Queensland Beautiful one day

Gilead the next.

Recently I have been wondering how anyone could miss the misogyny that is woven into policies that proport to champion the mysterious cohort of humans that are called trans people, I never realised how powerful the capture of the media was and how lazy people can be in accepting the narratives and opinions distributed by the bourgeois left.

Our latest dollhouse is about the fight against the neo-Nazis which are apparently middle aged feminists now.  

I’ve been writing this week about Shannon Fentiman, just for a change.  I sent it to The Spectator because I want it to be distributed widely. I don’t get paid for writing in The Spectator, but it does give me a wider audience. That should be out Monday, if they don’t want the names in there (they sometimes remove them to protect the publication) I will publish here.

Last week in the wake of Nazi-gate Fentiman tweeted that she is bringing in new laws to ban the “the public display of hate symbols such as those representative of Nazi ideology”. Fentiman went on to say that she is “also introducing tougher penalties for crimes motivated by hatred based on race, religion, sexuality, sex characteristics or gender identity.” So this bans nazis and equates them with the women like me that Fentiman hates the most.

We know that nobody is asking for these laws, and we can wonder where they come from.  I point out in the Spectator that the authority for the legislation are the Yogyakarta Principles (sited three times in the explanatory notes of the Bill).  The Yogyakarta Principles emerged from a website developed in Indonesia and have been further cultivated by gender identity activists. It’s an entirely illegitimate authority.

Here is an excellent article on the Yogyakarta Principles in The Critic by Julie Bindel and Melanie Newman where it is made clear that the principles didn’t take women’s rights into account.

The fact that the unratified Yogyakarta principles are an illegitimate authority for legislation is part of the basis for the constitutional challenge currently being run by Sall Grovers legal team.

You can support Sall in her fight against illegitimate legislation oppressing Australian women here.

https://gigglecrowdfund.com/

Despite fenitiman’s claim we have seen no problems overseas with this terrible weaponising of discrimination legislation that was made to protect women against them, we have seen lots of issue buried by terrible captured media.

Last year in Port Townsend in Washington State an 80-year-old woman by the name of Julie came out of the shower the YMCA to find a man helping little girls go to the toilet.  When she challenged the man, Julie was expelled from the YMCA.  The YMCA had policies that compelled the woman and the infants to see the man with a female gender identity exactly the same as a woman.  Very few parents I know would employ a male person, of any identity, to help their girl child use the toilet. This is a long-standing safety convention based on the statistical unlikelyhood of a female, even an unknown female

A subsequent meeting at the town hall, women come forward to bring their arguments for single sex spaces for women and girls, some women citing sexual trauma from assault.

The press, in conjunction with the local authorities in Port Townsend have combined to vilify Julie and any woman who would ask for single sex spaces.  One publication in Port Townsend called Julie’s complaint a “nasty instance of transphobic bullying.” They went on to say that women who testified of a need for single sex spaces because of sexual trauma were weponising their trauma.  This is rich from a group who never cease using made up statistics to appear far more vulnerable than women.  Apparently, sympathy for the fear women carry “ends when those fears are used to target other vulnerable people.”  There is no evidence that the adoption of gender identity in accordance with Fentiman’s new legal definition makes men in any way vulnerable. Juvenile human females on the other hand are the most vulnerable people on the planet.  

Not satisfied with a her usual level of handmaiden oppression of women Fentiman is cooking new legislation to “include a legal obligation to prevent discrimination and sexual harassment.” Remember this includes male women.  So we have to be active gender evangelists now under the Gilead utopia.

https://twitter.com/ShannonFentiman/status/1642734583669198848?s=20

There is a potential here for Fentiman to be, like Haman to be hung on her own gallows.

There is evidence that organisations are changing policies to protect themselves from the potential problems in making essentially mixed sex facilities advertised as single sex facilities. The ABC reported recently  that Terrigal surf lifesaving club members were “shocked over 'no nudity' policy in change rooms”.  Anyone with a brain could see the public liability insurance behind the scenes performing damage control.  

We can’t really hope that lawmakers will alter their path in the face of argument, facts, statistics or even the bodies of raped women. I have come to believe that increasing government power is the point of this over reach with anti-discrimination legislation.  In the WiSpa incident in California, the man who came into the female area of the Spa was a registered sex offender who displayed his semi erect penis in front of children and “progressives” went to unbelievable lengths to deny what is blindingly obvious.

The Guardian called the reports from women and children “misinformation” right up to the man’s arrest.  Even on the sex offenders arrest, The Guardian still reported that the “woman’s claims” spurred “anti-trans” protest. framing the woman’s complaint of a real-life sex crime as an act of aggression towards trans people.

The reframing women’s instincts and hypervigilance as hate is the cruellest aspect of this suite of Fentiman legislation.  That this has been missed by the privileged women of the Labor Party and the men on the Liberal party is only understandable in their class privilege of wealth and sex respectively.

The trans rights argument that is run by members of the Queensland Government and others is that we need evidence that girls and women are being sexually assaulted in single sex facilities by trans identified men before we reconsider the laws.  According to this argument, not only do we need to see girls and women sexually assaulted, Queensland Government Ministers have requested “peer reviewed” data of these attacks.  Ministers of the Queensland Government have openly scoffed at claims of women’s vulnerability, even in the face of prison and court data.

Activists counter statistic and logic with the simplistic statement that “trans people” are no danger to women. I have tried to determine in the legislation how female Queenslanders are to identify one of these males how they are to know when they are in risk of prosecution when they exclude one of these males from a space where instinct and hypervigilance will make women either unsafe and uncomfortable. 

My conclusion is that the mysterious and invisible gender identity that we are trust without question can be evidenced in an item of clothing or the tone of a voice but ultimately it is determined by the word of a man, women and girls alike must believe any man who claims he has a female soul and submit our rights to dignity and safety to him.  

Sex has been replaced in law with gender identity and sex characteristics. Here are the new definitions in the legislation

We can’t get protections even in “sex” characteristics because this has been placed in here to protect the breasts that a man grows and is still submitted to the authority of gender identity. Our female bodies must now submit to the “dress, speech and behaviour” of men. Welcome to Queensland beautiful one day Gilead the next.

Cheers,

Edie.