Tasmanian Times


Coming to a women’s gym near you …

This is what women and girls can expect at the women’s gym under Greens/Labors new laws – and woe betide you if you object.

From here

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


  1. Rob Halton

    November 30, 2018 at 9:58 pm

    I cant believe it that tears were shed by the Upper House MP’s such as Rob Valentine as the debate on gender law was briefed on yesterday. Makes the public look like idiots, what the hell are our political representatives doing being tangled up emotionally over a select group of “misfits” who do nothing but complain despite a recent national overwhelming support for Gay Marriage which represents a social acceptance for equality.

    Proposed changes to a suite of laws related to transgender and gender diverse Tasmanians has been delayed till March next year!

    And by the way it is my firm belief if religious schools if they so desire despite any highly charged laws for “so called equality” will continue to choose who they wish to accept into their midst in order to teach the creed which they represent!

    Unfortunately for Transgenders, acceptance will continue a lot harder than for straight out Gays who generally do not place any “special” demands to speak of in schools, workplaces and within the social environment.

    Ron, by the way the picture posted is not Porn, the person is not actually doing anything to suggest smut as you would prefer to think!

    Chris, a well described assessment of the situation of the individual, my view is also for those that wish to destroy the bodies that they were born with bear full responsibility for their potential medical misadventure throughout their life.

  2. Kim Peart

    November 30, 2018 at 3:14 am

    Poor old former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made an absolute idiot of himself when he came out as a fundamentalist wowser, thumping and screeching over Bill Henson’s art photos as porn. They were deemed art by an artist in the eyes of the law, and well as the art world. Read Cate Blanchett’s clear-eyed statement on the matter ~ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/may/28/australia.art

    If old Rudd had been more attuned to the realities of our society, and life, maybe he would have lasted longer as leader, which may have helped avoid the current whirligig of highly destructive politics that is dragging this nation into a global laughing pit.

    Is Tasmanian Times being published in the Victorian era, when table legs had little dresses and Queen Victoria had a pornography collection?

    If it is not possible to show a basic naked form in a modern publication, which is quite frequent in publications to illustrate anatomy, nature and art, then we have entered a water tank of blindness, and may the children hammer on that, where wowsers hide, with their secret lives.

    More problematic is the plague of young women who follow the Eastern custom of removing any labia that can be seen because they feel in some way ashamed of this aspect of their body, or they wish to look more like a child, down there.

    Do we blame publications that focus on labia-free images for driving young minds in the direction of the knife?

    I wonder if this stems from our failure as a society to show natural woman, and honour their natural form. Why should any young woman end up feeling so ashamed of her body that she will seek the knife?

    Some female labia can be quite as bold as the crown jewels shown in this story’s photo.

    Rather than growing trees of forbidden fruit, where children don’t know the difference between natural and carnal, should we wake up and ensure that our children know, and are aware, and don’t live in a fear of being seen? Self-Censorship of the body, to fit some perceived social expectation, is quite a health issue. But that happens when parents and teachers do not show children what is natural.

    Art can take the viewer past the naturally nude and into the naturally erotic. Then the viewer may be standing before a work of Leda and the Swan, even by Leonardo Da Vinci, and a long list of other great artists. Is this erotic art? Is this bestiality? Is it spiritual art? Is it mythological? Could this image be used to illustrate a story about Leda and the Swan in a Tasmanian Times story?

    If the answer is “No!” then would Tasmanian Times be dead in a wowser graveyard?

    What are the consequences of building a society that views a photo of a naked body as porn?

  3. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    November 29, 2018 at 10:11 pm

    Congratulations Bronwyn and Isla for bringing us the stark realities of gender dysphoria and the visceral consequences it has.

    I do not care what happens to the character above. What he does to butcher and malform his body is his business, as long as the tax system doesn’t have to subsidise his sexual fantasies. He makes an individual medical consumer choice, pays for it and has to live with the consequences. Good luck to his little member. May his breasts always be pert ones, and may his sexual hangups keep his medical and pharmaceutical team in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

    However, trying to impose his psychiatric disorder and his phoney ideology on the rest of us is another matter. The fact that he and the lobby behind him thinks it not only can, but also has an entitlement to colonise the rest of society with his off-message preferences is hard to take.

    We live in a society whose social infrastructure has been heavily corroded. Its boundaries have been removed by a process of systematic indulgent deregulation that spectacularly benefits otherwise insignificant minorities that align with that, who ordinarily wouldn’t get a sniff at mainlining their agenda. The genuinely substantial feminist re-regulatory sexual politics that would actually change the world by reconstructing that infrastructure is floundering in the wake of smart gender and sex sales industry bluffers, cribbers and fudgers.

    The situation here is just the same as the environmental crisis which is driven by an identical deregulatory and privatisation agenda in the economic realm. Its fundamental drivers are to asset strip the commons in favour of private consumption of any bloody fantasy you like because ordinary needs and wants just don’t feed the beast enough meat.

    Sex and gender just become another marketing opportunity. For indulgence capitalism, transgens are just another juicy market segment. And who cares if it is all bullshit if it helps burn down what little is left of our reproductive commons in favour of markets and ‘consumer choice’ .. which is what the transgen lobby is really all about.

    Indulgence capitalism is undoing us as a species as much as it is undoing the ecological systems that keep us alive. All the things that build and enrich the software and biology of life are now at discounts and threatened with the proverbial post Christmas sell off, whether we talking forests or bringing up children .. our future!

    The feminists (and women generally) on whose toes the transgens are so heavily treading, have a real agenda to make life better than it is for everybody; not some miserable little minority.

    They offer templates with which we can build a social edifice that is worth living in, no matter what happens to the economy where men and women, husbands and wives and mothers and fathers have stable, secure and profoundly sex role neutral and meritocratic (rather gender role) operating social values, procedures and protocols that bring out the best in all of us. It will enable future high integrity girls and boys to treat each other with equitability, dignity, respect, consideration and willingness to sacrifice and give more than they get; things that we have lost sight of.

    Feminists who want to make the business of building life-creating structures and a life-friendly economy into the next generation should not be pushed aside by characters who are not going to contribute to that enormous project and are entirely motivated by their sexual narcissism.

    And the only reason they can is because indulgence capitalism absorbs its deregulatory acolytes and spits out anything that might disrupt the smooth flow of ever more ridiculously irrational and indulgent product and service flows, which is what feminism will likely do when it eventually gets traction as unsustainable capitalism declines.

    • Caroline Norma

      December 5, 2018 at 9:52 pm

      Thank you. Yes, exactly.

  4. Rob Halton

    November 29, 2018 at 4:53 pm

    Thanks for providing the image. Isla and Bronwyn, you are on the right track to essentially shock the viewers as the trans issue is becoming ever more serious as certain members of the trans community think that they automatically have the right to invade women’s spaces and expect that legislation will be approved to suit their needs.

    Notice I mention certain members of the trans community, as I sure many would prefer privacy with respect, and not make a big noise about their sexual issues to provoke society.

    I hope that O’Connor, White and Liberal breakaway Hickey are cautious that there could be a serious social agenda beyond the changes proposed to birth certificates. Tread carefully ladies please, as governments are more than capable of cocking things up and legislating what could be something that eventually results in messy outcomes that only end up having an opposite effect, namely social disruption, discrimination, and worse still, hatred and crime. Now we don’t want that, do we?

    I do wonder where Robin Banks and Rodney Croome actually sit with all of this!

    Jack, you are pretty well on track with your comments. Unfortunately there are personality disorder issues here as well!

    Ron, I bet you are an old devil. Now don’t tell me that you don’t like bare breasted women. I don’t know any man who does not want to admire a woman’s body! Come on son, what is your problem?

    I would suggest that a holiday well away from Scrubby Creek would liven you up no end! You’ll get used to it as I did all those years ago when I was in Continental Europe where women express themselves openly without a blink of the eyelid.

    • Ron

      November 29, 2018 at 7:49 pm

      Actually Rob, I find the sight of a beautiful woman delightful, but prefer it when they demonstrate a little modesty and consideration for those about them. Apart from that, I am happily married and don’t need to look at some slutty little tramp flagging her “assets, either in Australia, or anywhere else they care to go. Its incredibly insulting in many cultures. Nor am I a prude, but quite the opposite I can assure you.

      However, your banter is irrelevant. I am aware, from first hand experience, that in many parts of the world this entire conversation would be considered laughable and a sign of incredible ignorance. In my opinion, anyone who:

      1/ Seeks to discriminate against another person based on gender/sex is a deplorable on numerous levels. Its also ILLEGAL.
      2/ Seeks to discriminate against a person who may have a genetic disorder is ten times worse.
      3/ Seeks to incite men, whom they obviously despise on principle, to do their fighting for them are gutless parasites IMHO.
      4/ Publishes pornographic images in a public forum are the lowest form of low life. This kind of image can profoundly affect children who may see it, and these lowlifes should crawl back under the rocks from whence they came.

      I find it hard to refer to these witches by gender. They are an insult to their own sex and driven by some twisted ideology that is truly toxic. You cant reason with them, period.

      As previously stated, the proposed changes to birth certificates are minute and will only affect a minuscule part of the community, and for the better. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can see that.

      • Barbara Mitchell

        November 30, 2018 at 7:05 pm

        Ron, you say ‘This kind of image can profoundly affect children who may see it’.

        If that’s the case, how would it affect a female child who saw it, in person, unexpectedly, in a female change room?

        • Simon Warriner

          December 1, 2018 at 12:48 pm


      • Russell

        December 3, 2018 at 8:03 am

        “Actually Rob, I find the sight of a beautiful woman delightful”

        It’s NOT a woman.

  5. Jack

    November 29, 2018 at 2:50 pm

    When I tried to understand this issue a little better I looked at the medical literature. What I’ve found has me concerned that once again ideology has been placed well before evidence in public policy and debate. While I’m concerned that all people need to have their identity respected, I am not at all convinced that in this case it is helpful to demand that women accommodate the demands of a minority via legislative orders when the issue is still hotly debated in the scientific literature.

    If anyone takes a look at the studies of co-morbidity in the transgender community, concerning personality disorders and other psychiatric disorders associated with chemically-dependent treatments, there is clearly cause for concern. This is not my ‘opinion’ but the stated conclusions of many studies (see some links below). Dispute them if you wish – I did not author them.

    It seems we are not only dealing with an issue of identity, but the use of powerful steroids/drugs that have dramatic impacts upon behaviour and psychological well-being. Hence the question seems to be “are women being asked to share their space with chemically dependent people who have a far higher incidence of mental illness as a consequence?” If so, have our politicians given women a warranty that this does not compromise their safety? I have no idea, but I would like to know the answer.

    I still don’t have a clear understanding of this issue in terms of the ethics and conflicting rights/risks of persons in the context of these findings, but I’m pretty darn sure that neither do the legislators who are riding the popular ‘rights’ wave that wins votes. This is dangerous as I’m certain if the medical researchers have yet to reach consensus on risk, then our politicians are probably off on another ideological ego trip once more that may well end in disaster for everyone – including trans-gendered people.

    And I just wonder why people supporting this policy consider the image to be pornography or inappropriate? Isn’t this just the very image that women are being asked to accept in their space? Or am I not understanding something important?




    • Isla MacGregor

      November 29, 2018 at 4:29 pm

      Just another case Jack, like the fox task force, of suppression of independent research.
      FYI: https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/brown-university-and-plos-one-defend-academic

      I have done a lot of research on the research on transgenderism and the attacks by transactivists against some of these researchers: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/16/academics-are-being-harassed-over-their-research-into-transgender-issues

      From my experience in researching intellectual suppression in the scientific community over many years, there is not just ‘smoke’ here, but a ‘catastrophic bushfire’

      • Jack

        November 30, 2018 at 8:19 am

        Hi Isla. After very effective lobbyists have created a toxic environment, researchers tend to withdraw .. and that’s part of the strategy.

        Of the papers I’ve looked at I find it impossible to ignore the stunning data on personality disorders and the very confused narrative that relies upon the rights of a very small minority to practically impose upon the rights of an entire biologically determined gender. How is this democracy?

        There are some very pseudo-scientific concepts at work in this domain. So are politicians once more making policy and laws, whilst refusing to grasp fundamental discontinuities? If so, this has a very ‘fox-like’ feel to it, and I note at least one key political player in common who should have learned by now that ideology and good intentions result in a trip down the road to public policy hell.

        It was totally appropriate to use that image. How can we debate issues without actually being confronted with their reality?

        • Isla MacGregor

          November 30, 2018 at 10:33 am

          Thankyou, Jack.

          ‘I note at least one key political player in common who should have learned by now that ideology and good intentions result in a trip down the road to public policy hell.’

          Yes Jack, Cassy O’Connor.

    • Ron

      November 29, 2018 at 4:32 pm

      The issue here has NOTHING to do with transgenderism. It’s all about a group of witches trying to impose their will on others. They make out that removing the sex of a baby from a birth certificate is going to be the end of the civilised world.

      In reality, a child of clearly defined gender will be recorded as such in birth the statistics. The parents may choose to state a gender, or not, a PARENTAL choice. A child of indeterminate gender will not be “assigned” a gender at birth, thus giving them “options” and a bit of privacy in the future. It makes complete sense and affects a minuscule number of people, and for the better!

      The picture they posted is PORN as much as posting a picture of a female or male in a public arena is. If I stuck up a picture of a naked woman in my office/ workshop, that revealed way less than this image, they would wail like banshees about being “objectified”, and what a low life male bastard I was. What a pathetic example of blatant double standards.

      I am pretty confident it’s a breach of the law posting this image. “Using a wire service to transmit pornography” … in this case a public network that MINORS can access. These witches could end up on the sex offenders register .. with luck. I amazed TT would allow it in the first place.

      • Peter Bright

        November 29, 2018 at 6:21 pm

        Ron, it could be worth checking if a naked image with no sexual undertones or overtones is actually pornography.

        I perceive neither in this image, one which is validly within the context of this vigorous discussion.

      • Peter Bright

        November 29, 2018 at 6:35 pm

        Ron, I found this definition:

        “Pornography is the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the exclusive purpose of sexual arousal.”

        This image, presented within an educational context, is not pornography.

      • Peter Black

        November 29, 2018 at 10:32 pm

        This image is NOT porn.

        As Peter Bright has pointed out, an image, presented within an educational context, is not pornography.

        An example: If this person presented in an arts studio, as a still life model and posing as shown, then it is Art, not porn.

        So with your expressed concern for the image being porn you may wish to reconsider using abusive terms, such as Femonazis, witches and sluts, is not constructive when it is dealing with sensitive issues which can have profound effects on people’s lives.

        But, is it your objective to give or create hate? If not, please consider presenting your views with a better choice of words.

  6. Steve Menadue

    November 29, 2018 at 2:22 pm

    Are minors allowed to visit TT? If so, why the photo at the top of this story?

    I’m sorry L.T. There can be no context to this picture. It is pornography. Would a picture of a naked woman or man be allowed on this site?

  7. Cathy

    November 29, 2018 at 12:01 pm

    In reality, are there any women’s services that are just for females, that is, biological women?

    Or is that no longer possible due to anti-discrimination laws?

    Sex based protection doesn’t mean much …

    • Isla MacGregor

      November 29, 2018 at 12:56 pm

      No and no and yes. You are correct, there are no longer any sex based protections under anti-discrimination laws.

  8. Isla MacGregor

    November 29, 2018 at 9:05 am

    Visit the ABC 4 Corners expose on Facebook failings and selectivity on ethical oversight here:


  9. Ron

    November 29, 2018 at 8:53 am

    Ah yes, the twisted sisters are at it again .. this time stooping to cheap pornography as a way to incite the misandrists among us. I can’t resist using the label they attribute to men, “pervert”, in order to forward your twisted little agenda.

    The individual in questions said, “I got a few disapproving looks but nobody said anything”, so I guess the women in the change room were a bit more tolerant than you lot …

    Since you have stooped to this level, I’ll send back to you a couple of thoughts …

    I don’t really enjoy seeing a hell of a lot of women at the beach, or anywhere else either, but I don’t generally rant about it in the media.

    I think women who go topless at beaches are both stupid, from the skin cancer point of view, and bloody disrespectful when they do it as tourists, in more conservative cultures, and inviting unwanted attention when they do it here … but I don’t generally rant about it the media.

    I find it insulting that some females here think it’s fine to prance around in public with their arses and boobs hanging out of their clothes, but I don’t generally rant about that in the media either.

    So what gives you the right to put porn in the media to support your twisted little agenda? You three witches of Tasmania are completely pathetic on so many levels that it’s positively nauseating.

    • Cathy

      November 29, 2018 at 1:05 pm

      Women in women’S gyms or sports clubs don’t need approval from each other. At swimming pools, mums and daughters undress and change clothing. They don’t need approval or give anyone else approval. they need to feel safe.

      Women suffer male violence, not the other way around.

      That is, I’m guessing, the whole point of the image.

      • Ron

        November 29, 2018 at 2:34 pm

        On the contrary, REPORTED statistics state that 10% of domestic violence is perpetrated by females, and that’s only what is actually reported. They are equally capable of being the most vile of pedophiles, although they rarely get the same sentence as a male rock spider.

        The point of this image is the twisted sisters wanting female only spaces, and that does not include those who are of “in-determinant” status. I doubt the twisted sisters know anything about this individual, what their situation is or their life experience, but they use this PORN to promote their misandry. The individual in the image may be a nurse, teacher, childcare worker, police officer, social worker, midwife or anything else and if you didn’t see the penis, you would not blink twice.

        Femonazis like these demanded equality and smashed their way into male domains, so it’s poetic justice that they are now reaping the whirlwind.

    • Lola Moth

      November 29, 2018 at 2:05 pm

      Ron, I will address the only point you made that is actually about the article. The individual in question said “I got a few disapproving looks but nobody said anything.” The women in the changeroom would not have known this individual was a man because he was discrete about his male genitalia when changing in the women’s changeroom before. It seems the individual went out of his way to defiantly show his genitalia to women this time, and it is not surprising that the women said nothing, because when women feel intimidated they don’t attack .. they shrink and try to become invisible.

      The individual also made two contradictory statements. “I love my body and am very comfortable with it …” and “It was incredible not to feel ashamed of my body …” This person is confused and I don’t blame them.

      If it is ok for this individual to feel comfortable and safe in the women’s change-room, then why aren’t women also allowed to feel comfortable and safe there?

      The rest of your comment, much like your others on this subject, are just your general ranting in the media.

      • Ron

        November 29, 2018 at 2:38 pm

        So, I guess you have a copy of the individual’s genome and can declare that they are genetically male … or are you just being ignorant?

        The person I see is intersex, neither male or female. Maybe they are saying “I was born the way I was born and I have nothing to be ashamed of …”

        Ever consider that possibility?

        • Lola Moth

          November 29, 2018 at 3:09 pm

          Ron, the person stated they are trans … trans, not intersex. They are two very different things. The person I see is a biological male with breast implants.

          The penis is a bit of a giveaway that this is not a biological female.

          • Ron

            November 29, 2018 at 4:17 pm

            Prove it! The original comment applies.

            Put clothes on this individual and you’d probably not even notice! They may be doing the trans gender thing because of a genetic issue. You have no idea of what the truth of the situation actually is.

          • Lola Moth

            November 29, 2018 at 6:43 pm

            Prove it? Ron, The photo is from a forum for trans people. Click on the words ‘more here’ and it will take you there. This man shares his experiences with an online community. If you don’t wish to have that on your browsing history just read the white on red comment that is below the photograph. It states, “So, I’ve been super open about my transition – I am openly trans at work, I talk about being trans with strangers, and I share a lot online …”

            I don’t understand your problem with the facts on this issue. I assume the person writing about his life is not lying, but you seem to doubt everything he says about himself.

          • Ron

            November 29, 2018 at 7:56 pm

            Do you know why this person decided to transition? No. You know nothing about them. They could quite simply have a female genome with some male attributes dominant or be a hermaphrodite to some degree. They might be quite happy in themselves but want to live as a female. Again, you have NO INFORMATION for their reasoning.

            The twisted sisters portray this person as a potential pervert/sexual predator because of the presence of a penis. People are occasionally born with three legs, but does that make them a tripod?

  10. Isla MacGregor

    November 29, 2018 at 7:33 am

    Warning … complaints have been sent to Facebook about this posting, so if you want to share this article you would be advised to screenshot it as it could be taken down from TT, and also from TT Facebook.

    For further information on recent social media bans on gender critics:

    More here in UK: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44288431



    Meanwhile social media do nothing about violent porn and pro-Nazi websites and postings.

  11. Sue

    November 29, 2018 at 7:19 am

    I’m hesitant to give this the dignity of a response. This campaign is reaching new depths, presumably because the desired outrage isn’t being achieved. The greater risk is to the credibility of women’s rights campaigning on real and more pressing issues.

    I apologise to my transgendered women friends, most of whom are not out, and don’t flaunt themselves in any way.

    • Barbara Mitchell

      November 30, 2018 at 11:36 pm

      What greater risk to women’s rights is there if biological males can become legally female and parade themselves and their maleness in female-only spaces with the full protection of the law if they can legally appropriate everything that female persons have worked for centuries to achieve – safe refuges, single-sex facilities, female sports, and female opportunities in education and public life?

      Are we supposed to be ‘good girls’ and accept the lie that ‘transwomen are women’?

      By all means apologise to your transgendered women friends if you feel you need to, but the image above, and the accompanying text, are part of the reality of male to female transgender entitlement and behaviour. No female person is under any obligation to apologise for exposing it.

To Top