Tasmanian Times


Women’s groups call on PM Morrison and Bill Shorten to support Parliamentary Inquiry into transgender laws


Women Speak Tasmania

Fair Go for Queensland Women

Australian Lesbian Health Coalition

Feminist Legal Clinic Inc

Gender Critical Academics Melbourne

IWD Brisbane Meanjin

Matrix Guild

International Women’s Day (IWD – 8 March 2019) is recognised as an International day to remember and centre women’s rights and achievements.

A coalition of women’s organisations has written to the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, and Opposition Leader, Bill Shorten, calling on them to establish a national inquiry into the expected and unexpected consequences of sex or ‘gender’ self-identification laws that are being proposed in several Australian jurisdictions.

Tasmania is currently considering legislation that will allow males to self-identify as female and have the change recognised at law simply by signing a statutory declaration’.There we all are – out and proud!

In November 2018 Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, and Opposition Leader, Bill Shorten, publicly opposed the removal of sex markers from birth certificates being proposed by Labor and the Greens in Tasmania.

Australia needs to be examining the evidence from other international jurisdictions where poor consultation and lack of robust legal analysis of transgender law reforms has led to women’s and girls’ rights being negatively impacted.

On 25 February, New Zealand Internal Affairs MinistThere we all are – out and proud!er, Tracey Martin, announced that the controversial Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Bill will be deferred due to ‘inadequate public consultation’ on the bill’s proposed sex or ‘gender’ self-identification provisions.

Last month, after a man who self-identified as female was transferred to a women’s prison where he sexually assaulted two female prisoners, the UK Prisons Minister announced the Government is revising guidelines for transgender prisoners with a view to establishing “transgender wings”.

And, this week, UK health officials announced they are reviewing National Health Service policies that allow transgender patients to be cared for on women’s wards even if they have not undergone medical transition.  The review follows a media investigation that revealed hospitals routinely allow male patients to share female wards if they self-identify as women.

Our government should also investigate the growing trend towards “medicalising” transgender identifying children that has accompanied transgender ideology, particularly in light of revelations that an internal review of the UK’s leading gender service for children, the Tavistock Clinic, found it “not fit for purpose”.

Many sporting bodies are now reconsidering their policies on transgender girls’ and women’s participation in women’s sports due to their recognised unfair advantage over natal feOn 25 February, New Zealand Internal Affairs MinistThere we all are – out and proud!er, Tracey Martin, announced that the controversial Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Bill will be deferred due to ‘inadequate public consultation’ on the bill’s proposed sex or ‘gender’ self-identification provisions


There we all are – out and proud!males.  Most notably, Martina Navratilova’s outspoken position against trans identifying males in women’s sport has encouraged many other sportswomen to speak out.

Australian Lesbian Health Coalition, Fair Go for Queensland Women, Feminist Legal Clinic Inc, Gender Critical Academics Melbourne, IWD Brisbane Meanjin, Matrix Guild and Women Speak Tasmania, are confident a national inquiry into transgender laws, which is evidence based, objective and has particular emphasis on women’s and children’s rights, will lead to better outcomes for transgender people, women and children’.



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


  1. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    March 12, 2019 at 3:46 pm

    Our Ron, who is clearly a professional smearmaster and well practiced in the tender art of defamatory hyperbole accuses the feminist ‘enemy’ of being ‘Femomazis’. Sweet.

    Now presumably those of a fascist turn of mind are not to ‘fussy’ about how they deal with opposition.

    Anyone familiar with the work of brown and black shirts during the 1930s will understand what I mean; you know, beating people up, shouting them down and interrupting/breaking up meetings, arranging with sympathetic officials to ban opponents from key open air public venues or intimidating the owners of private ones to cancel the use of their space, getting those opponents removed from their jobs, excluding them from major media access, activingly excluding them from any social group they control, disinviting speakers who have already been invited to speak, harassing and intimidating opponents in the street and at work, using the courts with vexatious litigation against them and routinely employing inflammatory and defamatory language against them; that sort of thing.

    The odd thing is, that it isn’t the ‘Femonazis’ who are doing that, but surprise surprise, their accusers, the Tranzis, are the ones who have a monopoly on that one. It is a favourite tactic used by ideological totalitarians to accuse others of their own malfeasance.

    The other favourite tactic used by the endearing likes of Ronny is to get creative with words like ‘equality’, by turning it into a totalitarian term whose meaning is absolute, but so vague, anyone can be ‘equal’ whether they are or are not.The totalitarian mind doesn’t care about fudging meaning.because it empowers it and lends weight to its spurious claims, bluff and crib.

    Women had to fight for their place (at least in theory) as ‘equals’, by fairly and squarely winning the argument against the representatives of the old patriarchy. They were able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the broad mass of opinion that the supposed infirmities of women claimed by patriarchs, that would justify their second class status and the authority of men over them, were false.

    The transgen lobby and its more aggressive ‘Tranzi stormtrooper’ activists have only so far managed to validate their right to ‘equality’ by ideological spoof assertion and the use of force or other unconscionable methods.of exclusion and intimidation to bully their way into ‘equality’.

    And I would assert that the Ronnie type Tranzi sympathisers aren’t interested in real debate because they know that they will be creamed if they ever come out into the open and expose their crummy and half arsed ideas to the light of day. That is why they ruthlessly avoid sharing platforms with those who disagree with them.

    Hitler never had a debate with anyone about Mein Kampf, not just because he was intolerant of opinion that did not conform with his, but because he was a poorly educated intellect who would not last five seconds on an equal platform, against anyone who knew what they were talking about and could subject him to real critical inquiry.

    The transgen ideological claim to equal status as women has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese, which is why Ronnie, you will always dance around out of range and fart in our general direction in columns you do not dominate. You have other and much more successful methods of ‘dealing’ with opponents.

    And as for wanting the respect of the likes of you ‘mate’, we will somehow manage to stagger along without it. We do not need to take seriously hypocrites who talk so glibly about ‘inclusion’ and yet so aggressively exclude anyone who doesn’t go along with them and so ruthlessly invade spaces where they have no business. For those ideological Primadonnas, ‘inclusion’ is only about them, even if it stiffs everyone else, as in women’s sport.

  2. Joanna

    March 11, 2019 at 11:14 pm


    USA Powerlifting has reconsidered their policy of inclusion, sending an example to many sporting federations: https://www.usapowerlifting.com/transgender-participation-policy/

    The IOC is reviewing it’s policy: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-looming-olympic-controversy-who-can-compete-as-a-woman-mwvr97cqx

  3. Ron

    March 11, 2019 at 1:42 pm

    Trolls still at it, I see. Femo-nazis like you lot spent decades attacking males for not treating females as “equals” and now, you turn around and viciously attack another next “minority” group, who are “different” to you, and dare impinge on YOUR rights. Pathetic hypocrites. You make me nauseous to my core. I used to have a modicum of respect for feminists… GONE!

  4. Paulibe

    March 10, 2019 at 12:30 pm

    Picking on one case in England is just plain pathetic. This person should not have been transferred to women’s prison because they were a sex offender. The gov and prisons made a grave error. You can’t blame an error on transgender people. If so many things would be banned eg driving cars, males, marriage, religion etc. because there will always be someone who does the wrong thing. The majority are just fine.

    • Isla MacGregor

      March 10, 2019 at 2:19 pm

    • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

      March 11, 2019 at 12:43 pm

      Thanks Isla for that wealth of transgen crime reporting. No one is ‘blaming’ transgender people for anything except the political aggression of their lobbyists in the service of an irrational and delusional pretension to being something they are not and invading social space where they have absolutely no business.

      I think Paulibe’s comment is emblematic of the kind of reality ignoring delusionalism of the transgen lobby and its stooges generally, where ‘equality’ becomes highly creative crib and bogus equivalencing, ‘inclusion’ becomes narcissistic colonization and running over the top of the needs of others, and ‘gender fluidity’ means fudging sex, sexuality and sexual politics into a meaningless but sound good identitarian gender splodge; in short, mutilating the language in the service of sexual political aggrandisement, in a milieu of social discourse that is so damaged by PRmarketspeak and postmodernist ideological schlock, it cannot resist even the smallest pathogen or absurdity.

  5. Isla MacGregor

    March 9, 2019 at 9:20 am

    The women’s rights perspective on trans ideology is now a global campaign with thousands of women joining- read:


    ‘This Declaration reaffirms the sex-based rights of women which are set out in the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 18 December 1979 (CEDAW), further developed in the CEDAW Committee General Recommendations, and adopted, inter alia, in the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women 1993 (UNDEVW).

    Article 1 of the CEDAW defines discrimination against women to mean, “any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.’’

    Sex is defined by the United Nations as “the physical and biological characteristics that distinguish males from females.’’ (Gender Equality Glossary, UN Women)

    The CEDAW places obligations on States Parties to ‘‘take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women.’’ (Article 2 (f)); and to take, in all fields, “appropriate measures, including legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men.’’ (Article 3)……..’

  6. Isla MacGregor

    March 8, 2019 at 6:29 pm

    From transgender man Miranda Yardley:

    ‘Transgender ideology is in a state. Its central ideas are inconsistent with each other, have little support in science or the ethics of power analysis and are so divorced from reality they require a complete suspension of disbelief in order to sit in one’s head without suffering cognitive dissonance.

    Although I am drawing a distinction between those of us who are transsexual and those who identify as transgender, all these points apply to both groups.

    Here are some of the things the things that transgender ideology needs to do so that it may support the lives of women:

    Accept that feminism and other women’s movements do not and should not centre transgender people. At the moment, trans is dominating the discussions, even causing huge ideological rifts, within feminism, yet here in the UK today’s news (22 June) reports hospital statistics showing 632 new cases of Female Genital Mutilation in the West Midlands (apparently girls “are brought to Birmingham to be cut”) from September 2014 to March 2015.
    Accept that innate gender identity is based on ideas with such a tenuous link to observed science it is barely a conjecture. The transgender claim to womanhood (or manhood) is completely dependent on this concept of an innate gender identity, and taking this away strips the movement of its cloak of being a civil rights movement, championing the fight of an oppressed minority, and instead reveals this to be the cross-dressing wolf of men’s rights activism, huffing and puffing at feminism and women.
    To accept that sex and gender are not the same thing. Sex is a biological reality based on reproductive potential, and gender is a social system that harms women through stereotyping behaviour, by giving women the negative stereotypes and men those that are positive; gender itself is oppression, not a civil liberty. All transwomen by definition are biologically male, socialised as boys then usually ‘transition’ as adults, although in the present climate it appears to be coming acceptable for children to ‘transition’, which should be examined critically rather than accepted unconditionally. That our underlying biological reality remains fundamentally unchanged is not a value judgement, it is a morally neutral statement of fact, neither good nor bad, it just is and being a woman is not a feeling or an opt-in.
    To respect feminism, and this includes the ‘second wave’ without which today’s women’s rights, support structures and organisations would not exist. To accept that feminism is for and about women and girls, not transwomen. It is wrong to insist feminism centre transwomen, this forces the oppressed majority to centre the interests of part of the male oppressor class; women neither oppress nor have privilege by way of gender over trans people.
    To drop claims to womanhood based on the discredited and scientifically unsupported idea of ‘brain sex’. This is called ‘neurosexism’ and it is this sexist idea that has been used to stereotype and oppress women for millennia. It is our bodies that make human beings sexually dimorphic and ‘brain sex’ has no place in any modern civil rights movement.
    To cease insisting that language specific to describing over 50% of the population be erased to indulge the fragile egos of the 0.3% of the population that is trans. This means respecting women’s right to be able to describe their own bodies and experiences and also getting rid of the inherently redundant and coercively imposed ‘cis’; we already have a word for ‘women’ and that is ‘women’. Penises are the male sex organ, vaginas are female; this is how human reproduction works.
    To recognise that trans lives are different to the lives of women and that women are entitled to their own spaces, which should always be respected; it is not acceptable to attack women’s institutions that exist to support vulnerable women in the name of transactivism.
    To have honest discussions about autogynephilia. This is a real thing. Presently the existence of it is denied even though many trans people admit this is a motivation for their transition and pornography forms a central part of transgender culture. You cannot fight honestly for transgender rights while denying that autogynephilia exists.
    To accept and explicitly recognise that lesbians are women who are attracted to women, not transwomen, and that the ‘cotton ceiling’ is sexual coercion through shaming lesbians. No lesbian is bigoted, transphobic or hateful for having boundaries that exclude transwoman. This should be respected and those who do not respect this boundary should be admonished by their peers, especially those who make their living from exploitative activities like pornography. They should also accept that the word ‘lesbian’ belongs to women.
    Accept that men and women are socialised in fundamentally different ways, and that there is such a thing as ‘male socialisation’ and ‘female socialisation.’ Accept that it is unacceptable to abuse or make death threats to women or other transwomen on the internet. Single out the problem of male violence and stop blaming women for your difficulties, and this extends to using the acronym ‘TERF’ which is used so much and so indiscriminately its essence and meaning is a term of hate.
    It is fine to have disagreements with others, this is what discourse and debate are all about and we can do this without it becoming a matter of life or death. It is not acceptable to shut down any debate that you cannot control.
    Accept that ‘trans women’ fails in making ‘trans women’ a subset of women because reality gets in the way. Saying ‘transwomen are women’ is an erasure of the actual lived lives of both women and transwomen and at best makes transwomen appear broken. Do transwomen really feel like that? What anyway is the ‘trans’ for if that statement is true? Similarly ideas of being ‘coercively assigned male/female at birth’ immediately makes us start from a point of inferiority or defectiveness. This is not self acceptance, this is a crass denial of reality.

    Most importantly, those who are transgender should learn to accept themselves how and as they are without shame and understand that the people they owe the most to, and can learn the most from, are women.’

  7. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    March 8, 2019 at 4:56 pm

    Yes Ricki, you are absolutely right! I too am guilty of ‘spoof assertion’ by baselessly arguing that your views are ‘ spurious, self serving and junk bond status post-modernist ideas’.

    You are so right that I have to justify that and I haven’t got much time, because now that TT is closing down, I have got about as much chance as a German ‘Jewlover’ after the same race marriage laws were promulgated in Nuremberg in ’35, of having my views aired in Der Hobart Mercury. The place is crawling with card carrying Tranzi Party Stormstooges, who have has little interest in free speech and open debate as you do.

    So let me put your mind at rest. This is how the ideological schock you subscribe to works,….

    The background to this is that over a 50-60 year period, Indulgence Capitalism captures sexual fantasy as its single biggest driver for the consumption of goods and service. What marketing and sales really needed was a way of repackaging ordinary sex into an iconic motivator across the culture; and not just the goods and services consumer culture, but the broader social-ideological one. It was an ideal leverage for the deregulation and privatization of the social system, just like the corporates were doing on the economic side.

    Ordinary real deal sex, boring domestic relationships and the hard work of bringing up children isn’t ‘sexy’ at all. We mentally associate that with dull needs and wants. Fantasy driven economics needs to go to the next level, and what better way than to mythologize sex into a ‘higher existentiality’ that takes on the aura of a quasi state of grace; i.e., a ‘sacred space’ that nicely fills the one vacated by old style religion. And suddenly, magically, ‘sexuality’ becomes the real deal. Saying ‘I am my sexuality’ is bollocks because if it were true, there wouldn’t be much of you there at all, but it sounds great..

    What once was mere sexual fantasy, desire and need to satiate it, fluffs into an unassailably soulful ‘sexistentialist’ state of being right up there with that equally mythological character, God.

    The central business of reproducing the species isn’t central anymore. And the post-modernist relativists have now declared that reproductive sex is ‘just another sexuality’ where all sexualities are equal, no matter how outlyingly and delusionally off the edge they are…..sorry, sorry, used to be before the sexological compliance lobbyists got into the psych related peak bodies…..and politically corrected them…

    The reproductive centre that lies in the heart of our species and gives existential meaning through creating and nurturing life, gets politically residualized (and in the process turned into dysfunctional near chaos) into a ruck of ‘alternatives’, that now bestow not life, but sexual/consumer ‘lifestyles’. Consumer economics and humanities trained post-modernism slide in together like hand and glove in the roll out of an indulgent regime,’ where you can have anything that you want, in Alice’s restaurant’….in any soul flavour you like.

    All the transgender lobby had to do once the new model of ‘reality’ was bedded down, was to declare that not only were the discrete ‘sexuality alternatives’ not as discrete as all that, but there was even more; i.e., dozens more ‘alternatives’ than we ever dreamed possible.

    Then, some marketing genius comes up with a gold standard marketing coup of reality repackaging by naming this alleged ‘new phenomenon’ (once a demographically microscopic and now sidelined psychiatric delusional disorder) ‘gender fluidity’, that (and here is the kicker) now applies itself across the entire ‘sexual alternatives’ product range, because it has a mysterious capability for being able to bleed across all categories, and everybody has to become ‘part of the transgen action’, as it creates new and ever more numerous gender alternative ‘islands’, like the Beijing regime is doing in the South China Sea.

    Anyone who thinks the porn industry does more kinks than you could possibly even imagine, hasn’t been doing the required reading in the gender studies department at Latrobe Uni…The industry plainly hasn’t hasn’t been keeping up with the latest trends…..

    What was really meant by ‘gender fluidity’ was ‘sexuality fluidity’, because gender is about sexual political role stereotypes and power allocation. But ‘sexuality fluidity’ just doesn’t roll of the tongue with the same chocolate smooth consistency. So ‘gender’ got the gong, because none of this is about real terms with any meaningful precision whatever. It is effectively a two word slogan and spruiker’s selling tool that you just keep repeating until it buries itself into the public consciousness and the assumed reality.

    And then bingo, you can start marketing ‘the new paradigm’ to libraries, to the kiddies in schools, academia (which hasn’t seen anything so exciting since eugenics) lock into to all the cross media platforms and compete for ‘market share’ in not just the ideological supermarket of all our dreams, but armed to the teeth with hormones and scalpels to sterilize a swelling tide of confused transexual wannabee recruits who can no longer the difference between life and sexistentialist theatre.

    You will notice that the ideological junk bond spruikers who are pushing this transgen agenda out into the talk programs just talk in marketing slogans; you know, ‘gender fluidity’ and ‘inclusiveness’ and the inevitability’ of the rise and rise of the Tranzi Compliant World Order. They never make the mistake of getting into the inconvenient detailed objections to their product. Spruikers never do that. They just keep rephrasing the slogans, because once all the palaver of debate and objection is over, the slogans are all the audiences are ever going to remember.

    In the BBC series, ‘Butterfly’, one of the adult characters speaks of the sexually confused main child character as ‘being in the wrong body’. It is a measure of just how far our ordinary critical defenses have collapsed that most people wouldn’t twig that this is secular analogue of much older notions of parallel realities, that take collective fantasy to the next level of being a plausible alter-reality that exists in its own right…which of course is bollocks and always was…….

    • Ricki

      March 8, 2019 at 7:49 pm


      • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

        March 8, 2019 at 9:03 pm

        Hey Ricki. Is LOL the best you can come up with? Has the cat got your tongue.You and your Tranzi mates have been slammed, pulped and then shredded into ideological fertilizer in these columns. That would make most people go home and have a little think about themselves. Obviously not in your case. OK. Give us your best shot.There is plenty here to work with. Maybe we missed something. I’m all ears.

  8. Woman n. Adult Human Female

    March 7, 2019 at 6:30 pm

    Well done! We absolutely need the Govt to be looking into this much more thoroughly. This Trans Ideology, which includes but is not limited to ideas like ‘Transwomen are Women’, ‘Women have Penises’, Men get periods’ etc has the potential to undo all the hard won yards for women and girls. It also has the potential to strip parents of their rights to make decisions for their children that will have lifelong consequences.

    To force us into adopting dehumanising language to describe our female bodies and how they function is pure insanity; chest feeders, womb havers, menstruators this list goes on and on. This unquestioning embracing of stepping away from material reality is working through the Safe Schools program by ensuring that primary and secondary school students are also questioning their own sexuality in school. I mean, Australian Educational standards are in freefall and Safe Schools is encouraging children to role play being in non-hetero intimate relationships because – as we parents are told – it encourages kids to stop bullying other kids. How that works exactly, has never been answered and neither has any evidence been provided to unequivocally back such a program. This ideology is largely a social experiment … on our children! Parents are not permitted to opt their children out of this program either. It doesn’t matter of you’re religious or not (we are Atheist) – this program is sinister and needs to be removed.

    Younger detransitioners are now coming out of the woodwork and recounting their horror stories of how they were pushed into transing…and it all started with their ‘safe schools’ program.

    We need to ask – who is exactly benefiting out of all of this? I can tell you now – it is absolutely NOT women and girls.

  9. Ricki

    March 7, 2019 at 2:34 pm

    Perhaps we need to be examining the actual proposed legislation in Tasmania rather than attempting to fear monger based on events in overseas jurisdictions and outright mythology.

    I would be interested to know which sporting bodies are “now reconsidering their policies on transgender girls’ and women’s participation in women’s sports”. I put it to you that the only conversation among Australian Peak Sporting Organisations on the matter of transgender athletes at this moment is pathways to inclusion. I’d also put it to you that there is not a “recognised unfair advantage” at all and that this is simply the uninformed opinion of a group of people hiding their intolerance, bigotry and transphobia behind a veil of feminism. Transgender people come in many shapes and sizes and from many differing paths. It is therefore a ridiculous and totally false assertion that all transgender women have an unfair advantage when competing alongside women.

    There is no “transgender ideology”. There are simply transgender people and a range of pathways, both social and medical – the medical conforming with recognised world’s best practice – to assist transgender people to lead happier and full lives.

    • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

      March 8, 2019 at 10:55 am

      Well Riciki, your little pile of PR sweetness and light has all the endearing qualities of a cross over between the pitch of a junk bond salesperson and a tobacco lobbyist. Only people in that sort of category would bother to even try to make out that the body of a natal male isn’t going to athletically have it all over those of natal women. To blandly spoof assert that ‘there is ‘no recognized unfair advantage’ is a preposterous statement that ignores ample evidence repeatedly offered in these columns over the last months and on
      the Women Speak Tasmania Facebook pages. But then ignoring the facts is a propagandist’s stock-in-trade….

      Evidence that does not fit into the sales patter of ideological spruikers like yourself just gets brushed aside or obfuscated, as if it didn’t exist, or didn’t matter if it did.. All the punters out there will hear is ‘inclusivity’, even if that ‘inclusivity’ stiffs female athletes. Why should transgen athletes and their supporters care about that? ‘Inclusivity’ works for them alright and we just keep denying the biological facts of life and the sports stats because we can, can’t we boys and girls? Yes Miss.

      And Ricki, Ricki, please, spare us the ‘bigotry’ and ‘transphobia’, please. The cliches and the crying wolf are killing me. I doubt that you even know what a bigot is or have any idea of its real context, or have the first idea how to read a psychiatry textbook sufficiently coherently to make an even basically informed diagnosis of a phobia, even if one slammed you in the face. But then you don’t need to, because spoof assertion doesn’t require any facts or evidence or even an idea what it is talking about, as long as the punters remember the keywords you used…..which subtly suggest that your opponents have no legitimate agenda and are driven solely by hate or fear pathologies, without you having to do anything except make the suggestion. Cute.

      And for you, to suggest that your opponents are ‘intolerant’ is breathtaking, unless we are talking an unwillingness to tolerate blatant and shameless bullshit!

      To accuse the other side of the intolerant authoritarianism and political ruthlessness that the transgen lobby you are acting for is infamous, would normally be regarded as gross hypocrisy. But in the case of lobbyists, moral categories and real evidence do not exist; only the arguable and deniable does.

      But I will remind the punters out there that the Women Speak Tasmania has no track record of shamelessly banning the distribution of your propaganda leaflets, as your lot did in Salamanca market recently, or deplatforming you at gatherings that are supposed to be open and encourage debate, or character assassinating you by suggesting that you are a dysfunctional psychopath, or unconscionably interrupting your meetings and speakers, or desemploying you (or at least having a go).

      Your lot live in a fantasy world where there is only room for tolerance of your ideas and no one else’s who might have the gall and temerity to disagree with you. All your behaviour and the way you to speak to others betrays the kind of ideological arrogance and conceit of a reformation cleric employed to deal with heresy, or that of a Soviet party apparatchik, enforcing the party line in the face of ideological ‘recalcitrants’ and ‘enemies of the people’.

      It is you lot who are the enemies of democratic discourse. Your practiced falsifications of reality to serve your ideological narcissism actually does more damage to it than your corporate opposite numbers. The spruikers down at big fossil fuel and tobacco are really only motivated by the money and the industrial maintenance of their product. Your lot are major cultural colonizers of social consciousness. If you weren’t, the microscopic demographic that you represent wouldn’t be getting into libraries, schools and universities and corrupting our children with your spurious, self serving and junk bond status post-modernist ideas, that have all the endearing pseudo scientific characteristics of eugenics!

      Let me count the number of so called ‘genders’. Let me count the numbers of angels that can be theoretically fitted onto the point of a pin….Both exercises are ideologically delusory baloney.

      You are not going to get away with this Ricki.

    • mctessa

      March 8, 2019 at 4:07 pm

      if there’s no unfair advantage you must surely advocate for the desegregation of sport on the basis of sex entirely?

      • Ricki

        March 8, 2019 at 7:47 pm

        Maybe you need to understand the process of transition and perhaps learn a little exercise science.

        • mctessa

          March 9, 2019 at 9:59 am

          Being transgender doesnt require any physical transition though. So, what’s the difference between a self-declared ‘transwoman’ and a man competing in womens sport? Nothing.

        • Russell

          March 9, 2019 at 11:42 am

          Maybe you need to understand the process of reality and perhaps learn a little exercise in nature. I suggest you take a good hard look at your hormone-laden diet, and do a little scientific research in that area for the known answers.

          • Christopher Eastman-Nagle

            March 9, 2019 at 3:47 pm

            Oh come on Russell, what are you talking about?. See if you can make that one a little clearer. That way we are in a position to either agree or disagree with it.

          • Russell

            March 11, 2019 at 2:41 pm

            How clear does it have to be, CEN? Read it properly. All the answers are there – without having to write it in a couple of pages of gobble-de-gook.

    • mctessa

      March 8, 2019 at 4:24 pm

      Whenever we examine the legislation and it’s consequences here were told “there’s no evidence of anything like that happening elsewhere”…and then we provide the evidence of the consequences happening elsewhere and were told “look at the legislation here”. Round and round we go.

    • Russell

      March 8, 2019 at 5:15 pm

      Ricki or Rick?

To Top