I have my doubts about the wisdom of Nigel and Sally Rowe’s decision to go public about removing their children from their C of E primary school after another boy started wearing a dress, as well as their intention to pursue legal action. It’s not that I disagree with the sentiments that the Christian couple expressed, but sadly they are on dodgy ground both legally and theologically.

It’s going to be extremely difficult for the Rowes to claim that they are being discriminated against, because their child is not the directly affected party. Being transgender is a protected characteristic under the Equalities Act, and although this is supposed to apply only to over-18s, Stonewall has done a great job under the guise of bullying prevention in forcing schools to apply it to their pupils. It’s not going to end well for them.

Were I to have been in their position I, too, would have withdrawn my children, but kept my mouth firmly shut. Mr and Mrs Rowe were clearly ill-equipped for the type of questions they faced as they did the rounds of the media studios on Monday.

I’m a veteran when it comes to defending difficult issues regarding sexuality in the media. My heart went out to the Rowes when they were asked by Jane Fae, on Victoria Derbyshire’s show, how they could be sure that their children were in fact boys. It’s unbelievable that they should have had to feel defensive about explaining such a basic biological reality!

Fae had obviously planned the line of attack in advance and so when they mentioned the most obvious difference, they were immediately accused of making it all about genitals. Not only that, but the claim that they were taking an adult decision for children too young fully to grasp the concept of what it means to be a man or a woman, made it seem that the Rowes were imposing something harmful on their vulnerable children. It was a masterful piece of rhetorical projection worthy of Syme, Winston Smith’s colleague in the Ministry of Truth and the man tasked with working on the Newspeak dictionary in Orwell’s 1984.

The Rowes’ lack of media prowess speaks to the fact that they are ordinary people who are receiving merry hell as a result of daring to ask whether the Emperor is wearing any clothes. Although they explicitly stated that they felt compassion for a child who presents as transgender, Labour MP Stella Creasy denounced them for teaching their children ‘hate’, and Conservative MP Anna Soubry has attacked them for ‘not being very Christian’.

Nigel Rowe, who has said that he previously loved and supported the school, has said, ‘We’re doing it because we want to make a stand for parents like ourselves who feel there is an agenda going on that is overriding our beliefs.There are a lot of people who are very angry about what is going on in our schools, but they are too afraid of voicing their opinions. We think that somebody has to speak out before it gets out of control.’

This was the second child in as many years who had presented as transgender in that particular Isle of Wight school. Given the number of transgender people in the adult community, this seems an unusually large proportion. Of course they were going to question what was going on and whether or not there was a trend.

My children would be as confused as the Rowes’ boys if members of their class suddenly presented as the opposite sex and they were expected uncritically to accept it. In fact by asking children to do this, we are abusing them by telling them that sex is something that can be altered as easily as a change of clothing and name.

When it comes to the transgender child, is setting them off down a path where they fear the onset of puberty and are then put on a course of first puberty blockers and later cross sex hormones, and potentially radical surgery along with a lifetime of medication, really the kindest and most effective way of treating gender dysphoria? Especially when the evidence is that puberty blockers not only affect brain development which cannot be reversed, but are likely to make the adult sterile. If surgery is undertaken later it makes it more difficult for those who have attempted to become women to achieve orgasm, and impossible for those who have attempted to become men to achieve natural erections. Those who go through a sex change are being condemned to a life of little satisfaction, sterility and frustration, combined with a natural anxiety about whether they can be accepted as a member of the opposite sex. It’s no wonder that the suicide rate in this demographic is so high. Cases are also beginning to emerge of those who have changed their mind and required corrective surgery for the damage done to their young bodies.

It’s completely up to adults if they choose to go through a sex-change but utterly wrong to impose an adult agenda on children and then accuse them of bullying or hatred if they find it hard to accept. The Rowes are correct to note that the issues surrounding sex and gender are far too complex for young children to have to grapple with.

Regardless of the wisdom of their case, the hate (coupled with a liberal helping of anti-Christian prejudice) unleashed by the media and political establishment upon this plumber and his wife for calmly stating facts, further demonstrates Orwell’s maxim: in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.


  1. On Saturday I received a reply to my letter concerning the harm that would be wrought on society and children in general by the Government proposals to allow people to self identify gender. This week it has been in the newspapers that a convicted rapist who now claims to be a woman and is in a Women’s prison has been put in solitary confinement because of his risk to the other women. Obviously the Government is more concerned about one confused individual than they are about the who,e if the rest of the women’s prison.
    The letter shows this to be true. “We want transgender people to be healthy and happy and to live their lives free from discrimination and distress”. So 0.1% of the population is more important than the well being of women and children who are put at risk by men posing as women. “We know that it needs to change: that is why we are delivering on our commitment to review the Gender Recognition Act and move to a gender recognition system that works better for trans people”. NOTE everyone “better for trans people” – not the majority population who are to be coerced into living in a fantasy that someone is who they say they are, even though we know it’s not true – just like the children sharing a classroom in this story.
    “We are interested in hearing everyone’s views on this important issue” – well get writing to them everyone and let them know your views on this lunacy!

    • PS My letter was addressed to the Secretary of State for Education and the reply from the Ministerial and Public Communications Division – an Orwellian name for an obfuscation letter writing division.

    • It is all part of the process. Getting the populace to believe things that they know in their hearts is untrue but accept anyway.
      Once the precedence is set and the system in place to enforce conformity anything is possible.
      We are allowing the cult of the progressive left to rule us and we are doing nothing about it. Boiling and frogs comes to mind.

      • “In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the
        purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to
        inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to
        reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they
        are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced
        to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense
        of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become
        evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even
        destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think
        if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is
        intended to.”

        — Theodore Dalrymple

        The originators of political correctness would be especially pleased to learn of the disruption they have caused in a Christian school.

  2. I’m sure you’re right
    about the prospects of success. However I do think it’s so valuable that they
    have stimulated such a story. I find people generally oblivious to the way in
    which these issues are being implemented. In general people make assumptions
    about common sense prevailing and it’s important that such stories “open the
    lid” on the actual circumstances. I wonder also about the effectiveness of a
    lot of the “talking down to” that this couple get. Clever arguing can look like
    sophistry and be taken as such. One of the great successes of the PC agenda is
    that it is conducted through professional bodies/guidance etc. rarely given any
    scrutiny by ordinary people not in the bubble. I think one shouldn’t underestimate
    how silly many of the explanations sound to people not steeped in the contorted
    logic of identity politics.

  3. What I find bizarre about this whole phenomena is that we have authority promoting and encouraging a condition in children that has very negative outcomes in adulthood.
    The attempted suicide rate in transgender people is 8 times highter than that of heterosexual non transgender people. We also know for certain, that that problems of depression, anxiety, and metal health in general sky rocket in this group.
    We also know that a large number revert or wish they had never changed.

    Are we going to see a spike in suicides in 10-15 years time when a lot of todays transgender schoolkids each adulthood? If so who will be responsible for that?

    • Also the suicide rate for those that are post op is not much better.
      Do we assist anorexics or those with body integrity identity disorder in their body dismorphia? No, we offer counselling to help them come to terms with what they actually are so why is this different.
      Perhaps the focus on male to female transition and the removal of the male appendage has some support in our feminist dominated establishment.

    • “…who will be responsible for that?”

      The ‘establishment’ figures in positions of authority who had the power to stop the nonsense but did nothing will be responsible of course. Will they accept their responsibility? I very much doubt it. If confronted they will probably hide behind the fig-leaf that they were only following the best scientific advice available at the time. The civil servants’ version of ‘I was only obeying orders’.

      If the ‘scientists’ are confronted they will hide behind the claim that they were ‘only following the evidence’ and they will deny any responsibility for any harm caused by educational-policies based on their research.

      • Yes indeed. And also there will be accusations that the rest of society was never ‘understanding enough ‘ or ‘thoughtful enough’.
        It will always because ordinary people were to bigoted or unwilling to change.

        • I’m half expecting one of the usual lefty troll suspects to come along in due course and reinforce those sentiments.

    • Yes and not just in suicide but also in hate towards their parents and authority for allowing this to happen. There are many unforeseen consequences coming down the road. But then didn’t someone once say that socialism is a disease of the brain (truly) and once it takes hold it has dangerous consequences. We have most of our MPs and Academics who are educated, live and subsequently work in a very tiny bubble. They inter marry and they belong to the same ‘think tanks’, media networks and social circles. None of them actually engages with the outside world. They do not know or understand how 90% of this country lives.

      Unless there is a massive shake up in our education system we are going to have a huge problem of identity, crime, civil unrest and worst of all suicide to deal with in 20 yrs time. Anyone who wants to talk about this now are in the same situation that many were in twenty years ago over immigration. This and Islam are the next big issues the left will shut down until it becomes impossible to contain and then another explosion of anger will cause the total and final breakdown in our society.

      It has happened around the world throughout the last thousand years. We are seeing the result of oppression all round us and yet the west has been seduced in its democratic complacency to go backwards when most countries are beginning to move forward.

      • It’s unfair to blame the parents (apart from the Tranny ones who ram it down their throats), as if they treat a confused tomboy as you should the state and SJWs will dump on you as they have with these parents.

        I’m afraid you are way behind the times.

        I used to work in EBD school, residential (the name changes periodically but it’s badly behaved kids). 25 years ago virtually every child would come in at 10-12 ish. Very very occasionally you might get a nine year old. Most of them came from genuine “broken homes”. Most were “repairable”. This had been stable for a long time, back as far as anyone I know can remember. It collapsed. You were getting children unmanageable at 5 and 6 and ramped up levels of behaviour. I actually lived in Residential EBD in the 70s – parent worked there – and they were absolute softies compared to now. Now they aren’t practically repairable nor do they have any interest in being so. They’re really being indulged and child-minded (one of the reason Children in Care do so badly in exams is that there is an unspoken we-won’t-push-you you-don’t-cause-trouble agreement with staff much of the time)

        Your “20 years time” is pretty much already here, I reckon.

  4. How do we teach children to respect authority when the school pulls stunts like this, and then is backed up by all the other malign state institutions ?

    • They don’t any more. If they aren’t taught basic respect of people by their parents, it doesn’t happen (usually). It’s not actually respect of authority so much as considering that someone who has been teaching for 20 years and has a degree in the subject might actually be worth listening to.

      • Yes indeed, teachers might be able to command some respect if they kept to the subjects they are experienced in. Its when these teachers expand into matters outside academia that school time is more like brainwashing than teaching.

  5. Not surprised that Anna Soubry weighed in on the side of people who believe they can call themselves whatever they want and make it true. After all, she claims she to be a conservative.

  6. Please do not make the mistake of blaming the genuine transgendered for this. As you will probably realise their voices are seldom heard and they rarely make an appearance except as some kind of bizarre publicity stunt.

    This is undoubtedly being driven by malign outside forces with a sinister agenda of their own which is not the same as transgendered people, most of which I expect are cringing at being dragged against their will into the spotlight, and blamed for the appalling left wing insanity which is being carried out in their name.

    As an aside I have had to type this in word as the site does not appear to accept typed text, not just on this PC but on others as well.

          • The medical term is Gender dysphoria. Contrary to the ignorant belief it is a very real condition, and not a mental one. The work of Professor Doctor Milton Diamond showed that the brain contains something he named the sexually dimorphic nucleus, an area which is different in men & women, but post mortem studies show that diagnosed transgender people have the incorrect SDN for their body gender.
            In Soviet Russia experiments have been performed on pregnant women which have produced both trans and gay children. The cause of it is well known, but impossible to predict in pregnancy. It’s just a kind of birth defect, but one which is invisible, and mercifully quite rare.

          • if this is the case, and I have no proof against, that shows the move to making all children ask themselves whether they want to be boys or girls, and the very real work that has been done on the mind by Goffman and others shows we are now in the process of social engineering on a massively sinister scale.

          • Yes that one. And if you cannot accept an academic deriving conclusions and presenting them for discussion then how are you any better than the Left wing Fascists we all condemn for their proscribing of free speech?

            He made a study and made suggestions based on that study. It’s a similar situation to needles being made available to drug addicts which Margaret Thatcher approved – something unpleasant in order to achieve a desired outcome.

          • Dr Judith Resiman said:

            “It should not surprise that Diamond (winner of the 2011 [Alfred] Kinsey Award from the Midcontinent Region of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality) like Kinsey, uses bogus ‘data’ to target children as sexual objects,” she said.

            “I met many of Diamond’s pedophile-favoring colleagues at the Fifth World Congress of Sexology in 1981. They award each other college degrees and grow in power,” she said. “Having served as a ‘Distinguished Lecturer’ for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality (IASHS) in San Francisco, Diamond is a long time advocate for legalizing any age victim for pornography/prostitution employment.”

          • Nope. It is possible to be XYY for example. (If you are old enough you might remember a TV show called “The XYY Man”)

            I actually just checked and this is actually 1 in 1,000 or so of the male population, which is surprisingly high.

            It also accounts, I would think for the Trafia claims about XX/XY alternatives not being that uncommon ; they’re right if 1 in 1000 males is XYY, but most of them are not remotely cross-gendered, so they are being deliberately misleading.

            Reading briefly about it suggests they they are very definitely Male and not easily distinguished ; growth is accelerated for example but not absurdly so.

    • The people whose agenda is to destroy traditional societies will shamelessly utilise any group – whether the working class, women, ethnic groups or LGBT people – to further their objectives.

  7. Unfortunately our skewed society is run by people who are probably ignorant of the fact that there are not very many Homosexuals or lesbians walking around. They are, thank goodness, accepted in modern society and are able to make their choices without fear of imprisonment. However, the disproportionate amount of gay people seem to be in our institutions and government. I would like to start asking some questions as to why this is the case and why there is such a strong leaning to make the whole of society androgynous. It is extremely sinister.

    I also felt for this couple because they have a genuine concern and have been brave enough to bring it to open discussion. Yet again the sincerity is being mocked and shut down. No one else will put their head above the parapet and again the SJW brigade will think they have won the war. The bullying that goes on in this country is getting out of hand and the likes of the very silly Anna Soubry and Stella Creasy should be asking why so many parents are becoming worried, rather than condemning them.

    • Indeed. The oft quoted figure is about 5-7% but I think this includes people who might have been slightly that way inclined in the past (say) rather than people who are straight and out gay. I suspect it’s more like 1-2%.

  8. I read s few days ago an article by a woman journalist about being at a function where there was a queue for the Ladies toilet, so, with limited time, she walked into the Men’s toilets, past men at the urinals and used a cubicle (why is it so often now “Ladie’s” and “Men’s”, not “Women” and “Men’s”?). No problem, she declared. All very sensible, empowering and to be celebrated. Would the police act had someone complained? Unlikely.

    Now, let’s just say at some darts or rugby match a man refuses to wait in the queue, walks into the Ladies, past women and uses a cubicle. No problem? Sensible? Empowering? To be celebtrated? I wonder.

    In Hartford, Connecticut, a boy athlete at the state high school declared himself now to be a girl. He competed in the girl’s championship, beating Kate Hall, the expected champion and denying her a sports scholarship to university.

    “It’s frustrating. But that’s just the way it is now … I can’t really say what I want to say, but there’s not much I can do about it.”

    Now, suddenly, there’s concern about transgenderism in the MSM. “Has it gone too far?” the media now asks? Its in doubt that it doesn’t consider it fair. But now that a young woman has been disadvantaged by it, the SJW’s are in a quandry.

    A few months ago someone called Pablo Gomez was arrested for the brutal murder of three women. Gomez insisted that he was to be referred to in a gender-nutral way, choosing they/them as acceptable terms. The SJW’s and some of the media, usually vehemently ready to enforce these choices when made by others, were outraged. Even though Gomez had not been tried, they were in uproar that someone who had murdered women (the verdict appeared to be foregone conclusion by them all) might be allowed to do this.


    • Many years ago I was due to play for my local football team, but had to pull out that day. Fortunately. They had a female referee, of indeterminate age, and unshapely, not that this actually made any difference to the utter horror and fury of the teams when she wandered naked into the men’s showers whilst they were in there and proceeded to use them. She was, rightly, sacked from refereeing.

  9. Ms

    Has the school said which toilets these boys in dresses are going to use?

    Have the parents been consulted?

    Do we have four classes of victims?

    1. The boys in dresses;
    2. Fellow pupils;
    3. Teachers (through the worst form of oppression: self-censorship); and,
    4. Parents.

  10. As someone who feels left behind by the circus, I would like someone to explain to me exactly how this whole transgenderism idea is supposed to work.

    I can understand boys and girls who don’t want to subscribe to the historic stereotypes of their sex. Fair enough. There are boys who prefer to draw flowers, have long hair, and learn to dance, and girls who prefer to climb trees, wear dungarees and learn kickboxing. I am quite comfortable with the understanding that each sex encompasses a very wide spectrum of interests and inclinations, and that there are always some “masculine” girls and “feminine” boys.

    I can also go along with the concept that this is what is meant by “gender” as opposed to sex. So a child can be a member of one sex biologically, but have personal characteristics that are more typical of the opposite sex. A biological boy can be of the feminine “gender” and a biological girl can be of the masculine “gender”.

    So why do we not just accept this wide spectrum for both sexes, allow that there are extreme examples of each; but recognise that every child still belongs to its biological sex? A boy can be effeminate, but he is still a boy; he is just “that kind” of boy. Ditto for a masculine girl.

    But here is where I get lost. It seems that we cannot just allow effeminate boys to be effeminate boys, or tomboy girls to be tomboy girls; they must also change their biology to become as physically like the opposite sex as possible. But to what purpose? A boy who physically transgenders to a “girl” will never be able to conceive and have a baby, and a girl who physically transgenders to a “boy” will never be able to generate sperm and father a child. So why twist their natural and perfectly functional bodies into a fake caricature of the sex that they can never really be, knowing that their artificially doctored appearance is just a sham? How does that make them any more truly feminine or masculine than they want to be or are capable of being?

    And if “gender” is what is going on in their heads rather than what is going on in their bodies, which is what I have repeatedly heard asserted by those who seem to know all about these things, then why confuse the two and change the latter in order to accommodate the former? Why does the “gender” have to be matched by the biology, when it should be apparent that the head and the body are quite capable of getting along just fine together, provided the rest of the world would only stop interfering and telling them they are wrong?

    • The reason you feel ‘left behind’ is that you are of the opinion that the people driving this are those feeling the way you describe. This is not the case, but it is the Fascist Left, who if society complied in the way you describe would have no one to fight against.

      This like so many other things, is not about ‘gender’, that’s just the latest tool being used as a weapon to fight society and the people.

      The sooner people recognise this the sooner the Fascists can be put back in their boxes again.

        • Not at all, you can examine the claims of transgenderism (is that a word?) and make a reasoned criticism of them, however what you should not do is to confuse this with the Fascist left using a minority group for their own twisted ends, and not for the first time either.

          • On the one-hand you cite Prof Diamond (who supports sexual abuse of children) in support; on the other you say it is the ‘Fascist left’.

          • No he does not support the sexual abuse of children he had a point about pornography preventing such abuse!
            I can cite two sources, because my position is that there are two different camps here, one using the other for its own ends.

          • “Since children must not be ‘disadvantaged because of age,’ as these ‘Mission Goals’ deliberately have no lower age limit, Milton’s (Prof. Diamond) IASHS buddies would legalize adult sexual abuse of infants and children, including incest, child prostitution, and child pornography, assuming they wrest some form of verbal, gestural, or signed ‘consent’ from child, parent or guardian,” Reisman said.

            Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2010/12/237297/#4tWc5I73uISRI1pc.99

          • ‘No he does not support the sexual abuse of children he had a point about pornography preventing such abuse!’


      • Exactly! I could not agree more! These “progressive” activists couldn’t care less about the extreme minority of people who do suffer from gender dysphoria. They are simply exploiting them, using them as a political tool to push their despicable agenda upon the rest of us. People who care about the future of our children, whether Christian or not, must come together to fight back against the Satanic ideology that lurks behind the mask of “progressive equality” – whether they actually believe in “Satan” or not.

    • “But here is where I get lost. It seems that we cannot just allow
      effeminate boys to be effeminate boys, or tomboy girls to be tomboy
      girls; they must also change their biology to become as physically like
      the opposite sex as possible.”

      The core of the problem. What happened previously is that people accepted their “non standard” behaviour and emotionally supported them and they grew out of it. Or maybe they didn’t. So, they might become feminine men and masculine women ; big deal.

      Now what happens is lots of people who are otherwise unemployable try to bully them into believing they are transgender.

      (I don’t count the attention seeking loonies as worthy of ten minutes thought)

      • Or they might become openly gay/lesbian. For all the one-voice “LGBT
        community” twaddle, you can find some of the latter arguing very
        strongly against the medical ‘transition’ of children on both health and
        “I’m so glad that wasn’t available when I was a teen because I might
        have…” grounds.

        • If I was a gay person I would want nothing to do with the transgender mafia either.

          I think the trannies want to believe they’re the same as Gay people who were persecuted in the past and criminalised and so on.

          They are not. They are dangerously unstable child abusers.

    • > It seems that we cannot just allow effeminate boys to be effeminate boys, or tomboy girls to be tomboy girls

      But why should we? IF the human nature is totally malleable, why not to reshape the underlying biology to prove that there are no invariants when it comes to our species?

      > But to what purpose?

      “Because we can”. Because people are explorative by nature. We accepted the blank slate theory, now we HAVE TO follow it all the way down to the rabbit hole.

      • I wonder how long blank-slate theory can last given we’re at the start of the age of human genomic engineering, with e.g. genes influencing variation in intelligence expected to be pinned down in a decade.

        • I believe it is already cracking.

          The problem is, in my opinion, blank slate is one of the corner stones of The Age of Reason – that shift from Medieval mindset that Western civilisation did 300 years ago. Blank slate validates an awful lot of what we consider to be the norm: from massive higher education, to the welfare state/progressive taxation, to “rule by consent”/Republicanism. Without that premise, there is no rational validation for any of that.

          Getting rid of it would be painful. Maybe as painful as French Revolution, Russian Revolution, the spring of nations and the two World Wars combined. But I believe it is inevitable.

          As Nietzsche said, Christianity brought it’s own end by fostering the instinct for truth (that gave birth to the scientific method, that shattered the cosmology of Christianity and brought in nihilism). And now we might be witnessing the very beginning of the end of the Enlightenment.

  11. I expect that in about twenty years the whole circus will come to be regarded as the biggest social disaster since the satanic panic witch-hunts of the 1980s-90s. Men who want to cut their goolies off and run around in a wig calling themselves Mavis should be free to do so once they reach the age of 18. Women who want to strap on a dildo and pretend they have a penis now… well some people just can’t be helped.

    The point is that there is a microscopic community of biologically intersex people who could actually benefit from a “third gender” ID, and a larger (but still tiny) community of loonies who should be allowed to claim the right too, without forcing their sub-culture’s mores on the 99.9% of the population who are perfectly happy with two genders (trannies might need to be reminded here that they are the exception, not the rule, and as such don’t get to define reality for the rest of us via public shaming, cops and the courts).

    • I think the only which is going to stop the circus is the cold hard cash which will need to be paid out in compensation for children who were abused by being railroaded into a gender change by their anxious parents and unscrupulous medics.

      • “paid out in compensation” which of course can be added to the shed loads of money spent realigning these kids in the first place, still with the compensation bill in the NHS heading ever north they might not have the money for anything shortly, never mind gender re alignment.

        • Why the heck are we wasting NHS money on this stupidity anyway ? Some cretinous lunatic wants to mutilate themselves, they can pay for it.

          • That’s the thing though isn’t it? The NHS and professional take a very different view to the Fascist Left demonstrated here. They will not allow any child access to gender altering treatment until the age of 16 at the earliest.
            What the Left are doing here is flying directly against the opinions of the professionals, and all the evidence that they have based their studies on.

          • The “Fascist left” ? Do you mean Justine Greening, Tory MP? She is proposing that there should be no requirement for evidence of a committed alt-gender lifestyle or for the involvement of medical experts, and instead allowing people simply to self-declare their chosen gender, which will then presumably compel the NHS to provide the drugs and gender reassignment surgery on demand.

          • I worked on a Plastic Surgery unit that served a large area of the UK for many years that undertook gender reassignment surgery. In all of the years that I worked there I only nursed a tiny handful of people. The surgery and treatment is complex and is completed over a lengthy period with rigorous psychological back up, which screened out the dubious characters. Before treatment was even considered the individual had to ‘live’ as the desired gender for two years to prove their commitment, hence the very small number of people who were actually approved or felt able to put themselves through it. These people tended to reserved and had no desire for anyone to overtly push an agenda.
            I also had dealings with a small number of individuals who were born with chromosomal disorders which made them appear ambiguous in gender. These people generally, identified as one or another gender with appropriate treatment and support, without a lot of fuss and without undergoing major reconstructive surgery. This lefty liberal nonsense is pernicious and does no favours for those generally in need of treatment.

    • It happened just like this before Rome began its disintegration. Interestingly, there was also a rise in celebrity chefs during the same era.

    • I’m afraid minorities dictating reality for the rest of us is here to stay…what after all is gay marriage other than a re-definition of a fundamental foundation to society, for the sake of a small minority not being offended?

      • Strongly agree with you there.

        Personally I don’t really care about gay marriage per say – I don’t think it’s unfair that gay people’s partners get next-of-kin rights etc etc, or that their partnership is officially registered with the state for the purpose of tax, inheritance, the non-bastardy of their children (adopted or otherwise) etc etc. It cuts down on faff.

        What I object to first about gay marriage is the tone of moral superiority adopted by proponents (hearing “marriage equality” in particular makes me want to vomit; gay suffering does not compare in scale to the suffering of African slaves in the US and their centuries long quest for civil rights – gays were never someone’s property for example). Fashionable types surfing along in comfort aboard the wave of outrage the issue generates seem unable to comprehend that they are merely a product of their era; I highly doubt their moral courage would have extended to defending gay people in the Middle Ages for example. They would have followed the Church and social attitudes of their time like the sheep they are.

        My other objection is to the attacks on religious groups who follow traditional Muslim, Christian or X teachings on homosexuality. Now I am an atheist and I despise religion. But gays trying to force churches to host gay weddings, suing bakers or slagging off religious parents who withdraw their kids from class over LGBTQ issues, are breaking the Golden Rule. The state recognition of gays should not be a carte blanche for LGBTQ activists to launch a crusade to force religious people to confirm with their worldview, any more then the state should persecute gays etc in the name of religion (like Iran). Yet I fear our courts will forget their duty to be impartial in these matters.

  12. The straight forward answer to the Tranny Mafia is to call them out for what they are ; people who are willing to abuse children to get social and economic power.

    Stuff being “nice” to them ; they are mentally unstable child abusers.

    Teenagers have been confused about gender and sexuality since forever. It’s entirely normal. It needs dealing with with sympathy, not with ignorant loonies encouraging them to medicate their bodies to destruction.

    No six year old. Period. is capable of deciding they are a girl. They are being railroaded into it by people for their own benefit. I noticed in a recent BBC article about two transexual supposedly kids, guess what, they each had one tranny parent. Obviously *not* a coincidence.

  13. There was a similar incident in the USA in which a very aggressive male homosexual was permitted to bully another male teen incessantly in the name of tolerance. After several months the bullied teen decided enough was enough, brought a pistol to school and killed his tormentor.

    The fact is that what we are seeing is bullying, even worse we have vicarious participants supposedly in authority that are revelling in the freedom to vilify and very publicly shame those who try and defend themselves. These bullies pick the weaker just as all bullies are want to do. It’s vile, viscious behaviour promoted by those sadistic people who wish to see the world burn.

    As for it being an attack on Christianity-it isn’t, it’s an attack on the good for being the good; an attack on logic, reason, existence and freedom. Its getting worse daily.

    • It is an attack on Christianity. This specifically teaches that people were born ‘man and woman’ – there is no other clear imperative that makes such a statement, only fallible human arguments that can be torn down by those with another viewpoint. Unless truth comes from outside the fallible and incompetent mind of man it cannot be truth.

      • I don’t disagree Dominic, but the difficult they are going to face in a court of law, is that the C of E has such a breadth of opinion on the matter, the judge is going to rule that following conventional gender dress-codes is not a matter of settled Christian doctrine. It will all be down to the judge’s interpretation of Christianity, who will no doubt consult with liberal Anglicans and so on.

        Nigel and Sally are right to feel let down by the school, but they don’t have a contract with the school, so it’s going to be very difficult for them to argue.

        The media response has entitled an attack on Christianity because the Rowes have cited it by way of opposition and to form the basis of their legal case. However it’s worth noting that there are many non-Christian parents who are similarly concerned by their children being taught that sex or gender is all about an inner feeling and also, children shouldn’t be having to worry about what they are or having to choose whether or not to affirm their gender. They should just accept it and get on with life. And they want to conform to stereotypical norms about their gender, that should be fine too! Nothing wrong in girls liking pink princesses if that’s their wont.

        • Is the issue not whether the family has been discriminated against on the basis of religious belief? As I understand it protection against religious discrimination is not limited to beliefs that are “institutionalised” (upheld by the CofE) but to any belief that can reasonably be considered religious.

      • Doesn’t require Christianity to tell anyone that. Science has long shown it is true on a biological genetic level and the rest of us can observe it in reality without either science, or religion informing us.

        Truth is what metaphysically IS and man is able to comprehend that truth by means of his senses. That is the only way in which man is capable of verifying existent reality.

        • If the discovery of truth is apprehended by the senses then how can it be metaphysical given that the senses apprehend that which is in space-time?

          • The way you put that sounds like a traditional skeptic. Would I be correct in assuming the idea of the existent universe as one in constant flux ? If not then you may have to re phase the question so I can grasp it better.

    • Where do you get your idea of ‘good’ from?

      You need a straight ruler before you can assess that which is crooked.

      • Yes, indeed you do.

        Objectivism holds that the standard by which one judges good and evil is mans life, or that which is required for mans survival qua man.

        Reasons is mans basic means of survival, that which is proper to the life of a rational being is good; that which negates, opposes or destroys it is evil.

  14. It’s worth noting 3 things which happened after I submitted the article.

    1) Editor of Spiked on Line, Brendan O’Neill, wrote a popular post on Facebook in which he decried an ideology which had resulted in a man who had been convicted of rape, being transferred to a woman’s prison. Facebook removed this post because it supposedly violated their community standards, despite the fact it contained nothing hateful and the only criticism of an individual, was that of the male rapist.

    2) A debate which was supposed to take place this evening in London, organised by a group of feminists, entitled “what is gender” was shut down. First of all the transgender speakers who had agreed to debate the issue withdrew, then the venue was threatened on account of holding a ‘one-sided debate’. The managers believed that the risks were too great to guarantee people’s safety.

    3) Stephanie Davis-Arais, founder of transgender trend website, which is an excellent and well-researched resource for anyone looking to investigate some of the medical evidence and statistics often bandied about by transgender campaigners, was the subject of a coordinated smear campaign by transgender activists, desperately looking to discredit her, in order to stop her from being cited in the mainstream media. They were only able to come up with the fact that Stephanie is a talented sculptress and attempted to claim that somehow she was obsessed with women’s genitals on account of some of her (perfectly wholesome and tasteful) art, which depicts the female form. I couldn’t help thinking that there may be some projection at work here, by people who are so obsessed by the female form that they have gone to drastic measures to attain it. Almost all of these campaigners are those who were formerly men.

    It demonstrates the orchestrated bullying and demonisation of anyone who dares to challenge this agenda, against which the Rowes stood little chance. This is all about the lives of vulnerable children being wrecked in order that adults can feel better about themselves.

  15. The way the Rowes are being sneered at is disgusting. Ordinary people who are being mocked, dismissed and even accused of being bad parents because they won’t go along with the current ideological fashions.

  16. I agree. they are absolutely right to have withdrawn their children from the school, but I cannot quite understand their decision to go public on it. they are brave, for sure, but probably not the best defenders of this case in the ‘court of media opinion’. Having said that, all power to their elbow, and let’s hope they get some traction on this perversion being foisted on children across the UK.

  17. What chance against the thought police? In this case, none whatsoever. As Caroline observes, it is painful to witness this slightly bewildered couple being denounced on national television for the crime of sincerely opposing a fashionable cause.

    Unfortunately, the Rowes’ claim of discrimination against their Christianity misguidedly allows this case to be caricatured as wacky religious superstition pitched against cool logic, reason and understanding. The irony being, of course, that it is transgenderism which has suddenly become the unchallengeable doctrine – an inversion which, from the pulpit of ITV’s This Morning, allowed interviewer Philip Schofield scold the blaspheming Rowes, “It’s you that has the problem.”

    Personally, I preferred Schofield as stooge to Gordon the Gopher. For him and others interrogating this hapless couple, the questions of whether a six-year-old can be sufficiently mature and competent to redefine its gender, and whether a school should blithely accept such an assertion and insist that everyone accommodate it, evidently are already unassailable.

    • Well they’re apparently not competent because the Rowes claimed they were: “identifying as a girl some days, and as a boy other days”.

  18. How do people who “transition” know when they’ve arrived? And if someone tells me they’re born in the wrong body, why should I believe them?

    I would genuinely like some answers.

    • 1. A Gender Recognition Panel certifies you are transgender.
      2. Through the administration of hormones and sugery – ‘you grow a pair’.
      3. You have sex with a lesbian (lesbians appear to reject trans-men).

      The main argument from the transgendered seems to be that, well, they are simply born in the wrong body. Take that as you will.

      • It’s a funny old world where I apparently need a Gender Recognition Panel to guide me on whether I’m talking to a man or a woman.

        As for hormones and surgery – I wonder if anything is done about hips, hands, wrists and feet. And if those who transition from female to male f*rt in bed.

  19. Rather than posting on here, it’s beyond time we started a revolution in this wacky human world and fight against the media, including the pc BBC, Channel 4 and 5.

      • I now know what the fox feels like during a hunt. Packs of liberals hunting us down, one by one, until we simply stay in our den, or die.

  20. My second child was born (and this was only six years ago) with the cord twisted around her neck. Faced with this emergency, the midwife cut the cord without ceremony and whipped the baby off to the resuscitation machine in the next room. We heard the hissing of oxygen, and heaved a sigh of relief when we heard the baby cry.

    The midwife returned: “Everything’s fine. Just fine.”

    “Boy or girl,” I asked.

    “Girl.” These things are very easily determined.

    Maybe she’ll grow up to be a lesbian. Maybe she’ll decide as an adult that she wants cosmetic surgery to attach a prosthetic penis, and devote the rest of her life to playing rugby. But she was born with a vagina; therefore, she’s a girl, and there ends the argument.

    P.S. We called her “Seren”, the Welsh word for a star (and a common girl’s name in Wales — there are two other Serens in her school), and she is, as the midwife said, “just fine”: a beautiful, intelligent, spirited girl with stunning blue eyes, who makes her father very proud!

  21. Our response should be. Campain for Educational vouchers.

    Set up our own schools. Give parents a choice between schools that tolerate boys dressed as girls and those that don’t

    • My opinion/ Some kids love dressing up ,i doubt they understand gender issues at their age. But never mind it gives their parents a platform, I hope the kid suffers ridicule IT might group up and not become a snowflake like its parents!

  22. I am beginning to understand how the witch mania took hold in the 17th century. How ordinary sane people found it dangerous to speak out against obvious lunacy. These are increasingly dangerous days as this mania for the irrational gathers pace. Much of the anti brexit vituperation is driven by an irrational feeling of persecution amongst the remainers and it is no coincidence the young are to the fore.They are far more prone to irrationality The whole safe space mania is part of it.
    It will pass but the damage to society could be immense. I remember the Red Guards in China and how destructive they were when unleashed by Mao.
    The BBC is now a prime source of danger to civil society along with much of the MSM. The BBC in particular has the power to whip up a frenzy more or less at will. The government seems transfixed by it and unable to counter the abuse of power.
    One final thought. The Muslim minority which is , and lets face it, is continually being crticised for a lack of integration is actually behaving in a quite rational manner consistent with it’s core beliefs and customs. This and the fear the elite has of Muslim reaction makes it far more likely to resist the lunacy now threatening all of us.
    I now expect the Muslim faith to make rapid and significant converts amongst many of the majority sickened by the way our society is heading. Once again an illustration of the unintended consequences of events.

      • Interesting indeed. My worry or prediction is that a specifically British form of Islam will appear that is very conservative and driven by indigenous converts. Not conservative in the way of the Saudis but drawing on Western conservatism. There is a real space created as the C of E and even the Catholics seem to have withdrawn from engaging with the traditional elements always present in any healthy society. The C of E in particular is now actively hostile to any conservative view whatsoever.

        • I’m afraid the practicing of religion and any religion in reality is now seen through the prism of intolerance. Any attempt to maintain its moral guidance, consistent over thousands of years will inevitably lead to making a moral judgement on someone’s behaviour, and thereby create a victim. As we all know, once you have a victim, you have a left-liberal cause and off we go.

    • The analogy to the Red Guards seems very accurate indeed. Libby Purves in The Times coined a new term recently; “coercive liberalism”. It seems that not only can you not disagree with the liberal zeitgeist, you can also neither remain neutral. You have to explicitly agree, otherwise you are cast as some sort of bigot or have some form of ‘ism. With us or against us seems to be the new liberal way of things.

      • We should ban the term “Liberalism” as it is now not so much meaningless as a deliberate misuse of it where, in current usage, it means authoritarian imposition of usually lunatic negative requirements to promote minority and, usually, unpopular minority practices or sects.
        They are the malign Officer class of the thought police imposing each and every petty or gross insult on the normal majority whom they abuse for their normality and society’s basic right to expect it to be respected. And all with the collusion of the MSM and the Courts, funded with our money provided by a equally collusive Government, cravenly attempting to obtain socially engineered change through proxies, too frightened to put it to a democratic choice.

  23. Only in our decadent world does this exist – another imported disease from the USA, and most likely San Francisco, California

  24. The Rowe’s decision does have merit: in attracting enemy fire it is showing who the enemy is. That is a hard lesson, perhaps, but a necessary one in waking people up. Well done Mr and Mrs Rowe. We shall be praying for you. Not all of us are little Jeremy (or Jeremina) Corbyns, and the depravity being pushed in many schools – from condoms to ‘gender’ conversion therapy – needs to be exposed.

  25. Some of these confused ‘trans’ children are going to get irreversible sugery and other damaging treatment. In a few years time some of them will regret the change, but it will be far too late. Those pushing this agenda are using children.

    There should be huge caution about taking action that can’t be reversed, but any reluctant practictioner is vulnerable to being labelled ‘transphobic’ or other nonsense.

    Most of the fools pushing this agenda have picked up leftie ideology at university. The Government should remove funding for non-core social sciences and stop universities from being centres of indoctrination. We’re paying to encourage this madness.

Comments are closed.