Feminism

A nurse who was disciplined for calling a transgender paedophile “Mr” is facing dismissal for allegedly speaking publicly about her ordeal.
Jennifer Melle, 40, was issued with a final written warning after misgendering the patient at St Helier Hospital in Carshalton, Surrey, in May 2024.
Ms Melle said she referred to the individual, an inmate from a high-security men’s prison listed as male on their medical record, as “Mr” and “he” while discussing the use of a catheter.
She told them: “Sorry I cannot refer to you as ‘her’ or ‘she’, as it’s against my faith and Christian values but I can call you by your name.”

The use of a catheter would seem to be one of those times when biological sex – in hte absence of anyone having had the chop – was the operating necessity, no?

But being sensible isn’t any part of gender politics now, is it?

On X, a woman posts a photo in a sari, and within minutes, various users are underneath the post tagging Grok to strip her down to a bikini. It is a shocking violation of privacy, but now a familiar and commonplace practice. Between June 2025 and January 2026, I documented 565 instances of users requesting Grok to create nonconsensual intimate imagery. Of these, 389 were requested in just one day.

Last Friday, after a backlash against the platform’s ability to create such nonconsensual sexual images, X announced that Grok’s AI image generation feature would only be available to subscribers. Reports suggest that the bot now no longer responds to prompts to generate images of women in bikinis (although apparently will still do so for requests about men).

But as the technology secretary, Liz Kendall, rightly states, this action “does not go anywhere near far enough”.

Why is a piccie in a bikini a sexual image?

Sure, sure, at one point in society a glimpse of ankle was enough. But we’re different now. Standard dress for teenage girls walking down the street these days is little more than a bikini. And don’t you dare say that’s flashing you misogynist you.

“It’s the actual back and forth of it, [trying] to shut someone down by saying, ‘Grok, put her in a bikini,’” she said.

“The performance of it is really important there, and really shows the misogynistic undertones of it, trying to punish or silence women. That also has a cascading effect on democratic norms and women’s role in society.”

Why is this misogyny? Why does it shut women down?

They are at least admitting the obvious here:

“There are hundreds of apps hosted on mainstream app stores like Apple and Google that make this possible,” said Nina Jankowicz, a disinformation expert who co-founded the American Sunlight Project. “Much of the infrastructure of deepfake sexual abuse is supported by companies that we all use on a daily basis.”

OK, the tools exist. They will be used. What’s going to happen is that they’ll just become the background to a normal life. Because that’s what happens to things that are ubiquitous. Give it 6 months and it’ll be “Oh, that’s AI. And?”

It’s very telling that the most vocal self-appointed “protectors of women and girls” have nothing to say about the absolutely horrific production of AI-generated sexual abuse images of real women and children that’s happening on X on an industrial scale.

As they continue to post on X, in many cases paying for the privilege to do so, the anti-trans activists, columnists, politicians and publishers are making it very clear that while the existence of trans women in public is beyond the pale for them, widespread image-based sexual abuse of women and children is not.

AI images is just like slicing the tits off a teenage girl.

No, really.

But there is a new, arguably greater threat: the extremism of young women. If young men have trended Rightwards and downwards, young women have gone to the dark Left. Haven’t you noticed that the most passionate disrupters, yelling till puce in the face, are women?

Major surveys have already shown that Gen Z women have moved sharply to the Left over the past few years. In the UK, the 2024 election showed how wide the gender gap, in electoral politics alone, has become.

A good 23 per cent of 18- to 24-year-old women voted Green, compared to 12 per cent of young men and 6.7 per cent of the general population.

So that century long experiment hasn’t worked out. The wisdom of our forefathers – to emotional to be able to think properly about things – has proven correct.

Back we go therefore.

Right?

The Trump administration is facing a legal complaint from a group of government employees affected by a new policy going into effect Thursday that eliminates coverage for gender-affirming care in federal health insurance programs.

The complaint, filed Thursday on the employees’ behalf by the Human Rights Campaign, is in response to an August announcement from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) that it would no longer cover “chemical and surgical modification of an individual’s sex traits through medical interventions” in health insurance programs for federal employees and US Postal Service workers.

The complaint argues that denying coverage of gender-affirming care is sex-based discrimination and asks the personnel office to rescind the policy.

I can see that it’s discrimination about gender, yes. Even willing, for the sake of argument, to agree it’s discrimination about sex. But it’s not discrimination on the basis if sex, which is what sex discrimination means. They’ll not pay for female to male, nor male to female. Thus it’s not discrimination upon the basis of sex, is it?

But accusations against him wouldn’t disappear for good.
Indeed, by the time of the FBI’s April 2020 letter, he had fathered eight children with five women

Now, yes, that is just an extract and yet that is a continuous extract. Fathering children with different women is, well, umm, an accusation? Bad?

In a way that noting that a woman has children by different fathers is not an accusation, bad, perhaps?

As it happens Nygard was indeed a Bad’Un. But it’s just that bit there which I think interesting – and interesting not about him at all, but interesting about what is being assumed by the journalist.

The phrase female genital mutilation is “stigmatising” to certain cultures and should be replaced with a more “inclusive” term, academics have argued in a British Medical Journal publication.
In an article published in the BMJ’s Journal of Medical Ethics, researchers called for the term to be replaced with the phrase “female genital practices” to “account for cultural complexity and avoid the reductive and stigmatising force of the term ‘mutilation’”.

Whitey’s being unfair to darkies, see?

In the article, academics suggest that criticism of FGM is based on “racialised stereotypes” and “Western sensationalism”.
The 25 co-authors, made up of academics from the University of Cambridge, the University of Bristol and Brighton and Sussex Medical School, said that they had different views on “debates and disagreements” about such practices, with some opposed to all genital cutting practices and others arguing “it is up to parents to decide what is best for their children”.
However, they wrote: “We are concerned that, out of all the genital practices alluded to above — carried out across cultures, age ranges, sexes and genders — there has been a systematic tendency to cordon off and single out, for purposes of condemnation and critique, only those practices affecting non-intersex females, and among these, only those that are customary in the global south, especially in Africa (or in diaspora communities), while ignoring similar practices that have long been customary in powerful countries of the global north.”

To criticise the practice of cutting off a woman’s clitoris is bad because it’s Global North, see?

Peter Malinauskas, the 45-year-old premier of South Australia and father of four children aged ten and under, was at home with his wife. She had just read the final page of The Anxious Generation, the psychologist Jonathan Haidt’s best-selling book about the dangers of social media to young people. “I will never forget one night, she finished the book, she turned to me and she said: ‘You better bloody do something about this,’” Malinauskas recalled.
The democratic world’s first social media ban began in Australia on Wednesday.

So an entire country gets pussy whipped into something then, eh?

So, what else is subject to this sort of femininity? Politics say? And if so, was the expansion of the franchise really all that wise?

Scientists have issued an urgent warning that some of the synthetic chemicals that help underpin the current food system are driving increased rates of cancer, neurodevelopmental conditions and infertility, while degrading the foundations of global agriculture.

The health burden from phthalates, bisphenols, pesticides and Pfas “forever chemicals” amounts to up to $2.2tn a year – roughly as much as the profits of the world’s 100 largest publicly listed companies, according to the report published on Wednesday.

Most ecosystem damage remains unpriced, they say, but even a narrow accounting of ecological impacts, taking into account agricultural losses and meeting water safety standards for Pfas and pesticides, implies a further cost of $640bn. There are also potential consequences for human demographics, with the report concluding that if exposure to endocrine disruptors such as bisphenols and phthalates persists at current rates, there could be between 200 million and 700 million fewer births between 2025 and 2100.

The biggest source of endocrine disruptors in modern societies’ water is women pissing out the byproducts of the pill. Strangely, no one ever does say women should have to pay for this pollution.

Well, I have done, a couple of times, and didn’t I get stick for having done so?

‘It was extremely pornographic’: Cara Hunter on the deepfake video that nearly ended her political career

The Irish politician was targeted in 2022, in the final weeks of her run for office. She has never found out who made the malicious deepfake, but knew immediately she had to try to stop this happening to other women

Politics is not going to be able to stop this. Sorry and all that but it just isn’t. The tech exists, it will be used because there are bad people out there.

The only solution – and it’s the one that will happen just because that’s the way the world works – is that in a decade or three we’ll simply accept that video evidence is not evidence. Too easy to fake therefore that’s that – we’ll just, as a society, assume that it is faked. It will all be as convincing as cutting out a face from a photo and sticking it on a Page 3 girl.

Doesn;t help people today when it’s maybe and about believable that something might not be a fake. But as I say the solution, the end point, is going to be that having film of something just isn’t proof of anything at all other than a few command lines.

Rising levels of hate forcing women out of Swedish public life, says equality agency

Well, you know, maybe.

The 2025 politicians’ security survey, carried out by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, found that 26.3% of female elected representatives reported being exposed to threats and harassment last year because of their position. The equivalent figure for men was 23.6%.

Ah. It’s not quite as much as a genderdly thing as being suggested then, eh?

The number of women globally who commit violent crimes is very small – in 2021 they were responsible for just 10% of homicides. Indeed, women are far more likely to be victims than perpetrators. But when women do kill, in many cases the victim is a male partner or family member and there is a history of domestic abuse.

Data and research suggests the majority of women on death row around the world have been sentenced to death for the crime of murder, and that most of these were committed in the context of gender-based violence. Women kill to save themselves – only to face abuse and death again.

Therefore wimmins who kill a bloke should be let off, see?

Not that that’s quite said outloud but you know it’s meant.

Increasingly, research shows that women who kill their abusers are let down by criminal justice systems and are not getting fair trials. They are faced with lawyers who are not equipped to deal with survivors of abuse; justice systems that are patriarchal, rigid and old-fashioned; and a lack of understanding of how coercive control or domestic violence work and the resulting mental health impact.

See?

A study by Penal Reform International found that with few exceptions criminal justice systems are failing women by ignoring their trauma and the realities and dynamics of domestic violence. In most countries there is no separate basis in law for a history of abuse to be considered, and generally women must rely on existing legal defences, which tend to be ill-adapted to women who have experienced prolonged abuse.

Speshul.

A transgender athlete has been stripped of her world strongwoman title after allegedly failing to tell competition organisers that she was a “biological male”.

Jammie Booker, an American competitor, was crowned the world’s strongest woman at the Official Strongman Games in Texas, beating British lifter and former champion Andrea Thompson by a single point on Sunday.

New Zealand has announced it is banning new prescriptions of puberty-blocking drugs for young transgender people, in a move that critics warned could worsen the mental health of those affected.

If you start from one extreme, that there’s no such thing as gender dysphoria in teens, then obviously this is good. If you move one step to a slightly milder position – about my own – which is that humans can believe qll sorts of things which are not, in fact true, and that this one generally clears up with puberty itself, then this is also good news. Let us attempt the most effective cure we know of before anything else.

Other views don’t matter here of course.

Celebrity crib sheet: Sydney Sweeney is everywhere – here are nine things you need to know about her

The tits are so impressive even The G has to write about them?

And Tsk, eh?

Sweeney’s art, however, is increasingly at risk of being overshadowed by her controversies. In July, an ad for the denim company American Eagle, showing Sweeney decked out in denim with the tagline “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans” sparked instant controversy, seen by some as catering to the “male gaze” and subtly promoting whiteness.

Why shouldn’t an attractive white bird glam up a bit for the male gaze? And sure, being an attracti e white bird can be sen as promoting whiteness – she usually gins the sort of reaction that would lead to more little white babies if carried to conclusion – but, you know, so what?

No doubt it’s part of the ongoing internal battle on the wider subject.

It wasn’t until she was 36, after years of “performing as a man”, that she found out that she has partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (PAIS). Essentially, that meant that although she had the XY chromosomes characteristic of a male, her body didn’t fully respond to testosterone, and would never look fully “masculine”. After doctors advised her that keeping her male genitalia would greatly increase her risk of cancer, Luk agreed to have surgery to remove them and started living legally as a woman. Now, alongside her work as a doctor of Chinese medicine, she is an ardent activist for intersex rights across the globe – calling for an end to genital reconstruction surgeries on children before they are old enough to consent themselves. “I really don’t want them to experience the same suffering,” she says.

All part of that trans stuff. For there are indeed those few intersex. And it’s possible to have the argument over surgery on children using intersex instead of trans. You know, to avoid getting mobbed by shrieking nonsense from the likes of Freddie. You know, Freddie, the bird who took testosterone then stopped in order to get pregnant – twice I think – and also insisted that they feared for their very life because someone in The Guardian newsroom said something not fully supportive. Can’t recall what that was, maybe rainbow zebra crossings or something.

This week marks a turning point in the UK’s approach to violent porn. The government has announced it will make publishing or possessing pornographic depictions of strangulation or suffocation – often known as “choking” – illegal. This bold move could transform the porn that appears on porn sites and social media platforms.

Strangulation in porn was once niche. Indeed, studies investigating the content of porn 20 years ago found hardly any instances of it. Yet an independent review of pornography released this year found that it was rife on the most popular porn sites. This summer the children’s commissioner released a report revealing that 58% of young people had seen strangulation in pornography, even though only 6% had searched for it. As renowned porn producer Erika Lust puts it, strangulation has become the “alpha and omega” of “any porn scene”.

So, ban anyone seeing it and it will go away.

And yet…..when people actually study varied turn ons – academically you understand, not directly and personally – it seems to be a larger subgroup of women turned on by it than subgroup of men. The kink is more about do it to me than do it to someone.

Which is interesting, no?

There is the comforting news that many boys report being happy to continue showing their vulnerability as they head into the adult world, feel at ease comforting friends and are happy to talk openly about their problems.

Why is this comforting? Why is it comforting that men adopt feminine behavioural patterns?

Could this in itself be a problem, this rigid focus on a masculine solution to the rigid masculinity problem? It perpetuates the foregrounding of masculinity and says something salient about how important everyone thinks it is for men to teach boys how to be men. Why?

Blimey, we’re getting to the up own colon stage of argumentation here, no?

So what does it mean to be a boy/man? Ultimately it means the same thing that it means to be a girl/woman, or anyone on the gender spectrum. That you are no better or worse than anyone else regardless of your biology. That you have the distinct ability to reflect on and laugh at your existence. That you should be free and safe to be whoever you want to be. It’s what it means to be human.

And is that stupid? Why is there, therefore, this differentiation into male and female if, in fact, we’re all the same? Even, if we’re all the same then how can we differentiate?