Tasmanian Times


Australian media warned … UK newspaper offices smoke-bombed and the rise of Transfascism

Last Friday in Kensington, London, trans rights activists smoke bombed Northcliffe House, which houses offices of the Daily Mail, the Evening Standard, the Independent and the Metro.

The attack by trans rights activists was in response to the Metro’s publication of a full page advertisement they claimed promoted ‘transphobia’.  The advertisement, from the group Fair Play for Women, stated they were ‘concerned that in the rush to reform transgender laws, women’s voices will not be listened to’.

Protesters blocked both entrances to the Northcliff House and employees had extreme difficulty leaving the building.  The street was closed off.  Protesters were apparently unaware that Metro staff do not work on Fridays.

See –




Read more at –


The Times journalist, Janice Turner, has also come under attack from the trans rights lobby over questions she has raised in a number of articles.  In Turner’s most recent article titled ‘Suicides should never be a political weapon’ she wrote

‘Trans campaigners cannot demand legislation without scrutiny.  My Times column from September 2017, which supposedly precipitated a suicide epidemic, described a feminist meeting where a trans activist punched a 60-year-old woman in the face.  Everything I have written since has been intended to shed light. Why is there a 4,000 per cent rise in girls believing they are in the “wrong body”: why is a male sex offender’s gender identity more important than the safety of women prisoners, resulting in the case of Karen White; can a compromise be reached which meets both trans and women’s rights?

I asked questions because many women (including trans women) risk their livelihoods for airing dissent, and could not.  Even 54 per cent of MPs, according to a ComRes poll, are scared to raise this subject.  In the middle of a government consultation!  No wonder, when suicide is shamefully wielded as a political weapon, when anyone who strays from dogma is accused of having children’s blood on their hands’.

See more at –



Meanwhile Scotland Yard has had to be very ‘careful’ about identifying the sex of three suspects who assaulted a 60 year old woman at a transgender rights event in London –

‘Police are hunting for three people wanted over an assault at a transgender rights event in Hyde Park – but have refused to give their gender in case they get it wrong.

Maria MacLachlan, 60, was punched in the face and knocked to the ground at Speakers’ Corner on September 23 by suspects including one clutching a ‘trans misogyny is still misogyny’ placard.

The mother-of-two, who describes herself as a ‘gender critical feminist’, was attacked at a ‘gender recognition talk’ in central London last month.

Describing the suspects in the attack, a Scotland Yard spokesman told The Telegraph –

 ‘We have to be very careful……

Supporters of the trio accused of attacking Ms MacLachlan later said it was acceptable to punch her because she was with Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists who believe you can only be a woman if you were born one’.

Read more at –


It seems transactivists and their supporters will countenance NO opposition or questions about their actions and their ideology.

The Liberal Democrats, for example, are under fire from women’s groups over their adherence to trans ideology and the edicts they have issued telling party members how they should respond to anyone who questions them about transgender issues –

‘Things to do:

Some useful stock responses are:

“This organization is committed to equality for LGBT people, and this includes trans people”

“We do not believe that there is a conflict between trans rights and women’s rights”

“Trans women are women; this is not up for debate”  

and, regrettably, sometimes “Please leave me/us alone”’ 

See –


In other words, the Lib Dems don’t want to encourage members to research the issues, ask questions and form their own views but repeat the trans dogma – or else!

What does this tell us here in Tasmania about trans ideologues and their claims to the media about those who question their views?   We are told we are fearmongering for raising legitimate concerns and asking questions trans activists refuse to answer.

What is worse, the Tasmanian media seems to have adopted trans ideology as though it were an uncontested truth.  There’s a huge wave of opposition out there, and they are deliberately ignoring it.

More on Tasmanian media coverage of women’s views in the trans right debate –



Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]


  1. Joanna

    October 23, 2018 at 7:18 pm

    I agree with you Christopher, about the use of words such as ‘fascism’ and ‘transphobia’. These are specific words describing extreme circumstances.

    This is reactive, violent, ideologically spurred behaviour, and it is celebrated by many in the left. This worries me, as I was always part of the activist culture. It is certainly very worrying to see the escalation of violence and bullying and intimidation.These people are out of the minds!

    It is important to highlight, like this article does, that groups who oppose the changes to GRA (Fair Play for Women,etc) have not been falling for the same tactics. They are angry, but they are not bullies. They run an amazing grass roots campaign.

    It has been consistently frustrating to see local media being intimidated or swayed by emotional and ideological rhetoric.

  2. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    October 23, 2018 at 2:55 pm

    ‘Transfascism’ sits on about the same level as ‘transphobia’ in terms of rhetorically hyper-inflated negative stereotyping.

    The street violence of the Italian fascist Blackshirts and Nazi SA Brownshirts was a product of paramilitary organization. They formed to defend their own and attack the meetings of opponents, particularly the communists. They would turn up armed with iron bars wrapped in newspaper and were trained to work in teams. Brawl injuries were often serious ones, sometimes leading to deaths. In the case of Jewish property, SA teams would routinely smash up shops and/or burn them down.

    Transgen street and meeting tactics aren’t in that league.

    Having said that, it is an ominous sign of the times that low level physical/social intimidation is being tried, because any upping of that sort of ante is bound to eventually provoke a counter-response and the possibility of a spiral in confrontational style and substance.

    The biggest risk in this is that that kind of milieu is an irresistible attractant to neo fascist and alt right ‘activists’….who can very quickly take over the space and then ‘spread the love’ around…and not just to other sexually off message groups. That outcome becomes more likely as the post WW2 social and economic consensus continues to break up.

    ‘Transphobia’ is a jargonistic pseudo-scientific rip off of real psychology designed to reduce opposition agenda to the level of fear and loathing, in order to deny it an intellectually legitimate ideological platform. It is a cheap and nasty propaganda stereotype that requires no justification, argument or evidence, but hey, mud sticks.

    And what is problematic about it, besides being a dirty tactic, is that it reflects a much more general collapse of political discourse into the cartoon language of marketing/publicrelationspeak, which is the privatized successor to the totalitarian state based propaganda machineries of the last century.

    I think the shrill aggression of the transgen lobby is not a protofascist phenomenon so much as a reflection of the sheer tendentiousness and vulnerability of its agenda. It has to be hardballed into the social firmament because it just won’t survive real critical inspection in the calmer atmosphere of controlled debate.

    The pseudo-philosophical ‘sexistentialist’ (I am my sexuality) identitarianism and commodification of sexual fantasy that has been alienated from its real reproductive purpose, is based on ideological crib, fudge and bluff, backed by long term marketing campaigns, in a society that now substantially leverages itself off sexual fantasy driven production and consumption.

    The transgen lobby is just a somewhat more aggressive extra layer preying on a social commons that is now in such a low resistance state of unstable uncertainty about what it stands for beyond complete deregulation and privatization of what is left of its damaged assets, that even a gnat can do real damage. And knowing how weakened the object of their attention is, makes gnats all the more ambitious, daring and aggressive.

    A less battered society vaguely in possession of itself would just bat them off. They wouldn’t even try it on. The ‘equality’ line would be seen for it is, as rank opportunism, because to be regarded as an equal in anything, you need to qualify, as in meeting some criteria, doing so to a certain standard and providing some evidence to that effect, of slightly higher calibre than a self serving and ideologically updated version of racial ‘science’.

    Unfortunately the human rights culture that the transgens have battened on to legitimize their ideological demands conveniently does away with the need for regulatory qualification, unlike the more pedestrian civil rights suite where one actually has to have both implicitly and explicitly earned standing to gain and keep them, as in some kind of responsible and accountable adult agency; i.e., a social contract. Thus the existing culture has declared an open season on itself by permitting an on-demand rights structure that anyone with a good line and a decently funded and protracted campaign can colonize at will.

    In the meantime, the status of women rots inside the indulgent sexual availability fantasies constructed around them during the so called sexual revolution, because the sexy bit of sexual politics are the only stuff that is allowed to get traction. The deregulation of the social system did them in. The institutional patriarchy was replaced by its deregulated version that swept its politics under the carpet of informality and disarticulated the power and work discrepancies it caused. The formal decencies and honourable intentions of courtship and rules based social/sexual behaviour was traded in on an indulgent open season where women were the sexual bunnies with a status little better than prostitutes.

    So why is it that microscopically unrepresentative swill like the transgen lobby can make all the right noises and sweep all before it, while the sisters, who represent 50% of the market get screwed literally and metaphorically?

    Indulgence Capitalism loves deregulation of any sort, because it destroys the capacity to intellectually discriminate between genuine truth values and fantasy. It is the perfect dance partner to the toleration of/excuse making for excesses and poor/undisciplined behaviour. It systematically destroys rules based behaviour and proper character building and the means to mentor and enforce it, leaving large swathes of the population in a state of permanent adolescent narcissism…especially males. Autonomous behaviour and self control becomes uncool and ‘out of step’ with spontaneous buying behaviour, whatever the product, service or idea on offer is. And above all, it leaves the whole social edifice more at the mercy of Marketing and Sales Inc than anything ever achieved by the great state totalitarians of the past.

    The transgen lobby is just froth on top of glass of indulgence lager that is really just fermented urine that has become part of the ‘acquired taste’ of latter day modern societies. Its governance is already starting to implode along with the rest of the infrastructure of life and its increasing incapacity to reproduce itself without turning feral…or going into denial about the basic character of our biological being and fundamental purposes as human beings.

    Social agenda just cannot get any more dangerous than that. Fascism be damned. The Wrath of God more like!

    And if I am not wrong, this is what the coming wars of toleration will be fundamentally all about for the next couple of centuries, just as it was at the beginning of the modern period.

    Great journeys must be imagined first
    and so trenchant in their intent
    to slake the deepest kind of thirst,
    they grasp imaginers by the throat
    and tell them bluntly
    only through travail and trial,
    by purging fire
    and hammer blows be smote
    can their spirit be reforged
    and history’s child
    be sired.
    This ordeal can either temper
    or destroy
    according to its whim,
    or perhaps the pilgrims’ strength within.
    Courage can surmount faint hearts,
    but how can faith presume
    that having gambled all,
    there is a way to save us in the end?
    There are no roads upon the other side,
    except the ones we make,
    every step perhaps at stake
    our lives,
    every view through soldiers’ eyes.
    And so we wile away our days
    beside brooding familiarities
    that will not speak to us for fear
    that it is not the sun that brightens
    all that we hold dear,
    but the bonfire of our vanities;
    that the deepening darkening shade it castes
    is not shadow,
    but decaying sanity.
    We look for hopeful signs,
    but at midnight,
    the clock rings its hands and says
    in anguished tones,
    “Ladies and Gentlemen,
    it’s time.”

    • Jillian

      October 24, 2018 at 8:11 am

      “I think the shrill aggression of the transgen lobby is not a protofascist phenomenon so much as a reflection of the sheer tendentiousness and vulnerability of its agenda. It has to be hardballed into the social firmament because it just won’t survive real critical inspection in the calmer atmosphere of controlled debate.”

      Nailed it.

  3. Isla MacGregor

    October 23, 2018 at 1:44 pm

    Trevor Phillips was chairman of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission 2006-12 and had this to say in The Times on 22 October:

    ‘The disaster of the public consultation process on gender recognition has revealed a government so terrified of being labelled transphobic that it is ready to destroy half a century of painstakingly assembled anti-discrimination legislation to the detriment of every woman, person of colour and disabled individual in Britain …

    However, agitation by a guilt-tripping band of “trans” activists has corralled MPs into contemplating a wholly unnecessary and dangerous further step. It is seriously being suggested that we should do away with any objective test of gender, and leave the decision as to whether an individual should be treated as male or female entirely in the hands of the person themselves. In short, a man would be able to declare himself a woman, and immediately have every right to enter spaces reserved for women — changing rooms, lavatories, prisons …

    I can only imagine that many of those supporting this insanity believe that they are displaying empathy for a group of individuals who have suffered genuine anguish. But this is certainly not what I had in mind when, along with the other authors of the 2010 Equality Act, we fought to include transgender as a protected characteristic in anti-discrimination law. The truth is that, far from encouraging empathy, extreme trans activists and their allies are adding a new layer of cruelty by raising false hopes that changing gender could become as easy as changing a name …

    Self-declaration is already proving a disaster elsewhere in the world. In Brazil, dozens of blonde, blue-eyed students were found to have taken university places reserved for the descendants of African slaves. Given the country’s history of sexual violence pretty much every Brazilian can claim a black ancestor but this was hardly the law’s aim. In the US, Rachel Dolezal, a white woman who declared herself an African-American, contrived to become an officer of the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People. Vijay Chokal-Ingam, brother of the Indian-American TV star Mindy Kaling, found that his grades weren’t good enough to get him into medical school, so he shaved his hair, trimmed his eyelashes, reclassified himself as African-American, and duly took his place at St Louis University, almost certainly depriving some worthy young person of medical training.

    The self-declaration principle, masquerading as compassionate recognition, risks making a mockery of the struggle for equality. If ministers give in to trans zealots, a white man would merely need to say “Today, I’m a black woman. I might not be tomorrow but, hey, who cares?” Well, I do. And so should everyone who genuinely believes in fairness.’

    • Mentor in Prevention of Violemce

      October 23, 2018 at 4:10 pm

      Women and girls continue to struggle for genuine advancement in all countries and within all cultures, including the right to access health and education, income for livelihoods, political and legal representation and freedom from sexual and all forms of violence, and access to reproductive choice and safe birthing centres that empower.

  4. Trisha Y Roberts

    October 23, 2018 at 10:23 am

    What a sad little “news” source Tasmanian Times is to be fearmongering like this.

    • Invicta

      October 23, 2018 at 2:59 pm

      It’s interesting to see the truth spoken of as ‘fear-mongering’. And by the way, nobody ‘fears’ trans people – if they bother to think beyond the approved, politically correct trans narrative, they’re not scared, but intensely annoyed at the narcissistic entitlement of the trans lobby and the shortsightedness of those who readily accept its Orwellian doublespeak.

    • Isla MacGregor

      October 23, 2018 at 5:29 pm

      Tasmanian Times … for the news you won’t get in other Tasmanian media.

      Here’s why: It has a fearless, fair and professional editor, Lindsay Tuffin, who supports the fundamental concept of freedom of speech, fair debate and the vital importance of the role of the fourth estate on which a real democracy relies.

  5. Roen

    October 23, 2018 at 7:48 am

    Funny .. I saw video of the protest and the protesters were standing several metres from the doors, dancing on the spot to pop music. I don’t see how that makes it difficult to get in/out of the building .. unless you’re scared to be near trans people.

    What are the questions that “trans activists refuse to answer”?

    • Invicta

      October 23, 2018 at 2:50 pm

      As you may be aware, the UK government has just wound up a public consultation on proposed changes to its Gender Recognition Act. Those changes will, among other things, allow transgender persons to change the sex marker on their birth certificate on the basis of self-identification alone. As you would also know, the same change is proposed by Transforming Tasmania for the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act in Tasmania – see their policy outline at https://ymlp.com/zMdaVo.

      Many women’s groups see this change as potentially having a negative impact on female-born persons’ rights to female-only spaces, services and facilities. The trans rights activists mentioned in the article above are PROTESTING because a newspaper had the temerity to run a paid advertisement that didn’t agree with their agenda.

      Do they think they OWN the media? Do they think no-one has a right to express an opinion at odds with their ideology? Are they so fragile that they have to claim bigotry and victimisation every single time someone disagrees with them?

      Protesting in this way does the trans rights movement no favours. It makes them look like spoilt children. When almost everyone is rushing to appease them – offering grovelling apologies for any supposed offence and buying into the bizarre fiction that a male born person can magically become female, just because they feel like it. It’s not a good look to stamp your feet petulantly at EVERY perceived affront.

      And no-one is ‘scared’ of trans people because they’re trans. They are, however, understandably frightened of any activists, trans or otherwise, who picket their workplace and feel entitled to physically and verbally assault anyone who rejects their demands.

      As for the questions trans activists refuse to answer, how about these for a start …

      1. How can a movement that claims to reject socially constructed, sex-related stereotypes logically suggest that it’s possible to have a ‘gender identity’ incongruent with biological sex, when that ‘gender identity’ is expressed via the very sex-related stereotypes they supposedly denounce?

      2. Why is the trans rights movement so determined to silence any dissent, especially from women’s rights groups? Are they scared of the truth? Do they not believe in free speech?

      3. What is the opinion of the trans rights movement, in general, about the current trend towards ‘gender affirmation’ in the treatment of trans children? Are they concerned that these children are being treated with untested hormonal therapies and offered unnecessary disfiguring surgery at younger and younger ages? Do they know that the likely long term effect of such treatments will be, at the very least, irreversible infertility? Do they think adolescents have the emotional and cognitive maturity to truly understand what loss of fertility means?

      4. Why is the trans rights movement convinced that allowing changes to sex markers on birth certificates will have no negative consequences for female born persons? Do they think NO man is capable of abusing and exploiting women and girls? Do they not understand the lengths some men will go to in order to abuse intimate partners? Do they think allowing male bodied persons to legally join female-only groups like Girl Guides will NOT be exploited by certain men?

      5. Why are the issues faced by intersex persons deliberately conflated with trans rights when they are entirely different? Intersex persons are born with a Disorder of Sex Development (DSD) – they often have ambiguous genitalia and other associated physical anomalies. They deal with these problems from birth, and they don’t decide, at some point later in life, that their perfectly normal body is ‘wrong’.

      6. How can the trans rights lobby claim birth certificates are ‘useless’ .. but at the same time advocate for legislative amendments that will allow them to easily change the sex marker on their birth certificate and thereby ‘validate’ their ‘gender identity’?

      I look forward to some well-reasoned, logical answers.

To Top