The Australian Puberty Blocker Market is Worth $27M

Execellent post Kit

The Lady Kit Kowalski

You might have the impression that accessing Puberty Blockers is prohibitively expensive. You may have heard that they are unfairly withheld from children, and how they should be subsidised by the government.



For this post, I have relied on data published by TransHub, which is an informational website owned and operated by ACON.

TransHub is the place trans people, children and parents go for their data about transitioning.

The Cost of Blocking Puberty

TransHub advise that there are 3 types of puberty blockers, and that these are prohibitively expensive. Goserelin, Leuprorelin and Triptorelin are each medications that are taken periodically 3-5 times per year.

These drugs are subsidised for conditions such as – endometriosis, chemical castration, prostate cnacer – and are limited for short treatment periods only.


Doctors can prescribe “off label” so the consumer can buy them, but will not receive a subsidy…

View original post 483 more words

CRITICAL ANALYSIS of NSW Department of Education Bulletin 55 – Transgender Students in Schools

CRITICAL ANALYSIS of NSW Department of Education Bulletin 55 – Transgender Students in Schools

By Katherine Deves

This article is in response to deep concern caused by the proliferation of gender identity ideology that is being taught in our schools. Bernard Lane, the investigative journalist at The Australian, is the only mainstream journalist in Australia willing to cover this contentious issue1.

In NSW, Bulletin 55 (referred to as “the document”) is the official policy of the Department of Education in relation to trans-identified (“transgender”) students. It was conveniently published in December 2019 just before the holiday break, and it is in the keeping with the IGYLO strategies designed by global law firm Denton’s for the regulatory and institutional capture by gender identity ideology lobbyists. The timing was likely purposeful in order to avoid any media scrutiny or public debate in implementing such policy and legislation that favourable to the efforts of these ideologists, as it is favoured tactic to achieve that aim when it likely would be rejected or criticised by the vast majority of the general public had they been made aware.

The document contains a number of discriminatory and alarming policies:

• It deliberately conflates ‘sex’ with ‘gender’, and omits to refer to the single-sex exceptions contained in the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth);
• It continually prioritises one protected characteristic (‘gender identity’) over others, contrary to Commonwealth sex discrimination legislation;
• It fails to satisfy Australia’s international treaty obligations under CEDAW Art.10 in relation to education;
• It fails to meet basic safeguarding requirements by promoting mixed-sex changing rooms and residential accommodation;
• It treats concerned parents as a safeguarding risk;
• It disregards the rights of all pupils to safety, privacy and dignity in single sex spaces;
• It disregards the rights of teenage girls to compete in sports on a level playing field as per Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) s 42, Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 NSW s38 and CEDAW Art. 10(g).


Reliance on Erroneous and Ideologically Informed Language

The policy begins by upholding the ideological stance that sex is “assigned” at birth. This is factually untrue, sex is observed and recorded at birth. Sex is determined at fertilisation with the absence or presence of the Y chromosome and SRY gene, with observation in utero possible from the beginning of the second trimester, and via genetic testing from 7 weeks via a blood test of the mother. The word “assigned” has been co-opted by gender ideologists from the now outdated practiced of “assigning” a sex to an infant born with ambiguous genitalia due to a Disorder or Variation of Sex Development. The current protocol for such a situation is that scans and a blood test are conducted in order to ascertain the sex of the infant, as Disorders of Sex Development conditions (colloquially known as “intersex”) are conditions that arise from either one sex or the other.

In relation to birth certificate, the document erroneously refers to “gender”, because it is “sex” (not “gender”) that is recorded on the document, and this opens up the broader implications of people being able to retrospectively alter a core identity document to reflect a factually untrue status.

The document repeatedly refers to “gender”, “gender identity” or “gender expression”, without including a definition within the document. “Gender identity” has been defined in federal legislation2, and is based on a definition promulgated in the Yogyakarta Principles3. The concept of “gender identity” is unable to be defined without resorting to circular reasoning and relies on offensive and restrictive gender stereotypes (i.e. a little boy likes “Frozen” and wants to grow his hair therefore IS a girl, instead of just being a child who may be gender non-conforming, or is simply exploring his personality as a normal part of child development), which is contrary to the Sex Discrimination Act (Schedule) and CEDAW Art.5(a) where sex based stereotypes are specifically rejected in order to eliminate prejudice.

Toilets and Change Rooms

“The need for the student to be safe is a paramount concern in these circumstances. Students should not be required to use the toilets and change rooms

2 Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) s 4
3 “[T]he Yogyakarta Principles have no legal force either internationally or within Australia. They were developed by a group of human rights experts, rather than being an agreement between States” Responses to questions on notice provided by the Attorney-General’s Department on 21 May 2013 in The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee pg. 26 used by persons of the sex they were assigned at birth if they identify as a different gender.”

This statement privileges the needs of the trans-identified student over the rest of the student body. This is particularly problematic in the situation of a male student identifying as female and then using the girl’s facilities. Girls are entitled to privacy, dignity and safety, particularly during puberty with the additional burden of managing menstruation (or pregnancy), without having to deal with a male-bodied person in this space.

There is ample evidence of girls being adversely affected at school via rebranding of female toilets as “gender neutral” or allowing biological males access to this space; there are reports of girls electing to self-exclude, being subjected to period-shaming, and refraining from eating and drinking (with a commensurate rise in UTIs).

In QLD there was a huge international public outcry when a new school in Brisbane was promoted as having “gender neutral” toilets, which forced Premier Palasczuk to step in and revert the policy to single sex provision4.

Sanctions for Objecting to Overriding of Boundaries

“If other students indicate discomfort with sharing single-sex facilities (toilets, change rooms, dormitories or overnight accommodation for example) with a student who identifies as transgender, this should be addressed through the school learning and support team.”

Our society takes great pains and invests significant time, energy and resources to educate our children about safeguarding from a very young age (particularly for girls), and we encourage them to speak up if they feel uncomfortable, intimidated or frightened, particularly by the presence of a male in a space where they are vulnerable. Yet the document completely dismisses this basic safeguarding tenet by telling children that if they raise concerns or assert their boundaries, the child who is rightfully expressing their fear or discomfort with an opposite sex child being in a confined and private space with them, will be the student who will be removed, reprimanded and re-educated to acquiesce to gender ideology because the trans- identifying student’s needs have been given priority. It also promulgates a false narrative that the male student is actually “female” and has every right to be in that

4 school-cause-outrage/news-story/aedcfd3787f58b943eff624c3b4b4aa8

space, essentially we are asking to children to ignore the reality of their own senses and to accommodate a falsehood despite their own distress or discomfort.
It is particularly egregious and concerning to presume that a male student should be allowed to share sleeping quarters with female students – this is a significant safeguarding issue, and completely disregards the rights of girls to safety, privacy and dignity in spaces where they may be in a state of undress or asleep.

School Sport

The section completely misrepresents the protection for sex-segregated sport under Sex Discrimination Act (Cth) s42 where sports can be segregated by sex after the age of 12 years if “strength, physique and stamina” are relevant. These factors are relevant to all sports, particularly as most children have begun puberty by age 12, which is when the biological advantage of males over females is in arguably apparent.

“Most students will be able to continue to participate in competitive sport in their identified gender after they have turned 12”.

The implication is that there is presumption that the needs of the trans-identified student will again take precedence, without any due consideration for safety and fairness of the girls, and the trans-identified student’s need take priority without any application of the legislative exemptions that allow for a player to be excluded solely on the basis of sex in NSW, and upon consideration of the factors of “strength, physique and stamina” under Commonwealth legislation., the legislation is silent on either elite and community sports.

“It may be lawful to exclude students aged 12 and over from competing in certain sports at the elite level in certain circumstances”.

The legislation does not differentiate between elite or community or social sports, in fact the legislation is entirely silent on distinguishing the differing levels of sport. The safety, privacy, dignity and fairness for girls in sports, fought for by women over many decades of activism, to ensure equal participation in sport has been completely disregarded. Investment, resource allocation and media coverage of women’s sports remains woefully inequitable and has only been further adversely impacted by COVID-19.

A high-profile case is currently being heard in the US in relation to Title IX violations where the state of CT has allowed males to compete against females5, and the Department of Education has stated that any institution allowing biological males to compete in the female category is violating Title IX6.

Teaching Gender Identity in the Cirriculum

The document states that “gender identity may be discussed in many curriculum areas”, this is deeply concerning due to highly contentious nature of the topic, and it is arguing that NSW school children should be taught factually untrue and ideological concepts such as human beings can “change sex”, or “boys can be girls, or have periods” and some “girls have penises”. A recent example of this is the “genderbread” managing to find its way into NSW classrooms, despite gender identity being explicitly excluded from the formal curriculum7.

There is a case currently pending in Canada where a 6 year old girl was deeply distressed at being told girls aren’t real.8

The document goes on to state that “Teachers should treat the topic in a manner that is respectful, inclusive and positive”, however based on the current method of silencing or shaming critics of the ideology, it is strongly doubted that the opinion of any student criticising the dogma would be welcomed, and would in fact require reprimanding for failure to unquestioningly accept the ideology should they dare to critique, or even question. It is also asserted that “inclusion” in this instance, excludes girls, as by accepting this ideology they are being compelled to subsume their needs to those biological male students.

Undermining of Family Integrity and Parental Authority

The most alarming part of the document is found in Support for the extended family of the student and Reporting Requirements; if the parents of the trans-identified child do not “affirm” the child and refuse to provide “consent” to the school to facilitate the transition (“to help with decision making, planning, assessment or service provision”), the school is informed that they can rely on the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 to circumvent the parent’s rights and authority and they are encouraged to report the parents to Community Services for this “harm”.

6 transgender-athletes-in-womens-sports-violates-title-ix/
7 Genderbread-Person-pulled-NSW-school.html

There is a growing group of concerned parents9 who have suffered already due to this policy; ordinary, caring, diligent parents whose children have come to believe “transitioning” is a solution to their problems. Many children “diagnosed” with “gender dysphoria” have pre-existing mental health issues, are on the autism spectrum or are simply gender non-conforming and would likely grow up to be gay or Lesbian if they are left alone.

Managing Risk of Harm

The document states in its introduction: “Schools have a legal duty to protect students from foreseeable risk of harm and to do what is reasonably practicable to ensure their safety”.

However, it is clear from the guidelines that the concerns and rights of girls and non- trans identifying students have been completely disregarded and dismissed. The Guidelines explicitly say “The welfare and educational needs of the student are of primary importance and should be the focus of all actions taken by the school”, It is remarkable that the needs of the trans-identified student take priority over the needs of the rest of the entire student body, to their detriment, with girls’ needs failing to be given any consideration whatsoever.

A school’s exposure to liability may be increased if biologically male students are entitled to access spaces that have been set aside for female only use when the girls may be vulnerable, asleep or in a state of undress. Additionally, it appears no consideration has been given to the known and foreseeable increased risk of injury and concussion to girls playing sports should they have to compete against a biological male.


It begs the question, who were the advisers to the Department of Education in relation to this Bulletin? Why has there been an obvious failure to consider the needs of the overall student body against those of a single or very small group of students? Why were the needs of female students ignored? Why has this policy and regulatory capture occurred with no media scrutiny or public debate, except

9 109605477037918/

coverage unilaterally in favour of gender ideology? Why were students, particularly female students, and parents, not consulted?

Recently in the UK, school districts and the CPS implementing similar guidelines were threatened with judicial review and legal action, have now been withdrawn. It will only be a matter of time before similar legal action occurs here in NSW, should these issues not be addressed10.

Bulletin 55 is an egregious example of policy capture by transgender ideologists. It is deeply concerning that such guidelines are being implemented in our schools with little oversight or public scrutiny when it has such a significant material impact on the student body, particularly girls. This has gone far enough, our children deserve better.

10 Oxfordshire-council-scrap-transgender-toilets-toolkit.html girls-victory-the-times/

The new ‘Pronoun’ practice is neither inclusive nor respectful of diversity

50 pronouns

“Are we letting American Universities dictate Australian cultural norms?” 

On the topic of language, I was chatting to an Indian Australian woman, she found the push for the use of pronouns offensive as it was against her original culture’s norms.

Which gave me pause, I would imagine that applies to many others. In a place like Sydney, approximately 40% of the people come from other countries, cultures and are of many religions.

Not to mention the many different Australian Aboriginal cultures that have already had their cultures (yes, 290+ cultures, there is not just one) ravaged by Western traditions. Isn’t this again an onslaught by western culture conforming to traditional tendencies to homogenise expression? Insisting we conform to some new virtue signalling trend without the input from all Australians?

According to the LGBTQIA resource centre, there are at least an additional 50 pronouns for example instead of his, her or their you have cos, ens, eir, hir, yos, zir and ver. Instead of herself, you can have coself, enself, emself, hirself, yoself, zirself and verself.

You can end up with a sentence like; “Ze reminded zirself to pick up zir umbrella before going outside”. Actually, this language contradicts principles of Accessibility that the Australian government has been pushing through all its departments. Relevant principles of accessibility revolve around readability, semantics, and meaningful information. Accessibility is specifically about the language of inclusion and this language is not inclusive of all.

I found some of this language inherently disrespectful to the wider Australian population, are men to be called AMAB/DMAB? Or women AFAB/DFAB? Why is the language of a tiny sector of the population used to define the wider population? How is that inclusive or respectful when the language that the wider population has for itself, is ignored?

I was curious where this new fad came from, I researched the card below. As I suspected it came out of a University department. <insert eye roll emoji?>. The card below “came out of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee LGBT Resource Centre in 2011 has been widely reproduced and distributed across the US.”

I’m guessing what happened, is some academic dude probably in Philosophy thought he’d be clever, with nothing better to do; writing a dumb blog post, which got picked up by someone else and that was put in a book or paper. From the look of the ‘words’ most likely the author/s were into D&D or did futuristic fantasy role play in his/her spare time. Language making or (appropriating from other cultures) is often a part of that.

I found somewhere that the discussion that led to this creation was that in trying to be inclusive of women and marginalised youth (not including those of different race or religion though, of course <insert another eye roll emoji? > is that even when people say ‘they’ for themselves – (which is wrong by the way ‘they’ is plural not singular) that people think ‘male’.

Good intentions, I like it. But I don’t see how appearances are going to change that when the default setting of everything IS male. (see Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men, by Caroline Criado Perez ) In other words, this was not designed to be a fix, for a deeper problem. It’s just a paint job continuing to hide a serious infection in a wood-like structure of inequality. So, it gives the appearance of doing good, without doing good at all.

So what is ‘inclusiveness’? ‘The quality of including many different types of people and treating them all fairly and equally.’ Awesome. On the 23rd October ‘Play by the Rules’ ran a panel discussion around Diversity and Inclusion in Sport, Dr Ben Gauntlett, (Discrimination Commissioner at the Australian Human Rights Commission) said: “In Australia, at the moment we really do have a segregated model for the treatment of people with disability, unfortunately, we have segregated education, we often have segregated workplaces, often we have segregated sports clubs.”

Dr Ben Gauntlett does wonderful work in the disability space. This segregated model, however, is a model my company rejects. We work with disadvantaged youth (18-22) across a range of mental and physical disadvantage; autism, bi-polar, high anxiety, migrants, poverty, gay, occasional trans, physical disabilities etc.

Each course, each class we run is a mixed bag of disadvantage. I don’t segregate those with Autism, out from those who have a history of suicide, high anxiety, live in poverty, etc. These problems are what knit our class of youth together. They all have an ‘identity’ or really more like a label stuck on them that impacts whom they’re seen to be and if they buy into those labels, limits what they’re capable of. They’re vulnerable but they learn they have each other, and though have different issues they are in the same boat.

Poor mental health for a lot of these kids is derived from an expectation of certainty in the world, and stress when they find that there is none. 

They’re right, we work in conditions of uncertainty. So, in Test-Ed one of many things we do is train them to ask questions to discuss and gain clarity around uncertainty and with that clarity effectively navigate their world. We ground our mental activity in facts, reality, truth, critical thinking, and attitudes of empathy and compassion towards each other as we fail often, learn, and succeed in a continually fast-changing world.

Words and the use of words are critical in the work I do. Words must reflect how things are or have been from the evidence we find in the material world. Words dealing in the future, which may seem nebulous are words around promises and agreements and the development of trust as I keep my word and they learn how to keep theirs. And the development of trust is key.

I checked with a few of these youth to find out how they feel about this new ‘language’. For those on the spectrum, in particular, it freaks them out, it’s very unsettling. For others it doesn’t make sense, it’s confusing.

My youth and I included are a percentage of people who do not fit the mould of whatever society thinks we should be. I know from the contribution of wonderful people from the tech’ and humanities space that most Australians want my people to be happy and not demeaned. They want us to live a decent life, a meaningful life. And I would say Australians are willing to make some accommodation, some public accommodation for everyone. (Politicians suck but most Aussies I say are okay.)

Ours is an organisation that is non-segregated and diverse in the area of marginalisation and disadvantage. These pronoun practices do not respect the principles of diversity and inclusion. Diversity and inclusion are about including ALL people, which means you poll and discuss these things in any society with all people, not have some new fad from predominantly white American Universities dictate our cultural practices.

Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Bill 2020 VIC Summary and Analysis

Written by Law Graduate Katherine Deves

Main purpose of the Act is to denounce: to condemn or Censure openly or publicly

The Act creates a Civil Response Scheme within the Victorian Equal Rights and Human Rights Commission (“the Commission”):

  • Non-judicial and non-elected politically appointed body
  • Non-judicial therefore not subject to the rules of evidence, or practice and procedure
  • Empowered to create offences
  • Empowered to amend Acts (only parliament has that power)
  • Redefines words (sexual orientation) and introduce ideological concepts (gender identity, sex characteristics)
  • Officers are employed as Public Servants in VIC
  • The powers of the Commission may be delegated to any member of staff of the Commission.

Objects of Act

The object empowers the right to denounce (i.e. condemn or censure a person openly and publicly) a natural person or any organisation for failing to acquiesce to the legislation, backed by significant criminal sanctions and substantial fines.

It is not normal legislative drafting, emotive position statements with no legal meaning are being made “feel welcome and valued in Victoria” and “live authentically and with pride”, “broken and in need of fixing”, “shortcomings”, and in the absence of evidence that such conduct are “deceptive and harmful” to individuals and the community “as a whole”.

The legislation empowers the Commission to publicly excoriate anyone who causes “serious harm” or “harm” to a person by failing to affirm their sexual orientation or gender identity.

These two concepts are defined in the legislation, but they are sufficiently broad as to be rendered meaningless (see below) and could be interpreted to be applied to any feeling a person may experience towards another person, or their name, dress, mannerism or subjective feelings about themselves.

A contravention of the Act is any conduct that is not supportive of or affirms a person’s gender identity or sexual orientation.

It means that if a person fails to affirm another person’s “gender identity” their employer can be held accountable, as can any body corporate that they are employed by or act for.

Suppression is not given a definition, it relies on the initial premise and fails as an illogical fallacy, and it is given sufficiently broad scope as to mean anything that does not affirm or support a person’s “gender identity” or “sexual orientation”.

The Act has extra-territorial application, meaning it can apply to conduct occurring outside of Victoria, provided there is a “real and substantial link” to Victoria such as the harm caused occurring inside Victoria even if the person who contravenes the Act is outside the State.

“Sexual orientation” is redefined as same “gender”, by doing so it erases the concept of homosexuality – same SEX attraction, and fails to define “gender”

If a person consents to treatment for their gender dysphoria, and they want assistance reconciling with their natal sex, anyone assisting them in this could be held liable

Any person is able to report another person to the Commission for breach of the legislation

The language used is archaic and medieval – they refer to “deliverance practices” and “exorcisms” s5(3)(b) and denouncement s1 in the legislation.

The scope for prohibited conduct not only covers in person interaction, but online communications s5(4).

The penalty is up to 10 years imprisonment and 1200 penalty units ($198,264.00) or 6000 penalty units for an organisation ($991,320.00) if “serious injury” is caused.

Serious injury is a legal term defined in the Crimes Act 1958 VIC s15

  • Life has been endangered; or
  • An injury that is substantial or protracted;
  • But under this Bill the Commission is entitled to determine “serious” as it sees fit – depending on the regularity of the conduct, and in consideration of the objects of the

The penalty is up to 5 years imprisonment and 600 penalty units ($99,132) and/or 3000 penalty units for an organisation ($495,660) if “injury” is caused.

Injury is a legal term defined in the Crimes Act 1958 VIC s15

  • Physical injury; or
  • Harm to mental health;
  • Whether permanent or
  • “Harm to mental health” includes psychological harm but does not include an emotional reaction such as distress, grief, fear or anger unless it results in psychological harm
  • Note: for psychological harm a mental illness such as depression, anxiety or PTSD must be established

The penalty is up to 7 years imprisonment and/or 240 penalty units ($39,652.80) if you take someone out of Victoria for the purpose of a “change or suppression” practice.

If anyone advertises about change or suppression practices they can be fined up to 60 penalty units ($9,913.20), and an organisation up to 200 penalty units ($33,044). The Commission is empowered to demand any person produce any documents and will be fined up to 60 penalty units ($9,913.20), and an organisation up to 200 penalty units ($33,044). should they fail to do so.

A corporation will be held criminally responsible for any associate who engages in conduct, if they are aware of any associate engaging in conduct, or if there is a “corporate culture” that encourages or tolerates conduct, that has the intention of contravening the act.

The Commission

The Commission has placed themselves as judge, jury and executioner. They are empowered to assign authorisation for any of their powers to any person.

They are empowered to:

  • Create the message;
  • Conduct research to create the message
  • Educate the community;
  • Enforce compliance including criminal sanctions and substantial

The Commission is empowered to perform their functions against:

  • A natural person;
  • An organisation or corporation;
  • An employer, principal, organisation or corporation who will be held vicariously liable for all employees, agents, officeholders and volunteers, unless they took steps (proven on the balance of probabilities) to prevent the

The Commission is fully empowered to perform these functions:

  • Receive reports from any person about any other person or organisation;
  • Request any information from any person or organisation who has allegations made against them;
  • Establish the policies and procedures for reporting;
  • The report does not yet have to be in any proscribed form;
  • Conduct any investigation if it advances the objectives of the Act in any manner it sees fit
  • If the investigation contravenes the principles of natural justice, it is allowed to do so if the Act allows for that;
  • A person or organisation can be compelled to provide the information, if they fail to do so they can be fined up to $9,913.20 as a person, or $49,566.00 as an organisation;
  • A person or organisation can be compelled to attend if the Commission deems it necessary and relevant;
  • Although a person may refuse to do so on the grounds they may incriminate themselves;
  • Establish the processes for determining the outcome;
  • Determine the outcome, along with the complainant;
  • The response is determined by the needs and wishes of the person affected by the contravention;
  • Facilitate the outcome;
  • That anyone bringing proceedings under this Act is authorised to do so;
  • The Commission may take any action it sees fit in relation to an investigation and enforce compliance or any other undertaking to refrain from or agree to take certain actions;
  • These enforceable undertakings will be made public;
  • Determine whether the parties are entitled to anonymity or not, or whether documents or information should be released publicly;
  • The Commission or anyone empowered with authority by the Commission can determine whether any information can disclosed to the public;
  • This person empowered to make these disclosures must not be required to provide any document containing information the Commission deems to be protected to a court unless it is to prosecute someone for a contravention of the Act, a criminal proceedings or with consent;
  • The parties can reach an “agreement” by consent to be certified and registered by the Commission which can then be enforced;
  • Provide “targeted education” the person or organisation in contravention, including the principals and office-holders;
  • Provide support to complainants to report contraventions to police;
  • Report the contravention to any other public body or agency, including the police;
  • The Commission is entitling itself to provide advice to the court in relation to contraventions of this Redefinition of Words “Gender Identity” means a person’s gender-related identity, which may or may not correspond with their designated sex at birth, and includes the personal sense of the body (whether this involves medical intervention or not) and other expressions of gender, including dress, speech, mannerisms, names and personal preferences;”.

This definition is broader than the Commonwealth definition as it has removed the words “deeply held” leaves limitless scope for application.

 Sex Characteristics

 “Physical features relating to sex” replacing the concept of biological sex, and breaks the body in parts instead of treating the human form holistically.

 Sexual orientation has been redefined as:

 “a person’s emotional, affectional and sexual attraction to, or intimate or sexual relations with, persons of a different gender or the same gender or more than one gender;”.

This completely erases the concept of homosexuality – same sex attraction – and replaces it with an ephemeral, subjective description that could apply to anyone’s feelings of any kind about anyone else.

Amendment of Family Violence 2008 and Personal Safety Intervention Orders Act 2010

The practical application of this is that if a child or spouse declares a sexual orientation or gender identity, they are entitled to have a member of their family or their spouse charged with domestic violence and a bring an Intervention Order against them if they fail to affirm or support them.

The practical application of this is that the transitioning family member can retaliate against family members who refuse to support or affirm, or even remain neutral, in light of their SOGI. It will enable people to impose criminal sanctions on their families – with respect to the stories of ROGD girls, AGP males, and transwidow and transorphan survivors, it is completely foreseeable and predictable the havoc and harm these amendments will wreak on families and relationships.

Explanatory Memorandum

  • Promote the rights of LGBTIQ+ people under the law; with the passing of the same sex marriage statutory provisions people with a same sex orientation achieved legal equality under Australian
  • Under our law, people claiming a gender identity or with an intersex condition are protected under the Sex Discrimination Act
  • Queer is not a protected characteristic recognised or defined anywhere in Australian law.
  • LGBTIQ have the right to “freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief”, if the Act is enacted, these rights will be denied to those whose conscience, thoughts or belief systems do not acquiesce to gender identity
  • Egregiously, they claim to rely on human rights protections for children to be protected by society and the State: it is arguable that affirming children to set them on a medical and surgical pathway on the basis of a belief they hold that is factually impossible (that they change sex) protects
  • That failure to acquiesce to, and openly criticising, gender identity ideology is “propagating myths and stereotypes about sexual orientation and gender identity”

UK courts protect children against unregulated medical experimentation for gender dysphoria in the Keira Bell -v- Tavistock decision

(For a primer on the Keira Bell vs Experimental Drugs on children see:  See a brief the overview of the courts’ decision below.)

By Law Graduate Katherine Deves

• The court has asserted they have the authority to make this decision under the best interests of the child principle because the treatment has profound lifelong and lifechanging consequences for children.

• The court acknowledged that the consequences of the treatment are “highly complex, potentially lifelong and life-changing in the most fundamental way possible”, and that there is no physical manifestation of gender dysphoria so it is concerning that clinical intervention is highly unusual in that it is surgical and medical, and interferes with normal biological and physical development.

• The court established that puberty blockers (“PB”) are not a neutral treatment (“pause button” theory was discredited) and that PBs and cross-sex hormones (“CSH”) are not discrete treatments because children invariably progress from puberty blockers to cross-sex hormones. Therefore, to be determined to be Gillick competent a child or young person must understand the implications of taking both.

• The court thoroughly reviewed the appropriateness of the application of the Gillick test and established a new comprehensive test of 9 different requirements to determine competency for consent, with children over the age of 16 being assessed differently to those under 16.

• The decision stated that the current Gillick test cannot be applied to the circumstances of the treatment as the child would have to understand, retain, and weigh up:

i. Immediate consequences of the treatment in physical and psychological terms
ii. The fact that the vast majority of patients taking PBs go to CSH and therefore s/he is on a pathway to much greater medical interventions;
iii. The relationship between taking CSH and subsequent surgery, with the implications of such surgery;
iv. The fact that CSH may well lead to a loss of fertility;
v. The impact of CSH on sexual function;
vi. The impact that taking this step on this treatment pathway may have on future and life-long relationships;
vii. The unknown physical consequences of taking PBs: and
viii. The fact that the evidence base for this treatment is as yet highly uncertain.
• In light of this new test and the unusual circumstances of this treatment, the court determined a child under the age of 16 is incapable of meeting the requirements as it is impossible for them to conceptualise and comprehend the effects. It should be a “statement of the obvious” in relation to children and adolescents finding it difficult to contemplate or comprehend what life will be like as an adult, and that they do not always consider long term consequences of their actions. There is no possible way to explain this in an age-appropriate way to explain the effects and cannot be mitigated by providing a child with more detailed information.

• Children over the age of 16 will require court authorisation, but the court has implied that it will be very unlikely it would be granted. For children over 16, it is appropriate for clinicians to involve the court should there be any doubt as to whether it is in their best interest because the clinical intervention involves “significant, long-term and….potentially irreversible long-term physical and psychological consequences”, and it is experimental with real uncertainty around the short and long term effects, and very limited evidence of its efficacy.

• The court was surprised at the Tavistock’s failure to keep data and records, and follow-up patients, as well as failing to make available research that was collated 9 years ago, and concluded that there is a lack of clarity over the purpose of the treatment considering it is unusual, experimental and with serious consequences.

• It must be remembered that the court is not empowered to make legislation, they are empowered to interpret the law, therefore, it is beyond their scope to issue a ban on such treatment as that is a matter for the legislature.

Matariki – remembering my dead

Image of the Matariki constellation overlaid with Maori artwork

I can’t see the Matariki from here in Sydney, OZ, but I remember it each year. I remember Claire, my pagan friend, telling me of similar celebrations in other countries (day of the dead), a time to remember those who have passed on, a time to clean up family gravestones, share stories, do genealogy, show family members in photo albums and gather the young to remember those who are gone and share their stories.

This was to be the year, I was going to visit Aunt Liz’s grave in Christchurch, New Zealand, with COVID it will have to wait until next year. She died in May 2012, our cousins her children were casually cruel never bothering to tell the rest of the family that their mother had died ‘they couldn’t be bothered’, another family member said these were her daughter’s words. It was gutting, and it wrenches my heart even now not to be able to say goodbye. More so because around that time, I had sent a parcel of pictures and a long letter thanking Aunt Liz for her influence in my life, telling her I loved her. I know now, she never got it.

Aunt Liz was a striking, slim, tallish woman, she was fiercely protective and had some part in raising me from 5-6 years old. She was staunch as hell. When my father Richard was burnt; something close to over 70% of his body caused by a petrol pump explosion, the hospital refused to give him pain killers when he cried for them. As they figured he would die at any time so it would be a waste. (He was Maori, that’s just how it goes in a white Hospital). My Aunt flew from Christchurch to Wellington Hospital, when she found out, she strode into the hospital and demanded the nurse comply. When the Nurse refused my Aunt’s holy anger gave her the strength to lift up the nurse, plant her against the wall and tell the nurse coldly, ‘you will give Richard the pain killer or you will be needing it for yourself’’. The nurse gave Richard the pain killer…And to spite the Hospital, Richard lived.

I first remembered her when I was probably about 4 or so and living at my Grandparents’ home in Palmerston North. She introduced us to porridge. I remember the look on her face when she heard that all we ever ate was cold weetbix. She would have none of that. I remember how impressed I was with Porridge. How I stared in wonder at the cream and milk floating on it. How it was warm and how the sugar fell as crystals then syrup-ed into glassy sheen on top. It was love in a warm, grey lumpy sludge.

In the main, she was strict, very disciplined, principled, and fair. Her sisters and brothers couldn’t pull her into fights with their partners, she wouldn’t take sides. She wouldn’t take sides with children fights either. If you started it, you finished it, no one would rescue you. She kept her promises, even if it was months later. The first summer, I wouldn’t swim in the Council’s paddling pool (I saw a white boy with red hair, poo in it). She didn’t see that. But she promised if I wasn’t going to swim in the pool then I wasn’t to go with them to it next year. Next year came along, and I didn’t get to go. Rather than be upset, I was impressed and comforted that promises meant something. (And I enjoyed the time on my own.)

She was truthful, and wouldn’t tolerate lies or cowardice. She taught evil was rooted in those two things; lies and lack of courage. Now much older, I’ve seen that’s true.

But she hit me often. I could avoid it if I was clear on the rules, pay attention, and keep small. I learned a lot of self-discipline and to pay attention. At 5-6 years old, my memory wasn’t always that good though. And the beatings were severe, around the end of my stay with her, for a few weeks, after dinner I would clean myself up and put myself in bed at 6 p.m to avoid any opportunity to be punished for an infraction. Still, I forgave her. One night she came quietly into the darkened room, sat at the end of the bed and told me that it was not right that she was so hard, that what she was doing was wrong. I will always be grateful for that. I had felt that it was me; I was just ‘wrong’. And it shifted something. She said she loved me. She teared up and said she couldn’t keep treating me this way. Not too long after I was sent to Petone for a brief stay, before moving to more homes.

Ten or so years later, I was 15, in and out of hospital. I was alone. I wrote to her, I don’t know what it was I said or didn’t say. But she was on the plane immediately, to visit and see if I needed to leave. She said she read between the lines and she had to come. And it was this trait, that she would drop everything if you needed her – to ‘rescue’ you from harm, I saw time and time again. I learned in time that she shaped me; I remember one night ages ago at a gathering with ex-missionaries I had served with, we were to go around the circle and describe the best trait of another in the room. A former companion picked me and said; ‘Kat will go to hell and back for a friend’ – and the others nodded. I know, that’s been one of her influences on my character.

I wished I had written to her more. I wish I knew the strong succumb to death. For some stupid reason, I assumed death wasn’t stronger than she. And she’s gone. At this time of Matariki, I mourn her.

Open letter to TYT (The Young Turks)

I had often wondered why TYT has barely touched on any of the issues around the trans activist movement that’s suddenly come to the fore over the last 5-8 years.  No discussion around why huge Pharmaceutical industries are funding Stonewall UK, Mermaids, the non-FDA regulated push of puberty blockers (Lupron) used to sterilize men in prisons now used on children younger than 16? The State push to remove the parental right to decide that their children should not transition? The number of young people in their 20’s pushed into transition as children (as young as 4-5 years old), and now finding themselves sterile in their twenties? Transwomen raping women in prison, rape clinics closed down if they didn’t include males – and so much more. 

It beggars belief TYT, that you don’t think this IS a serious topic.

No civil rights movement should be dependent on the elimination of womens rightsSo I said to myself ‘finally’ when I saw that the Damage Report* was covering the JK Rowling’s article in response to her tweet addressing the trend to replace the word ‘women’ from our common language to instead say ‘people who menstruate’. Which touches on the ‘gender-inclusive’ trend across all forms of media that is only applied to women, not men. The word ‘men’ isn’t replaced by the words ‘ejaculators’ or ‘inseminators’ whereas ‘women’ is replaced with terms like ‘menstruators’, ‘uterus havers’, ‘cis-women’ etc. I was disappointed. Instead of a discourse grounded in journalistic discussion, it was a laughingly ageist, misogynist mock fest of JK Rowling by two young white blokes and a woman arguing that‘ JK Rowling ‘attacked’ trans people (John’s circular reasoning that “they’re attacks because they’re attacks” was nonsensical at best) The two short videos on JK Rowling dismissed Rowling’s 3 years of research on the impact of removing the legal rights of women as the rants of a ‘triggered’ ‘boomer’.

I replied to  TYT’s request for responses and the following comments were immediately deleted x3. Which shocked me; TYT touts itself as being a liberal, progressive, incorruptible news source. But you remove polite feedback you disagree with? Tell me please TYT, what was so objectionable about the following post that it doesn’t fall under the umbrella of free speech?

Females are born into genital mutilation; femicide; date rape, marital rape, corrective rape; decreased access to education; reduced political power, and lower social status. These things are imposed on baby girls from the moment of birth because they were BORN female and biological women do not experience this oppression because of choice or self-identification. Accordingly, females need protection from this oppression precisely because they are biological females, and this means we need sex-based safeguards for biological women (as opposed to sex-based safeguards for “Anyone who identifies as a woman”).

Removing the definition of ‘woman’ across all social mediums along with the legal and common definition effectively makes a world of men as the norm and everyone else in the category of ‘other people’. We have effectively destroyed the class of women benefiting for what is in effect bares all resemblance to a men’s rights movement.

Women have a right to keep the LEGAL class of ‘women’ and that to be recognized, otherwise we face the elimination of ALL women’s rights. Thus far here are some of the rights in our different western countries that have been removed…

  • Removal of the right of journalists to report the sex, and history, of subjects
  • Elimination of sex-based crime statistics
  • Eliminating athletic programs and sports competition for women and girls
  • Removing the legal right of women to create reproductive clinics, rape crisis services, support groups, or any organizations for females
  • Removing the legal right of women to free speech related to sex-roles and gender
  • Elimination of the human right of female prisoners under state confinement to be housed separately from male prisoners
  • Elimination of the right of dependent females to prefer female providers for their intimate personal care requirements
  • Elimination of the patient right of dependent females to hospital/facility bed assignments separate from males
  • Removing the legal right of women to organize politically against sex-based oppression by males
  • Removing the legal right of women to assemble outside the presence of men
  • Removing the legal right of women to educational programs created for women outside the presence of men
  • Eliminating data collection of sex-based inequalities in areas where females are underrepresented
  • Removing the legal right of women to be free from the presence of men in areas of public accommodation where nudity occurs
  • Elimination of grants, scholarships, board and trustee designations, representative positions, and affirmative programs for women
  • Eliminating media and all public discourse specific to females
  • Eliminating the legal right of lesbians to congregate publicly
  • Elimination of lesbian-specific organizations and advocacy groups
  • Eliminating media and all public discourse specific to females
  • Removal of the right of journalists to report the sex, and history, of subjects
  • Eliminating the legal right of lesbians, to congregate publicly
  • Elimination of the legal right of women to protection from state-enforced sex-roles (appearance/behavior/thought)

(List compiled by Gallus Mag)

And if you question whether the trans activist movement is at its core is a men’s rights movement then consider the demands that are made of women. (See link) Understanding that trans genders have already all the legal rights of both homosexual and heterosexual people.

It does not matter that you disagree with JK Rowling, it does matter that your organization is displaying no professional integrity as journalists to do your homework; to research, to explore if there is corruption, to intelligently discuss issues that are negatively impacting 50% of the population (women), not to mention gay men and women and the lives of children who are targeted by big pharmaceuticals (a 40-200K a person revenue stream over their lifetime in drugs and surgical procedures.)

Be journalists, please! Set your misogynistic biases aside. Interview the other side, talk to the medical staff that left in droves from Tavistock Medical, the Academic professionals removed from their jobs who have highlighted these issues, those who spoke out against the 17 Autistic girls from one school who were transitioned under 16, the newly formed LGB Alliance that is fighting for Lesbians and Gay rights, teachers and others who work with children. (I have suggested a *list of people you can interview below.)

Thus far on this issue, you’re shown yourselves to be part of a propaganda machine serving at its core big pharma interests and a men rights movement, rather than the professionals with journalistic curiosity and integrity that you’ve appeared to be when covering other issues.


**List of people to talk to:
Ani O’Brien @aniobrien
Kathleen Stock @Docstockk
Jennifer Bilek 

(to be continued)


Measuring infinity

A few years back NEC Research Institute in Princeton created an experiment in which a light beam raced through a gas-filled chamber so quickly, it exceeded the speed of light by a factor of 300.

What’s more, the light pulse appeared to have left the confines of the chamber before it even entered – a seemingly impossible occurrence according to theories of causality, which predict that causes must always precede their effects. I read somewhere that Albert Einstein’s theory of special relativity holds that no object or information can move faster than the speed of light: 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometers) per second. At light speed, it would take us many generations to reach even the closest galaxies. The significance of anything moving faster is exciting because it would make intergalactic space travel possible. The experiment was discounted I think or is highly controversial, I don’t know. I think they’re still arguing about it.

Around the same time, I remember an obscure experiment in which they were able to record a faster speed of light by a new method and technology in measurement.

Which gave me this thought. If we measured something that by its nature was infinite, of an infinite number of properties, any standard or limit we discovered would not measure that thing. But only measure our progress in our understanding that thing, in relation to what we knew before.

Infinity Symbol
I don’t why but for some reason, that for me is a happy thought.

A Beautiful Passage — from Inanna.

(This is an experience from a dear friend of mine who passed away only 2 years ago, I came across it looking at old emails tonight – and cry again for her dear friendship.)

“A very dear friend of mine Graham was dying of complications brought upon by
AIDS. I went to see him almost every evening at the hospice if to do nothing but
hold his hand. A very special bond formed between us.

I was calm, and quiet just a comforting presence for him. One evening he said to
me “I don’t think I’ve done anything in my life” and that’s when I said “Your
wrong my friend, you have done a lot. We have worked together on many projects, I
could not have done them without your help and insight. I’ve learned much from
you and because of that, I know I have much from you to pass on to another
generation. We may not think we’ve done much, but in many ways we do.”

He looked at me in a most unusual way as if he were seeing me for the first time,
and then he smiled. He then looked toward his hospice doorway and acted as if
someone he knew had walked in, he looked at this presence that I could not see
smiled and nodded his head.

All of a sudden the energy in the room shifted, before I could hear the sounds of
the outside and hospice and was aware of people but all of a sudden those sounds
were gone. There was an unseen energy swirling around the other edges of the room
acting like a barrier against the outside world. But where I and my friend were,
there was a calmness and a peace that was so indescribable that I felt that this
is what heaven must be like.

And an incredible feeling of love so powerful began to overwhelm me and I felt a
presence next to me. I thought what is happening?? Where is the nurse?? A nurse
did come to the door but the look that suddenly came over her face was that she
could not come in, even if she tried she was not wanted in there, even to check
on him.

I saw her eyes grow large and see her throat move in that gulping fashion of
fear. But I felt no fear only love and a clarity of mind that I have never felt
before or since. I felt sorry for her because she could not join us. She backed
quickly from the door and hurried down the hall.

My friend had a look of peace on his face and he turned to me and asked “Would it
bother you if I asked you to leave?” and I said “no, you must be very tired and
need your sleep. Would you like me to come back tomorrow?”

“If you don’t mind, but call first,” he said–then he said to me “Thank you for
everything, I love you” “And I love you”

I said. I backed out of the room as he kept his eyes on me and at the door, I blew
him a kiss, and with that, he gave me a big grin as I disappeared out of the room.

I felt the presence next to me as if it had its arm around my shoulders, it
seemed to be saying to me—he’s fine now, we’ll take good care of him. I’m to
see you safely home.

I ran into the nurse at the station where she was with her co-worker she said to
me” What is happening in his room, I went to the door to check on him and I
couldn’t cross the doorway. What’s going on?” and I said to her “His friends are
with him, they’re taking him home” “But you were the only one in the room with
him” “Was I?” I replied.

Her mouth dropped open and her co-worker said to her “Your first Huh?, You’ll
come across a lot here. You’ll get used to it”

I went home had a cup of hot chocolate in milk and went to bed. I woke up
suddenly at 5:23 a.m. because I heard my friend laugh and say in my ear ” Your
right, and it is wonderful here” that’s when my eyes opened up abruptly and I
looked at the bedside clock and read the red light readout.

I called the next morning asking on my friend’s condition since I was one of the
people on his list to be given information on him, the nurse asked me if I was
sitting down and I said to her “he passed away last night didn’t he?” She
apologized and said yes he did and expressed her condolences to me and that the
the family had already been notified.

I asked if she knew what time he had passed away. The nurse replied that it was
some time between 5 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The nurse on duty had noted that he was
sleeping comfortably at 4:50 a.m. when she had checked on him. The Doctor had put
the official time of death at 5:30 a.m. when the nurse had gone in to check his
I.V. bottle.

Some people would say it was my imagination brought on by strain because of his
illness or a dream. But that voice in my ear was too real. And what I felt was

You decide.

Bright Blessings,