@lwhb__ @sally_hines If you had legitimate concerns your movement would have nothing to do with the likes of Berns. Instead, she was and is an integral part.

What am I supposed to make of her words? What are trans people supposed to make of your movement adoring her? Are they supposed to ignore it? @lwhb__ @sally_hines All you seem to want to do is insult me, and you seem completely unprepared to talk about what GCism actually is.

Is it Posie Parker standing in a park demanding that Debbie Hayton detransition and stop using the name Debbie?

Just one of the major thought leaders in the "gender critical" movement, saying that women's, black and gay rights were all contrived as part of "the progress narrative" where "they always needs a new battle to fight," and trans rights is just the latest contrivance.

https://twitter.com/AndrewGold_ok/status/1743996133506969780

Or perhaps women, black, gay and trans people are demographics that are traditionally subjected to bigotry, abuse and violence, and the human race evolved to the point where a lot of people went "hey how about we stop being shitbags to other people because of who they are?"

In May last year, I engaged @michaelpforan, a "gender critical" legal expert, in a cordial conversation about Magdalen Berns and what sort of speech is protected under "gender critical" belief, and he confirmed that in his legal opinion Berns expressed transphobic views. Now...1/ ...it seems that @michaelpforan is defaming me by saying that the conversation was somehow not in good faith (??) and that I have been sharing the screenshot of his reply almost every day. I did one thread on it at the time, and barely mentioned it again until today. 2/

The "gender critical" movement keep going on about me bringing up Magdalen Berns, so I will do you a deal. If @BevJacksonAuth, a founder of LGB Alliance, takes Berns out of her Twitter header, and apologises for venerating her, I will never mention Berns again. Deal? Fair, right? I am a staunch critic of so-called "gender criticism" and have been for five years, and in that time every "GC" person you can think of, from @jk_rowling to the anonymous "GC" trolls have said how much they admired Berns, but it's disrespectful to bring up what she actually said?

A "gender critical" artist set out to do portraits of 100 "detransitioned women" nearly 2 years ago. I suspected it was taking her so long (she's only at 56 worldwide) that some subjects would begin to drop out (change of opinion? Retransition?) and so it has turned out to be. 1/ Four years ago, the GC movement went to @SkyNews and @sallylockwood with the claim that they were in touch with 100s of young detransitioners in the UK alone, and yet, today this GC artist is clearly struggling to get 100 subjects, WORLDWIDE? This doesn't make sense. 2/

@jeannie_brady @StateOfSwimming @eoine_oc @mara_yamauchi @ruthpedz @TeamBaDJane @itsafrogslife @LizPower6 @CatAnita7 @adulthumangal @izzie_kathryn2 @parkrunUK @WorldAthletics "Call a male person a man isn't an attack."

It's your contention that if you stood up and said "Nicole is a man" in this audience that that should not be construed by anyone as an "attack" on Nicole?

I think most reasonable people would see it that way.

@jeannie_brady @StateOfSwimming @eoine_oc @mara_yamauchi @ruthpedz @TeamBaDJane @itsafrogslife @LizPower6 @CatAnita7 @adulthumangal @izzie_kathryn2 @parkrunUK @WorldAthletics Being trans is not a "belief" any more than being gay is, although homophobes do refer to people being gay as "an agenda" and "ideology" and "a cult" and "a delusion" and "a mental illness" too.

Nicole is clearly innately trans. She can't not be trans.

An lo, at the strike of midnight...

1. No-one will use pronouns anymore. In fact, some people will stop speaking in sentences altogether in case a paedophilic pronoun sneaks in, preferring instead the "gender critical" method of communicating through very angry grunts. 2. All trans women will detransition. This will prove to be a pyrrhic victory for "gender critical" men as it will also mean the end of trans porn - their favourite genre - and they will have no reason to keep that creepy folder on their phones "just to show how sick *they* are."

For 6 years now, every new year, the leaders in the "gender critical" movement tell the followers that people will soon be "taking pronouns out of their bios" and "pretending they never supported the trans cult" but it never happens. So why keep saying it? Answer in next tweet. They need their follower's money.

I think it's nearing 5 million that has been poured in over the years through donations from mostly the same 2500 to 3000 people, and they need to keep telling people that "victory" is close at hand to keep them donating.

Imagine seeing the outpouring of grief and fear from the trans community about the murder of Brianna Ghey and tweeting this?
Shame on everyone in the media who has platformed this man as someone with "reasonable concerns" in the last 5 years. He's a monster. What's your excuse? And you can't say that you didn't know he was like this. Five years ago he was using words like "mutilation" and celebrating a woman who called trans women "sick, pathetic f*cks." It was never "no debate." Some people don't have the basic human decency to qualify for debate.

Watson is one of the "gender critical" movement's "detransitioners you should listen to." The GC movement is a wealthy movement who can give 100s of thousands to multiple legal cases and not one GC person has thought to start a fundraiser to help here? This isn't a first. 1/ The GC movement has used detransitioners - who are often vulnerable people - like this before. Years ago, a previous detransitioner started an org to help "100s of detranstioners" (real number, 12) and the GC movement only gave that person 300 quid a month to fund that org. 2/

This person is not a "lesbian activist," she's an anti-trans activist who only last month was celebrating a woman who called trans people "pathetic, sick f*cks," as her "Shero." But you're not going to hear that in the @Independent_ie , because it doesn't suit Mark's narrative.1/

https://twitter.com/MarkLTighe/status/1710943374063051163

Now, as an unbiased journalist, reporting on trans issues, the FIRST question you ask someone like this is if they really believe we should have a society where someone who called trans women "f*cking blackface actors" and perverts etc. should be celebrated as "their "Shero" 2/

In late 2019, @jk_rowling revealed herself to be a "gender critical" activist. They sell this tweet on merch at GC events, and have a conspiracy theory that trans people in Twitter delete their likes off it. Here's the thing, though: they don't actually believe a word of it. 1/ "Dress however you please"

Kellie Jay Keen, who many would say is the defacto leader of the GC movement, said recently that she never believed this. She believes in judging people by what they wear. It is standard GCism to mock trans people and others for what they wear. 2/

Hi @SkyNews, it's not just the NHS, you are also culpable for the transphobia trans people face seeking basic healthcare, You published a "story" in 2019 which said 100s of young UK trans people were "seeking help" detransitioning, that was utterly untrue transphobic bullshit. 1/

The woman that @sallylockwood interviewed was not even a detransitioner, as she claimed to be, and the real number of detransitioners she was in contact with was around a dozen. The organisation she started to supposedly help "100s" folded 6 months after it was launched. 2/

The "gender critical" movement harasses any org that shows a modicum of support for trans people, because they want to drive trans people from public life. Today they are harassing a cancer charity for featuring a trans woman's story, causing them to have to issue this statement. This is a nearly weekly occurence now, for years.

One "gender critical" leader launched a week long harassment campaign, demanding to speak to a trans police officer's boss on "safeguarding" grounds, because they said her nail varnish wasn't to dress code.

Back in 2017, Graham Linehan was Twitter friends with Peter Bright. They even discussed paedophilia, where Graham once defended Peter against an accusation of paedophilia.

In 2020, Peter was convicted of soliciting minors for sex. 1/



This is an embarrassing exchange for Graham, in retrospect, but it's highly unlikely he knew that Peter was actually a paedophile. They were just Twitter-friendly after all. It would be deeply unfair to hold him to account for his defence of this man, except...2/

Graham Linehan says he's "still waiting for an example" of his vile bullying behaviour.

Here's a non-exhaustive thread of Graham's vile bullying behaviour. 1/ Katy Montgomerie is a trans woman and a feminist who calls out transphobia. Graham deadnames and misgenders her, calls her a crossdresser, portrays her as a child catcher. Posts pre transition pics of her. His YouTube cohost called her a pervert etc. 2/

I've seen two men recently defend Linehan by reducing his hatemongering to words like "rude," "unkind," and "uncivil." It's not merely "rude" to say, for example, that the fight for trans rights (or gay rights) is "grooming," as Linehan does, it *endangers* LGBTQ+ people.

https://twitter.com/NeilThin/status/1692676743755145459

.@NeilThin 's words here are a complete of the reality of the world we live in, which is a world where homophobia and transphobia exists, which physically endangers LGBT+ people. There is a marked rise in LGBTQ+ hate crimes, recently. Hateful rhetoric feeds into that endangement.

One of the "gender critical" accusations is that "TRAs" post porn in replies to JK Rowling.

I get porn in replies all the time; clearly pornbots.

Is it possible they are equating standard pornbot replies with "trans activism"?

Have you ever seen any examples of their claim? Rowling herself made reference to it once: "I've ignored porn tweeted at children on a thread about their art."

Firstly, children aren't/shouldn't be on Twitter (Rowling herself referred to Twitter as a pub argument, so I doubt she would endorse children having accounts.)

Here is defacto "gender critical" leader, Posie Parker, saying she never agreed with @jk_rowling's "dress however you please" tweet:

"I thought, you dress, and we all receive the message, whatever it is you want to send...and if you deny that to be true, you're just a liar." 1/ We ironically refer to this as "the holy tweet." A "gender critical" conspiracy theory is that it would actually be the most liked tweet ever only that Twitter deleted their likes on it, so they regularly go back and re-like it. But is it really representative of GC thought? 2/

Last week, "gender critical" lesbians found out that their allies wanted to remove "non-biological" lesbians from their kid's birth certs. We said marriage equality would be next. Right on cue, here's GC Harry Miller of @WeAreFairCop on the "Coalition For Marriage" Youtube. 1/ Who are "Coalition For Marriage"?

"The Coalition for Marriage is Britain’s leading campaign group supporting traditional marriage which is between a man and a woman, to the exclusion of all others and for life."

Are you getting it yet? It's time to defend your rights. 2/

Almost a year ago, @PogustGoodhead announced they would file legal action against the Tavistock within months, expecting "1000 families" (sic) to join.

Now, even online critics of trans healthcare, like @JenniferLahl, are beginning to wonder about the status of this action? 1/ I'm not sure why Jennifer is tagging her online allies, and not the legal firm involved? Isn't it incredible, though, so many mainstream media journalists, like @kvittozzi from @skynews, reported this at the time, and AFAIK, not a single news org has done a followup story. 2/