Man who ‘identified as dog’ following drink-drive arrest walked on all fours to cell – The Irish News - "A Co Tyrone man who told police he “identified as a dog” barked, growled, and crawled on all fours while sniffing footwear following arrest, a court has heard. Damien McClave (41), of Tramline Way in Aughnacloy, was arrested after failing to provide a breath specimen upon being stopped close to his home last December 14 on suspicion of driving whilst unfit through drink or drugs. When asked to provide a preliminary sample he replied he could not as he identified as a dog and animals cannot perform breath tests... Once in custody, when asked to provide an evidential specimen, McClave “barked and growled like a dog”. Having been told he would also be charged with this and to walk back to his cell, McClave “proceeded to crawl on his hands and knees, stopping at the cell door to sniff his shoes and continued to imitate being a dog”. A search of his vehicle recovered 70 shotgun cartridges and it was later established he did not hold the appropriate firearm certificate. When charged with the matter he provided “no comment” replies. At Dungannon Magistrates Court, District Judge Francis Rafferty remarked: “One wouldn’t expect to dog to be able to comment.” He asked the defence barrister: “What does the defendant currently identify as? An idiot obviously, but is there anything to add to that?”... Addressing McClave, Judge Rafferty said: “I’m not going to punish you for your buffoonery in custody but police have better things to do than deal with people who pretend to be members of the animal kingdom.”"
Lib Dems forced to pay gender-critical woman Natalie Bird £14k after barring her from standing as MP - "The Liberal Democrats have been forced to pay thousands of pounds in damages to a woman who was barred from standing as an MP over her gender-critical views. Natalie Bird, 45, was suspended as the party’s prospective parliamentary candidate for Wakefield in 2018 after she wore a T-shirt reading: “Woman: Adult, Human, Female.” She claimed her suspension was part of a campaign of discrimination by the Lib Dems because she fought for women’s rights and expressed her opinion that it was not possible for a person to change sex. Last year, the party admitted that Ms Bird had been discriminated against. At a costs hearing on Wednesday, Central London county court awarded her £14,000 in damages for injury to feelings, a payout significantly lower than Ms Bird’s claim for £90,000... Judge Evans-Gordon said there was no evidence that Ms Bird’s views “ever crossed the line and became transphobic”. She said: “Ms Bird holds the belief that sex and gender are separate. Her views are known as gender-critical. “She alleges that, as a result, she has suffered discrimination by the Liberal Democrats which has caused her great hurt to her feelings.”"
Hamilton's ban of a 'Woman: An Adult Female' billboard is irrational - "We have clearly entered the realm of the ludicrous when a local government in Canada is banning what most reasonable people would regard as the dictionary definition of what is a woman. The City of Hamilton, Ont., believes that “Woman: An Adult Female,” is too harmful, too toxic and too outrageous to be put on a bus shelter billboard. Once more, it is the institutions, such as local governments and universities, that we expect to be guardians of our fundamental rights, which, instead, trample them into the dust. But the “Woman: An Adult Female” billboard isn’t just about free speech, it is a glimpse into a Canadian — and, indeed, Western — society that has lost the ability to talk and disagree among itself. “I think our society has unfortunately become increasingly polarized,” says Lia Milousis, a lawyer with the Acacia Group, an Ottawa-based law firm specializing in defence of churches and charities from Charter abuses and government overreach. “And I think part of that is we’ve not practiced disagreeing and we have taken up this view where disagreeing is essentially hating someone. People don’t have practice tolerating other views.” And in this climate, the rather innoxious, inoffensive, dictionary definition that a woman is an adult female becomes a hateful slogan that the City of Hamilton cannot permit to be expressed publicly... The city said grounds for concern included the messaging which appeared to support “a traditional and biologically determined definition of gender in line with conservative values.” The city also consulted with LGBT groups before concluding the ad would not provide a safe and welcoming environment for all transit users. But as Milousis, who is fighting the billboard ban, points out, “The ad in question is the most tame way you can communicate this message. It is not inflammatory. It says, ‘Woman: An Adult Female.’ It doesn’t even say biological female. It doesn’t even say genetic female. It just says an adult female. “The city acknowledges that this is a basic dictionary definition but then talks about exclusionary undertones and how this is a definition associated with conservative values.” We have reached the stage when describing a woman as an adult female is such a provocative statement that it flusters the delicate mandarins of Hamilton. However, an Ontario divisional court agreed that in rejecting the ad, Hamilton had followed proper procedure and been reasonable... A central issue, of course, is whether freedom of expression, as enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is as sacrosanct as many believe it to be. Too often, our expected right to freedom of speech is being overthrown by courts or institutions because of someone’s “superior” right not to be harmed or offended. The City of Hamilton didn’t even wait for a complaint. The city, so sensitive to our cultural times, actively sought out people who might be offended and then based their rejection on the feedback. When you are in a position of power, it is easier to censor the side you disagree with. “This is not a case where this was hate speech, or calling for violence, or causing any kind of danger,” says Milousis in an interview with the National Post. “There is no reason why having this advertisement would make the transit system unsafe or unwelcoming.” She argues that the divisional court judgement appears to suggest that there is a right not to be offended or at least shielded from views that you disagree with. “And that’s not a constitutionally protected right.” “The expectation is that people in a democracy will be capable of handling robust discussion even on issues that they have strong opinions about,” says Milousis... Another concern is that if Hamilton bans a political message on an important public issue because it’s too conservative, why can’t another city ban something because it’s too Liberal? We could have a patchwork of different political bans all over the country. “It raises deep concern about the democratic freedom of Canada,” she says. Milousis also sees, “a level of intolerance at the institutional and particularly the administrative level that is concerning.” She cites the Saskatchewan student who faced a misconduct hearing for questioning diversity, equity and inclusion provisions. As well as the Manitoba medical student who was expelled for making pro-life comments. “I think it is only a very arrogant person, an arrogant society, that says, ‘I need to know nothing about other views. I do not want to know. I do not want to hear. I do not want to see. I can learn nothing from you.’ “There’s a humility that it takes to say, ‘This is what my view is, but maybe I have something to learn from you.’” Humility in a society so self-absorbed may be a tough virtue to foster. But we can start by talking to each other — and not banning ads we disagree with."
Damn conservatives erasing and oppressing women!
Time to ban dictionaries for being transphobic
Of course, if you support terrorism that the left approves of, censoring you is a Danger to Democracy
Read | Teach a friend to read - "One of our Library Volunteers is using the Teach a Friend to Read Better guide to teach an adult with additional needs who attends our weekly craft group - the volunteer is collaborating with his carer to ensure that he reads regularly throughout the week (not just when he is at the Library)... Rob has an inspiring career working with rough sleepers and the homeless in London. As a manager of the Passage hostel for the homeless in Victoria, Rob distributed copies of our first teaching reading scheme, Yes we can read to the homeless."
VPL Picks: Reading Aloud to the Elderly - Short Entertaining Reads — a staff-created list from Vancouver Public Library | Vancouver Public Library | BiblioCommons - "This list of brief, entertaining reads is for caregivers of elderly patrons, especially those with short attention spans"
5 Engaging Read-Aloud Activities for Seniors - "For the elderly who loved to read all their lives, listening to someone read to them can bring profound comfort and joy."
Weird. Left wingers keep claiming that the meme about drag queens not reading to the homeless or elderly, but only to kids, is stupid because you don't need to read to adults. I guess these people didn't get the memo
Canada needs a new LGB movement — without T - "The reality is that same-sex attracted people have unique needs that differ from, and occasionally clash with, the trans community, but which are not being adequately addressed under the status quo. While some people assume that homosexuals and transgender people are interchangeable, that is simply not the case. Yes, same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria can overlap, particularly in early life, but orientation and gender identity remain distinct concepts. In fact, maintaining this distinction has historically been integral to the gay rights movement, which fought for decades to normalize the belief that men are still wholly men (and women still wholly women) regardless of which sex they sleep with. The conflation of orientation and gender is a relatively new development; when gay and trans activists burst out of their closets in the 1970s, they generally saw themselves as belonging to distinct movements. Many early homosexual organizations, such as the Gay Activists Alliance, maintained that trans rights were unrelated, or at least peripheral, to their own struggles, and feared that associating with the trans community would erode public acceptance of same-sex attraction. Lesbians were particularly adamant about separation, with leading theorists denouncing male transsexuality as a colonization of womanhood. For example: in 1979, lesbian feminist Janice Raymond published The Transsexual Empire, a polemic wherein she argued that transgenderism uses “patriarchal myths” to appropriate and dominate women’s bodies. Her work was highly influential, and inspired the Lesbian Organization of Toronto to ban transsexuals in the late 1970s so that their space could remain for “women born women only.” Trans activists reciprocally formed their own organizations, such as the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries, which allowed them to uncompromisingly pursue their own goals without deference to outsiders. They criticized the homosexuals who had rejected them, arguing that they were too assimilationist, bourgeois and narrow-minded in their critiques of social injustice. This was a reasonable state of affairs. Each community, being represented by its own constellation of organizations and activists, enjoyed a great deal of self-determination. Homosexuals and transgender people were free to strategically co-operate, but could also meaningfully critique one another when their interests clashed. The gay movement ultimately proved more successful — largely because homosexuals were better resourced and were, on average, more strategic with their battles and words. In other words: respectability politics worked. As such, the transgender community was eventually absorbed into the gay rights movement as a junior coalition partner in the 1990s, forming the modern LGBT umbrella. Transgender people greatly benefited from this alliance, with gay labour setting the foundation for eventual trans acceptance. There were few downsides for homosexuals at first, because “LGBTQ” organizations remained cognizant of their needs. But then the United States legalized same-sex marriage and many homosexuals, feeling victorious, drifted away from community activism. In their absence, LGBTQ organizations were entirely co-opted by transgender activism, and the social issues faced by gays and lesbians (e.g. sexualized drug use for men, and intimate partner violence for women) were abandoned in the gutter. Many homosexuals found themselves voiceless, and, worse yet, scorned by the very institutions that were supposed to represent them. Cannibalized from the inside by gender radicalism, the mainstream LGBTQ movement came to insist that biological sex is irrelevant to orientation. Lesbians were advised to enjoy “girl dick” while gay men were pressured to unlearn their “genital preferences.” Homosexuals who asserted their sexual boundaries were excommunicated from queer spaces and dating apps while being smeared as bigots. In tandem, vulnerable same-sex attracted youth were pressured into receiving irreversible sex changes under the auspices of “gender-affirming care,” simply because they exhibited perfectly normal episodes of gender confusion that, in most cases, would have resolved naturally. This homophobic practice of “transing away the gay” received little scrutiny from mainstream LGBTQ institutions, because the safety of young gays and lesbians apparently matters less than maintaining the myth that all gender dysphoria is indicative of transgenderism. Some gender radicals even began to crusade against gay men in particular. Not only did they normalize using “cis gay” as a slur, they propagated a revisionist history wherein the participation and impact of gay activists was minimized, if not completely erased. Gay men were told, remarkably, that they owed their rights to “trans women of colour,” even though this claim has never been remotely true. And throughout all of this, the trans-led “LGBTQ” movement still found time to alienate the rest of society, too. According to the 2025 Ipsos LGBT+ Pride Report, which uses polling data gathered across 26 countries, support for transgender rights has declined markedly since 2021, with same-sex rights seeing a similar, albeit weaker, softening. Handing over the reins to gender radicals has been demonstrably disastrous — decades of progress risk being undone by the current backlash. In this context, it is imperative that the LGB community seize control of its own destiny. There is no reason for homosexuals to subordinate their interests to transgender activists who so often despise them. Gays and lesbians should not passively sit around while gender radicals sabotage public support for same-sex relationships. Let each community chart its own autonomous paths, as was done decades ago, and if there are opportunities for inter-community co-operation, then that should be explored — but on an equal and limited basis."
TRAs like to praise Iran - which executes homosexuals. Their narcissism exposes the lie that "United we Stand, Divided we Fall"
Weird. TRAs keep claiming that trans people have been intimately involved in the gay rights movement from the beginning, and always invoke Stonewall
Weird. Left wingers keep claiming rights are won by fighting, not negotiation (respectability politics)
I've seen TRAs sharing a cartoon where trans rights are a domino and other rights are behind it. Ironically, this shows that pushing trans mania leads to pushback that threatens the rest of the left wing agenda
Hockey Canada demand coaches take gender test ignores on-ice reality - "On July 3, Hockey Canada notified its bench staff — which includes coaches and trainers — that they must take a course on gender identity and expression to be a certified member of the organization. Judging from the test, Hockey Canada’s policies ignore the very real concerns of young girls and women — physical safety, competitive fairness and sexual privacy — in favour of radical “gender-diverse” discourse. Hockey Canada’s 2022 Gender Expression and Gender Identity Policy states that players “must be able to participate in the sport in the Gender with which they identify,” and be provided with “access to such facilities in accordance with their Gender Identity or Gender Expression.” But never before have coaching staff been given a nationwide, certification-required test, seemingly aimed at implementing the policy. The test begins with an introductory video stating that, “Hockey Canada’s members unanimously approve of the gender expression and gender identity policy, which is effective for the 2023-2024 hockey season.” (Whether all of Hockey Canada’s members genuinely approve of the policy is up for debate.) According to the test, screenshots of which were provided to National Post by a coach who was required to take the test, the gender identity and expression policy “ensures that all players, including transgender and gender-diverse athletes, can compete in hockey in a way that aligns with their gender identity.”... Hockey Canada has its own dressing room policy, which dismisses concerns that females might have about biological males entering their formerly sex-segregated spaces, suggesting that such concerns are irrelevant and based on myths... They must have some way of determining whether a biological male or female player can switch to a team of the opposite sex and use its dressing room, right? Apparently not. According to the test, “eligibility is based on a player’s self-identified gender without any requirement for medical or surgical transition related care such as surgeries or hormone replace therapies. They can participate on the team that best reflects who they are.” (Which would seem to open the door to those who want to enter female dressing rooms “for their own gratification.”) Diving into the term “gender diverse,” test registrants are educated on the non-binary flag and what each of its colours represents. Yellow, they are told, represents people whose gender exists outside the binary of male and female. White represents people with many genders. Pink is for a mix of male and female. And brown represents people who identify as not having a gender. The test educates registrants on a multitude of possibilities for self-identification, including “gender diverse” terms such as agender, bigender/polygender, genderfluid, genderqueer and two-spirit... in the test, Hockey Canada warns against outing someone — intentionally or accidentally. Who, then, can a player confide in, if a gender diverse person does something inappropriate? Surely, Hockey Canada isn’t suggesting all gender diverse individuals — or those who may be masquerading as such — are beyond reproach?... This policy puts coaching staff, who are responsible for the well-being of players, in a difficult position. Hockey Canada will not certify this staff unless they agree to allow biological males to pass freely through spaces normally segregated by sex, based on nothing more than a chosen gender identity. And it doesn’t appear that this chosen identity needs to be consistent in any way, as it is not tied to biological sex or medical interventions — just what identity an individual feels best reflects them from one day to the next."
A Beacon Shines in the Storm: European Court of Justice Advances the Human Rights of Trans People - "The CJEU reaffirmed that Article 16 of the GDPR obliges national authorities to maintain public registers to correct personal data related to gender identity when they are inaccurate, in line with Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR. The Court emphasized that data on gender identity should reflect the person's lived identity rather than their assigned sex at birth... Trans people across the EU can invoke the GDPR to demand sex or gender marker changes in official documents without invasive or excessive requirements."
Weird. We keep being told that sex and gender are different and that only ignorant people don't know that
Trans NHS doctor adamant trans women have right to get changed in front of female colleagues: 'I'm biologically female!' - "An NHS doctor who was born male and now identifies as a woman has said that trans women have right to get changed in front of female colleagues. Dr Beth Upton told an employment tribunal that "I’m biologically female" and said sex had "no defined or agreed meaning in science."... Dr Upton suggested that colleagues uncomfortable with a trans women using female-only spaces held "misinformed, biased, unpleasant or bigoted" views... "The term biologically female or biologically male is completely nebulous. It has no defined or agreed meaning in science, as far as I’m aware. "I’m not a robot, so I am biological and my identity is female. Without wanting to appeal to the dictionary too much, I’m biologically female." Cunningham questioned Dr Upton about how a female would be defined, proposing a hypothetical large-bearded character called "Pete" who appeared to be male in all respects but said that they were a “gender non-conforming woman". The doctor dodged the question, saying the example was "frankly unbelievable", adding: “As someone who lives in a transphobic society, I accept there are unfortunately and sadly prejudices, a lack of willingness to explore variety and the spectrum that is gender and gender expression.""
Trans changing room row nurse cleared of misconduct as tribunal resumes - "A nurse who complained about sharing a changing room with a transgender doctor has been cleared of gross misconduct following disciplinary proceedings by NHS Fife. Sandie Peggie was suspended from her role last year after she objected to Dr Beth Upton, who is a transgender woman, using female facilities."
Naturally, on reddit people were claiming Upton had done nothing wrong and was a victim. But when you push trans mania, logic goes out of the window. Not to mention memory of the recent Supreme Court ruling on single-sex spaces
Liberal-funded charity stops Alberta from protecting minors - "Until further notice, transgender medical treatments for minors will continue in Alberta. In December, Alberta amended its Health Professions Act to prohibit doctors from prescribing hormone therapy and puberty-suppressing drugs to minors in the course of treating gender-related psychological disorders. The law hadn’t come into force, however, and the government was planning to release an order allowing exceptions to the rule. Before any of these rules, or exceptions, could kick in, Egale Canada, a charity that is 71 per cent government-funded and now functions as the feds’ unofficial LGBT litigation department, won an injunction on June 27 that put everything on pause until a constitutional challenge has been heard out. The reason? The judge handling the case, Allison Kuntz, appointed to the Court of King’s Bench by Justin Trudeau in 2023, was convinced that age-based restrictions on cosmetic hormone treatments would cause transgender youth all sorts of harm... The Alberta government had argued, in 183 pages, that the evidence for hormonal cosmetics was unclear, and that the risk of harm that came with providing such treatments to minors warranted legal limits. It called four Alberta doctors to testify, along with three detransitioners; as part of its large pile of evidence pointing to the lack of scientific support for cross-sex medical treatments for minors, it cited the United Kingdom’s Cass Review and other European studies... Alberta isn’t just fighting a few activists: it’s going up against a federal government that acts indirectly, through judicial appointments and generous cash handouts to ideologically aligned charities. There were always going to be losses along the way; what will ultimately count is whether Premier Danielle Smith decides to draw the notwithstanding clause from its holster."
Council could be sued over trans flag zebra crossings - "an evangelical Christian resident, Blessing Olubanjo, claims she will sue the local authority if they fail to remove them. Ms Olubanjo said she shouldn’t be made to ‘feel excluded or marginalised by political symbols in public spaces’ and that public spaces should not ‘advance divisive agendas’ and ‘alienate people of faith’. She has been backed by the Christian Legal Centre, who called the crossings ‘a visual endorsement of a contested ideology’. The crossings, at Tavistock Place and Marchmont Street, faced criticism even before they were installed, with The Royal National Institute for the Blind warning they could be hazardous for visually impaired people. Transport for London’s Independent Disability Advisory Group, meanwhile, said individuals with disabilities, dementia or sensory sensitivity could become anxious by the colours or find it difficult to interpret the abstract shapes... Ms Olubanjo argues that the crossings breach political neutrality rules under the Local Government Act 1986. She also says they infringe on freedom of belief and expression under the Human Rights Act 1998. The Christian Legal Centre’s chief executive, Andrea Williams, said: ‘The crossing is a visual endorsement of a contested ideology, installed by a public authority in breach of its legal duties. ‘This is not the role of local government. Public spaces should be able to be used by everyone, not to advance divisive agendas that alienate people of faith and those who hold to biological reality. “The council needs to remove or redesign the crossing and apologise to its residents and local businesses.’"
Independent Women's Voice on X - ""To date, 2,012 female athletes have lost opportunities to males, & 2,789 medals have been stolen from women by men." -@paytonmcnabb_"
Weird. TRAs keep claiming transwomen in women's sports isn't a problem
Meme - "News. Identifying as trans gives you the privilege of having your voice lifted up and celebrated as divine, beautiful, magical. It is a golden ticket to compete in the top tier of social justice oppression olympics. It is used as a free pass for misogyny - bullying of women, erosion of language, safety and boundaries. They justify it by calling their victims "the oppressors" while they are clearly demonstrating oppression of women. trans privilege @soft.strawb"
Kaitlynn Wheeler on X - "If women’s rights are anti-trans, then trans rights are inherently anti-woman. Period."
Meme - "HUNTER WAs LITERALLY BORN TO PLAY ZELDA. THEY SHOULD GO FOR SOMEONE WHO LOOKS MORE LIKE THE CHARACTER THAN ANYTHING ELSE!"
"WITH THAT LOGIC, YOU CAN AGREE THAT BELLA RAMSEY WAS A TERRIBLE CHOICE FOR ELLIE IN THE LAST OF US"
