial question is, therefore, when a baby collapsed, how was it established that the collapse belonged solely to category (B), rather than to one or more of the documented risks that led to outcome (A)? That question matters because Lucy Letby was never documented actually harming a baby. But there were fourteen clear categories of failure with respect to (A). (B) therefore depended solely on interpretation: clinical signs, timing, presence, pattern and expert inference. But given a unit already operating under persistent safety concerns, those concerns had to be excluded case by case before "no other explanation" could safely become "deliberate harm". In practical terms, each allegation required a reliable evidential checkpoint. Was the baby genuinely stable? Were staffing levels BAPM-compliant at that moment? Was medical cover adequate? Were infection and pseudomonas risks excluded? Was equipment functioning normally? Were oxygenation, ventilation and monitoring within expected standards? Was escalation and response timely? Were the notes and data sufficiently reliable? If the prosecution are going to rely on a "constellation of factors" to infer deliberate harm, they must first prove that the "constellation of documented systemic risks" – the exact risks that triggered the downgrade – were fully eliminated at the time of each alleged offence. Every single systemic factor was capable of causing harm; therefore, all those factors had to be ruled out before inference could logically and so safely take over. Otherwise we could be conflating the two and treating evidence for (A) as evidence of (B). The saturation traces here are an example of why this matters. They show care being impeached by its own monitoring: babies were being run outside guideline range in a unit whose Level 2 capability was already in question. So the issue is not simply whether the prosecution could construct a deliberate-harm narrative. The issue is whether that narrative was reliably distinguished from the very systemic and real failures that had already justified downgrading the unit. The first conclusion – systemic failure requiring downgrade – is historically far more common than the second: a neonatal serial offender. Yet the second depended heavily on an interpretation that originated inside the same institution whose failings the downgrade had exposed. That leaves the central question unanswered: What evidential criteria were used during the court proceedings to separate the fourteen documented strands of observed failure that led to outcome (A) from the evidence used to support the convictions that proceeded in the absence of any direct inculpatory evidence in respect of outcome (B)? The appeals were fought on other grounds: admissibility, trial directions, fresh evidence, jury issues, media prejudice and abuse of process. But the deeper problem – that the same clinical record supported both a systemic-failure response and an individual-criminal interpretation – appears nowhere in the sentencing remarks and nowhere in either appeal judgment. The downgrade was an institutionally accepted consequence of the same dangerous clinical environment. Unless the documented risks behind that downgrade can be shown to have been fully and satisfactorily excluded in respect of each charged incident, "no other explanation" was never safely established. On the basis of that observation, every one of Letby's convictions may be viewed as potentially unsafe. #LucyLetby

All child safeguarding seems to go out the window at the BBC when gender ideology is concerned. This story, and particularly the interview with the boy about sex, has so many red flags that it's astonishing it was broadcast and is still available bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0r5…

"It is quite extraordinary that the board of trustees appear to think that legal compliance is optional." Ultimately, pretending that parkrun is not competitive doesn't change the fact that if a category is labelled ‘Female’, lawfully this must be on the basis of sex.

Just checked my notes from a recent doctor visit. They list my “sex assigned at birth” as being UKNOWN. My “legal sex” is female. I was in there for a routine Pap test. She was giving me a pelvic exam. It’s in my records that I’ve given birth twice. But my sex is ‘unknown’.🤦🏻‍♀️

It's terrible when Mogg is the one with integrity in a two person conversation. 😳

My aunt told the ER triage nurse she had jaw pain, left arm numbness, and sweating, and got sent to the waiting room for two hours. She drove herself in at 7 PM. Told the triage nurse every symptom: chest pressure, jaw pain, sweating, left arm numb. Has been going on forty minutes. Nurse asks if she's having trouble breathing. My aunt says not exactly, just pressure. Nurse marks her as "moderate priority" and sends her to the waiting room. Two hours pass. My aunt's symptoms aren't going away. She goes back to the window. Different nurse this time. My aunt lists her symptoms again. This nurse stops typing. "How long have you had arm numbness and jaw pain together?" "About three hours now." Nurse stands up immediately. "Why are you in the waiting room?" "They sent me here." Nurse comes around the desk, takes my aunt's arm, walks her directly back. Doesn't wait for paperwork. Calls for a cardiac workup. EKG, troponin, the works. Forty minutes later: heart attack. Minor, but real. Caught with enough time to treat it properly. The original triage nurse had marked her as "possible anxiety, chest discomfort." Didn't list the jaw pain or arm numbness. My aunt spent four days in the cardiac unit. Cardiologist told her if she'd waited another few hours, it would've been a different conversation. She filed a detailed complaint. The triage nurse got retraining. That's all. My aunt now carries a card with cardiac symptoms listed that she'll hand to any triage nurse going forward. Jaw pain plus left arm numbness is a five-alarm fire. Every triage nurse should know that.

Make no mistake: this where trans rights activists in the UK would like us, too. Silenced, punished, shamed, forced to affirm a repugnant, dangerous lie. It is disgusting, and we must fight it with everything we’ve got.

Just had a guy on a bike almost crash into me on Marsham Street (maybe 8 mins walk from Parliament) as he was speeding along the pavement on an electric bike. 20s probably, Asian-looking I tell him to not ride on the pavement as I walk away - angrily, but no shouting or swearing etc He throws the bike down and comes after me and says "do you want me to shank you?" (aka stab). Tucked into his belt he has a longish piece of metal - seemed to be some sort of blade but I can't be 100% sure what it was in truth. Enough to scare me anyway I very hurriedly walk away and he yells "yeh run you posh cunt", and at some point he (I think) stops following I call the police (was in two minds between 101 or 999 ; ended up going for the latter). Operator asked me my name and then how to spell it (hardly seemed the priority) Tell her what happened. She asks if I am still in danger - I say well I've walked away but the guy is still around I think She says it's not an emergency so I need to fill out a form on the police website. She says she'll text me the link I say - there's a guy threatening to stab people and is that not a priority? She says no and to fill out the form. I try to interject but mid-sentence she cuts the call That's it Not sure what to think really but as someone who doesn't have many interactions with the @metpoliceuk I just didn't really expect it to be so..dismissive? Maybe they were having a busy Friday night who knows