It’s October. People have begun putting up Halloween decorations. Today it’s 98°F. It might reach 100°. In October. 🥵🔥

When I first heard about Marine Le Pen I thought that she was an extremist & xenophobe. Today, if I were French, I would probably be voting for her. She gained my respect when she refused to wear a headscarf in 2017. Hochul and Clinton each caved one point & wore headscarves.🤬

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’.🤦🏻‍♀️

BOTH of my Senators are members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. NEITHER bothered to show up for for this important hearing today on the importance of protecting women’s sports. A huge🖕to all women and girls.

A NATIONALLY RANKED U.S. MASTERS SWIMMER LOST A WOMEN’S NATIONAL TITLE TO A MALE. THEN THEY TRIED TO BAN HER FOR SAYING HE WAS A MALE. Angie Griffin told Congress exactly how rotten this is. At Spring Nationals in San Antonio, a man took her women’s title and five individual crowns at that meet. She filed protests. Officials answered with a grievance for unsportsmanlike conduct and dangled a lifetime ban. After lawyers, months of stress, and a wave of support from other swimmers, she was finally cleared. The process itself was the punishment. U.S. Masters Swimming still lets males race in the women’s category while world bodies move toward sex-based rules. America should lead on women’s rights, not force champions to hire attorneys just to ask for a fair race. Prioritize women in women’s sports. Anything less is surrender.

Sen Durbin insinuated that enforcing female-only sports increases ‘trans kids’ to commit su1c1de. He said, “This committee should not participate in the marginalization of any children in this country.” Except when it affects GIRLS. Girls get marginalized by 🏳️‍⚧️ideology.

Well worth listening to this. 👏

It’s also insane that registered sex offenders can self-id as ‘TW’, get a new driver’s license that states they are female, and access female bathrooms, locker rooms, sports or prisons.

Thank you @KimJonesICONS 👏 A very simple issue. Does sex matter, or do the feelings of boys and men matter more than the rights of women and girls? Will the Dem Senators on this committee be willing to listen to how much gender ID hurts women and girls?

In March 2021, a man named Matt Thompson (who goes by “they/them” pronouns and describes himself as being “genderfuck”) wrote a paper in connection with his studies in gender and sexuality at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). He presented it at a conference in April that year for a course on Transnational Sexual Politics. The paper was titled, “Trans* Endemics: Embodying Viral and Monstrous Threat in Times of Pandemic.” In it, he said: “TERFs see transness as an endemic threat to feminism, a ‘social contagion’, the frontier on which they’re going to defeat patriarchy. They don their JK Rowling masks and shout bloody murder about ‘female erasure’. They see trans* people and gender studies departments as brainwashing the population against the sanctity of biological sex. Actually, on this last point, they’re not too far from right.” The paper concluded: “If TERFs think trans* is an endemic threat to feminism, let us be the threat to feminism. We are the endemic, the viral, the toxic onslaught of ideology that attacks the very core of what you hold dear. We go unnoticed, right up until the moment they scream for mercy. Am I a threat to you? Do I send chills down your spine? Picture this: I hold a knife to your throat and spit my transness into your ear. Does that turn you on? Are you scared? I sure fucking hope so.” web.archive.org/web/20210623…

👏👏👏

I agree.

Loved this speech. #WomenWillSpeak

I can’t wait until being the same sex your whole life is the new popular thing to be.

Well said Amelia clap. Rest of post below ⬇️

1./ 🧵 My latest article explores a mystery about the Pathways puberty blocker trial. In the High Court researchers insisted it shouldn't be judged by the standards of a normal 'randomised controlled trial'; because it wasn't one. Or so they said. This was a surprise. 👉 1/17

I don't know what Mr White is saying, because I refuse to listen to anything a transvestite man has to say about anything. These men are mentally disturbed. They are in the grip of a psychotic delusion. They should not be platformed. Doing so is an insult to all right-thinking people, especially women. Mr White's presentation as 'female' is horrific. It is no better than this... Why are you putting him on the telly, @GBNEWS ?

Any and all laws that say men can become women are wrong, and they all need to be repealed, amended, or fixed. ASAP. Is this really the kind of world we want to live in, where women are punished for calling a male person a man?

I’m so angry right now, thinking about how women & girls in Australia must be feeling. Then I remember that I live in CA, where, like in AU, men have full access to all female-only spaces & sports, including prisons. The fight goes on. We need to get back our sex-based rights.

SPECIAL LEAVE REFUSED: THE HIGH COURT WILL NOT HEAR GIGGLE’S APPEAL #GigglevTickle The High Court has refused Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd and Sall Grover special leave to appeal the Full Federal Court’s decision in Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd v Tickle [2026] FCAFC 64. The immediate legal consequence is that the Full Federal Court’s judgment stands as the final determination of this litigation. That judgment dismissed Giggle’s appeal, allowed Tickle’s cross-appeal and held that exclusion from the female-only Giggle app constituted two instances of direct discrimination on the ground of gender identity under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth). Compensation was increased from $10,000 to $20,000. A refusal of special leave is not the same as a judgment delivered after a full High Court appeal. It does not necessarily mean that the High Court has endorsed every part of the Full Court’s reasoning. Nor does it produce a detailed High Court ruling resolving every question raised by the case. It means the threshold for obtaining special leave—reserved for cases warranting the attention of Australia’s final appellate court—was not met. Nevertheless, the practical effect is substantial. The Full Court’s decision remains authoritative. Its interpretation of direct gender-identity discrimination, its approach to the statutory relationship between sex and gender identity, and its treatment of Giggle’s claim to be a special measure under s 7D will continue to shape the application of federal discrimination law. For women seeking to establish or preserve female-only services and spaces, the uncertainty does not disappear with the end of this case. The central policy questions remain: • How can the law protect people from discrimination based on gender identity while continuing to recognise women as a sex class? • In what circumstances can a female-only service lawfully operate? • What meaningful work can the special-measures provision in s 7D perform? • Does the Act presently provide organisations with sufficiently clear guidance before they establish a sex-specific service? • If the courts cannot resolve the tension in the way many women expected, should Parliament clarify the legislation? Those are no longer questions that will be answered through a High Court appeal in this proceeding. The focus must therefore turn to the text and operation of the Sex Discrimination Act itself—and to Parliament’s responsibility to ensure that the law identifies and protects sex-based rights clearly. This is the end of Giggle’s available appellate path, but it is not the end of the wider legal and democratic debate. Sall Grover brought before the courts questions that many Australians believe are fundamental: whether sex remains a legally meaningful category and whether women may organise services around their shared sex. The courts have now completed their role in this litigation. The responsibility for any legislative clarification rests with Parliament.