The modern Conservative Party is rapidly revealing itself as the most revolutionary organisation in British history. Not content with having redefined the very keystone of civilisation, marriage, under David Cameron, the party of Salisbury and Disraeli is now gradually arrogating to itself the power of redefining the very nature of man. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the next national census may not collect data on the sex of respondents for fear of discriminating against transgender people.

Accurate record-keeping is seen as a measure of civilisation’s development. The Domesday Book is marked by historians as a towering triumph of state organisation. Now we could be moving toward a time where the collection of inaccurate data by the state will be taken as the marker of civilisation’s ‘success’. The modern centralised state promises knowingly to collect incomplete information to avoid offending a minute subset of the population. Far from being recognised as regressive, this step is seen by some as a progressive leap forward in the British cultural revolution.

This is the latest episode in the ongoing transgender story. Last month, a couple on the Isle of Wight faced a barrage of abuse after they removed their six-year-old son from a primary school where another boy had taken to wearing a dress. They maintained that the school should have consulted them, and that it was intolerable that their child could, under the current regulations of the school, have faced charges of bullying for ‘misgendering’ the other child (that is, calling them by the ‘wrong’ pronoun). They said their son had suffered and would continue to suffer were he to be exposed any longer to the other child’s behaviour.

This is where we are at with the transgender debate in the UK – dissidence is frowned on.

Take this quasi-intellectual put-down delivered by Rupert Myers (British GQ, Telegraph) on Twitter recently. Alongside a photo of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in his papal vestments he quipped: ‘Struggling to understand the citing of Christianity as a reason to be uncomfortable with boys in dresses.’

The imputation is that those standing against the new push for ‘transgender rights’, that is to say mainly Christians and people of other faiths, are quite simply hypocrites. Amusing as the joke is, it quite spectacularly misses the point. Firstly, the national debate is not about transvestitism, it is about transgenderism. It’s not whether John can wear summer dresses, but whether John wearing a summer dress makes him Jane – and whether anybody and everybody should face threat of prosecution should they say it doesn’t or dare to ‘misgender’ him.

Transvestites, Mr Myers, dress in women’s clothes to imitate women; priests dress in cassocks and other vestments to remind them of their office and signify their calling (among other important reasons). The intention is what counts here: the cassock is similar to a dress but it is worn not for a sexual/erotic thrill; it is worn as a badge of service and as a working uniform that offers to the priest’s unique role the helpful side-effect of making him look very much like any other priest – because he is. When he puts on the cassock, he is both very visible as a priest and almost invisible as an individual. His uniform makes him at once uniquely available and uniquely anonymous.

One could go on cataloguing the historical background which informs the wearing of vestments and other loose male garments. But it is enough to reiterate that the intention is the important matter – a transvestite wears women’s clothes to become a woman; an Egyptian wears a jalabiyyah because it is hot and because his people have worn them for centuries.

Mr Myers’s agile quip was nothing more than a clever dodge.

Many of the children who are dressing up as boys and girls are demanding – or their parents are – that they be called a boy or a girl. The implications of this go far beyond simple ‘personal choice’ – they have, in practice, the potential radically to alter society. If anyone can, without any objective evidence, claim that they are male or female, and if society is so afraid to make any distinction between a truth and a lie, then all legal frameworks, all gender-equality laws, every category and distinction based on sex simply melt before this illogic.

Feminism also loses all practical power of protest – any feminists supporting this new front in the culture wars are writing themselves out of the story. If there is no such thing as ‘a woman’ or ‘a man’ then the so-called ‘patriarchy’ becomes a nonsense; genderless nonentities cannot oppress along gender lines. And to think that we talk about all of this madness in terms of ‘bigotry’ and ‘being nice’! The ‘nice and loving pro-transsexuals’ vs ‘the bigoted, stupid, hate-filled anti-transsexuals’ – all of these linguistic weapons mask a situation where meaning and truth have been rendered irrelevant. Nothing illustrates this better than the parallel but obviously contradictory statements which the transgender rights movement routinely asserts:

A) Boys can wear dresses as well as girls (without this making them any less a boy)
B) If a boy wears a dress and demands to be called a girl, this dress shall be taken as a sign and proof of his inherent femaleness

A) Gender is different from physical/biological markers of sex (genitalia, reproductive organs)
B) When James removes his penis and testicles, he becomes Janie by virtue of his changed physical state

A) Gender is a social construct (thus, by implication, meaningless)
B) I feel ‘male’/‘female’ (as if these are phenomena that an individual can identify and compare)

A) There is no such thing as a ‘man’ or a ‘woman’, gender is on a spectrum
B) I want to become a man/woman

Transgenderism, if accepted on its own inconsistent terms, is set to change the very nature of what it means to be a man and a woman, of what it means to be a human being. Ideologists who have hijacked this emotive topic to give their liberal credentials a boost, and to feel that thrill of moral superiority as when fighting for a just cause, are railroading society into an untold mess of confusion.


  1. Never mind, I wouldn’t worry about us getting deeper and deeper into this nonsense because while we are getting further into a fantasy land Help is on the way.
    With Muslims outbreeding us by a huge amount plus allowing even more in we will soon see Islam sorting out these issues as they rise to power, those tall buildings in London will become very useful.

    • Shia Islam is pretty accepting of trans gendered people and it’s only the Salafis who are not, but then they hate everyone who isn’t a Salafi Muslim man, it won’t be just the LGBT they come after !

      • Shia Islam is indeed pretty accepting of trans gendered folk offering them free operations and then a lifetime of service as prostitutes.

  2. I have a wry smile when I read these articles written by people who appear to have one foot planted so firmly in the past that their world view is distorted so much that their point looses its power.

    Christianity in Britain is all but dead, the only thing keeping Roman Catholicism alive is the influx of Eastern European migrants. The C of E with fewer practicing members than the RSPB is an irrelevance, something its prelates must be quite proud of.
    If fact if the C of E can be used as a microcosm for the destructive power of Socialism then its demise is certain and it should be given a quiet death with no one taking notice of it.

    Secondly this is not the work of some kind of transgender activist group who want to alter society, it is the work of left wing fascist activists who can use this issue as a kind of monkey trap to bring those whose views they find unacceptable out into the open – and boy do they oblige! Failing to see the trap laid they go off into vitriolic attacks on people who really have little to do with what is going on, making themselves easy targets for the charge of bigotry.
    Just watch, there will be a few along on this thread posting with a red mist coming down across their eyes.

    The real gender dysphoric people just want to live a quiet life in the opposite gender without any need for rights or protests. They don’t see themselves as transgendered, but of the new acquired gender. You have probably met one or two and never even realised.

    Those who wish to attack the subject of this have immediately lost, because the issue here is nothing to do with transgender rights, but outing the enemies of the Fascist left. There are plenty of lemmings only too ready to oblige them.

    • I agree with you that the majority of confused individuals are not at the forefront of this push. It is a left wing attack on our society and should be recognised as such.
      However, it must be fought against because we are allowing our freedoms to be removed and will cause psychiatric damage to the next generation.
      I have written to the Education Secretary with regard to the Government’s proposals and given my concerns regarding the damage to children. This is children who think they are in the wrong body and all others as drug treatment is damaging and irreversible and should not be on offer until adulthood.

      • How many years will it before we start to see cases of ‘misdiagnosis’? Children given hormone drugs from a young age who then claim at a later date they have been permanently damaged by the drugs and psychologically.

        • Not long if this Government continues down this disastrous path. It has already happened in America. This is all happening even though the John Hopkins Hospital in the US which had been at the forefront of this type of reassignment surgery decided a number of years ago to cease doing these ops because no change in the suicide rate. Statistics show that 80% of children who are confused in this way accept their sex by the age of puberty.

        • Look forward to the post. My reply from the Education Department is all about how they want transgender people to be “happy”. They appear to have no interest in the welfare of the majority in our schools – they just have to accept a lie and be prepared for disciplining if they misgender a child.
          Serious pressure needs to be put on the Govt to overturn this issue or there will need to be civil disobedience to protect our families.

        • Yes, drug companies are beneficiaries. But as another post has mentioned there is a ban on researching the effects of this. A psychotherapist named James Caspian wished to research those who had transitioned and regretted it later, but the University won’t allow the research as it does not follow the zeitgeist we are all supposed to accept. This is nothing short of an attack in young vulnerable people, who will have to live with the consequences of decisions they should never have been allowed to make!

        • Drug companies don’t make huge profits at all because the only drug currently offered is a hormone blocker. The Fascists are trying to make the female/male hormone pill available, which is one of the cheapest generic drugs on the market. There’s certainly no profit to be made from these drugs.

          Interestingly these hormone pills are available over the counter in most countries without prescriptions or Psychological intervention, and parents are free to provide them to their kids if they wish to.

          • Surely that is child abuse? (in a similar way parents who have their young son’s prepuce removed, at an age when he is unable to consent are also committing child abuse.)

    • You have made the assumption that all those fundamentally opposed to the spread of trans-gender ideology are Christians. I know plenty of atheists who see it as mass insanity too. Man cannot redefine nature without messing up the society he lives in. It reminds me of how the Communists outlawed the science of genetics because they wanted to believe that so-called “homo-soveticus” was a product of socialist nurturing i.e. man could be engineered into whatever the state wanted him to be. Concerns about trans-genderism are not a purely religious issue, though most religions have a perspective on the matter. The CofE has been polluted with political correctness. Many Christians in this country, and most of those outside the UK see the CofE as a corrupt and fallen institution; not because of its beliefs, but it has abandoned its beliefs. It will continue yo shrink and may die. Many Christians would see that as an opportunity for a revival of Christian faith.

      • ” I know plenty of atheists who see it as mass insanity too” Well said – I’m one of these atheists.

      • Not at all! It you you who have not read my post correctly.

        The column is addressed from my reading of it solely to Christians and cites Christian objections when the reality is that the Church is killing Christianity.

        You might well know plenty of atheists who object, but my point is that the column makes no mention of these people – probably in the majority, nor does it address the feelings of Muslims either.

        It seems that many people in our society both right & left are living in a past age when the people knew and cared about Christian values and virtues, and thus address their comments from that standpoint, the are however too removed and out of touch for their views to hold value.

        As a libertarian and someone who believes in the primacy of freedom, people should be allowed to do as they please i.e. to change their gender, however that does not mean that others should be banned from examining and if they so feel from criticising that choice.

        We know that unfortunately for those who do have the condition that it is a real one, and that thanks to immoral inhuman experiments in Soviet Russia, it is possible to produce human babies who are gay or trans. In the West experiments on animals have produced similar results.

        This piece is however about children and the reality is that very few of them who appear to be trans at this age actually are, and allowing them to change their bodies at this young age is going to affect the rest of their adult lives.

        The argument is not as this one foot in the religious past puts it, but one of Left wing idiocy attempting to over ride reality (yet again) it can be proven wrong with statistics and the medical opinions of those who practice in this field.

        The reality is that having wrecked someone life the Fascists will simply claim it had nothing to do with them and walk away as Harriet Harperson has done on several occasions.

        To state it once again for clarity! Stop bringing religion into this debate because it has no relevance and the Christian religion is less important than the author believes it to be. Start using the hard facts of medical research and statistics, because therin lies the real truth and ammunition to fight the Fascists with.

    • the only thing keeping Roman Catholicism alive is the influx of Eastern European migrants

      No, the only “things” keeping Catholicism alive are God and genuine Spiritual Faith.

      You commit the frequent Error of imagining that the Church is just one more group of some political or philosophical nature.

      • One has to ask then why the deepest Christian faith is among those who have lived for generations under aggressively atheist regimes,

        • Because it is a normal human reaction against repression to develop an identity fortified against one’s enemies.

  3. I can add another statement:

    A) Transgenderism is not a mental illness, please do not stigmatise and judge as so.
    B) These people suffer from gender dysphoria, a ‘mental heatlh’ issue (with a list of ‘symptoms’ and behaviours) that needs more funding.

    All these conflicting statements are there to simply obfuscate the matter, catch people out and fuel another branch of the ‘Equality industry’.

  4. Feminism also loses all practical power of protest – any feminists
    supporting this new front in the culture wars are writing themselves out
    of the story. If there is no such thing as ‘a woman’ or ‘a man’ then
    the so-called ‘patriarchy’ becomes a nonsense; genderless nonentities
    cannot oppress along gender lines.

    And there you have hit the nail on the head, Mr. Haywood. This is why Germaine Greer is really so opposed to transgenderism. This is why we have TERFs. Transsexuals threaten the very cornerstone of all the feminists demands for special treatment, the victim mentality, and not only in the sense of blurring the lines. Because if it is so terrible to be a woman, why do so many more men than women opt to make the transition?

    • Because 1) Most women are sane and know you can’t just put on trousers and ‘become’ a man; and 2) the men who want to ‘become’ women as adults are predominantly sexually aroused by the thought of themselves as women. It’s a fetish. People – especially men – will go to remarkable lengths to satisfy a fetish.

  5. The transgender aspect is on the rise and could increase substantially. It arises from the chemical soup that most of us live in, consume and encounter and its effects, notably on the development of children both in the womb and at critical states of life. See Kate Grenville for one aspect.

    • A related point is that the promotion of transgenderism is one more means towards the hateful ideological purpose of population control and population reduction, given that the introduction of hormones from the opposite sex into someone’s body typically sterilises that person permanently, almost certainly if that person is male.

  6. So, in ten years’ time, when the gender equality crowd tell us: “women are x% of the population, therefore, they should comprise x% of any given occupation…” how will they know the proportion without reliable statistics?
    The word “petard” springs to mind.

    • This is exactly why all the feminists who are actually paying attention rather than just virtue-signalling have been campaigning hard to stop it happening.

        • Ah, feminists and Islam. In my view Islam is as grave a threat to women and feminism as transgenderism, but the majority of feminists (while they may suspect this) are hampered from speaking out by a tribal affiliation with the left. And the left has a blind spot where Islam is concerned, because many leftists still believe Islamists to be allies in bringing down ‘western imperialism’ and choose to disregard the many obvious downsides of Islamism as an ideology to that end. Again, those feminists who are paying attention have pointed this out (Camille Paglia is a case in point) but you are right that many are silent where they shouldn’t be.

  7. “The imputation is that those standing against the new push for ‘transgender rights’, that is to say mainly Christians and people of other faiths, are quite simply hypocrites.”

    It’s a cute tactic by the Transgenderistas to whenever possible pitch their argument as secular logic and tolerance against backward piety and prejudice: they know that many gainsayers, though incredulous at what is currently happening in the public sphere, will nevertheless avoid alignment with any form of religious opposition.

    Yet this is a grotesque inversion, it being transgenderism which, at least for now, is seemingly indubitable. And certainly no religious perspective is needed to refuse to collude with a blatant lie, or to be aghast when a schoolchild is deemed competent to redefine their gender at an age when they might still believe in the tooth fairy.

    We are told that the creed of I-am-what-I-say-I-am must be accepted principally to protect the subject’s the mental health. But were this a campaign for psychological well-being rather that a dogmatic political movement driven by fringe zealots, legitimate and valuable research would be welcomed. Instead, as recently discovered by James Caspian – a psychotherapist generally sympathetic to the transgender cause – simply speculating that anyone might subsequently regret having transitioned brings nothing but opprobrium.

    • or mistressed the subject-matter. The whole thing is Frankfurt School indoctrination blueprint:

      To further the advance of their ‘quiet’ cultural revolution … the School recommended (among other things):

      1. The creation of racism offences.
      2. Continual change to create confusion
      3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
      4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
      5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
      6. The promotion of excessive drinking
      7. Emptying of churches
      8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
      9. Creating dependency on the state or state benefits
      10. Control and dumbing down of media
      11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family

      We have been taken a long, long way down that road to hell….

      • … as well as mothers having to go out to work to help pay the mortgage,
        drug use
        black versus white,
        women versus men,
        those who understand national sovereignty versus those who don’t
        old versus young
        rich versus poor …

  8. Very good!

    There is an answer, though, as to why transgenderism (or, more accurately, gender identity) is being implemented inconsistently, i.e., surrounded by contradictions. The contradictions are temporary.

    The ideology is yet to be implemented accurately, but the more thoroughly it is implemented, the more it will ‘make sense.’ For example: at the moment, we are supposed to believe that the dress is what makes the boy legally a girl (or is at least a sign of his girlness). But in time it will become clear that he is a (legal) girl despite the dress, not because of it.

    Swap the dress for surgery, and we see the same thing: if transgenderism is fully depathologized in law (as it should be, according to the concept itself, and as looks likely), then any man who has had surgery and is legally female, will be rendered ‘female despite surgery.’ How much money does the government intend to put in a pot for compensation claims??

Comments are closed.