JANET EASTHAM

The Metropolitan Police is reviewing death threats to women displayed by trans rights activists at a protest, The Telegraph can reveal.

The force is examining a series of threatening placards carried in central London during a demonstration against the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman.

Two signs showed hangmen figures alongside the phrase “the only good terf is a —- one”, another urged women to give themselves a “DIY lobotomy” and a fourth appeared to show bullet holes with the message: “I will make you listen.”

The Met initially told The Telegraph it would take no further action over the signs, saying that although it had received complaints about some placards, “to date the images and signs are from historic events, did not take place in London, or do not constitute a criminal offence”.

However, the force changed its position after being presented with evidence from this newspaper that threatening signs had been displayed in central London on Saturday.

The Met then said it would review complaints about signs alongside an investigation into seven statues that were vandalised in Parliament Square during the protest.

A spokesman for Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, told The Telegraph that trans activists who vandalised statues during Saturday’s protest in London should “face the full force of the law”.

Sarah Vine KC told The Telegraph that the hangman placards “clearly cross the line of criminality” and suggested that police would have “no difficulty in making a decision to charge the responsible person” if the situation were reversed.

She said: “Any reasonable person looking at the message “The only good terf is a —- terf” would be likely to believe that immediate violence would be used against anyone perceived as a ‘terf’.”

The barrister added: “If the word ‘terf’ were to be replaced by any equivalent word – ‘trans woman’, ‘Muslim’, ‘Tory’, ‘immigrant’ – I would expect the police to have no difficulty in making a decision to charge the responsible person.”

ALLISON PEARSON

Has Sir Keir Starmer still got a cervix? Asking for 35 million (or thereabouts) who were delighted, if not, it has to be said, entirely surprised to be told last week that it is now official: we are women. Phew!

I didn’t think there was much doubt to be honest, what with bleeding once a month since the age of 13, and having period pains and spotty hormonal breakouts, and struggling with horrid bulky sanitary napkins in those first months when you were scared the boys would notice or that the blood would soak through your skirt when you were sitting an exam, and also sprouting breasts for which you were teased, which was excruciating and delightful in equal measure, and beginning to realise your power as a female (such delicious power), but also your vulnerability.

When you were on the way to work that bank holiday weekend and a man masturbated a few feet away from you in an empty tube carriage and the next stop took several lifetimes to come (Old Street, thank God!). And feeling terrified and humiliated and later angry that he could do that to you because of – oh, that’s right – because of your sex. Because you were young and female and he was older and stronger and male. And hearing the rumours at work that you’d slept your way to a promotion (never heard that said about a male colleague, funny that) and laughing bleakly and thinking, “Well, sex would have been a lot easier than working all hours to prove myself as swotty girls are doomed to do.”

And, later, carrying two babies in my womb for nine months apiece, and having the midwife checking every hour if my cervix was dilated – excruciatingly painful that probe touching your reluctantly dilating cervix, Prime Minister, but you’d know all about that being a man, wouldn’t you? And feeding that first baby in the long, dark reaches of the night, posting the nipples, cracked and sore, into that tiny, voracious mouth while your brain struggled to do the broken jigsaw of sleep – and you never could find the missing piece, not for years afterwards, not while the children were small. Fathomless tiredness, dear God, voyage-to-the-bottom-of-the-sea tiredness which is just about survivable because the love – maternal love – is so vast, one of the greatest forces in this world.

And realising that being a mother means your heart leaves your body and walks around in young adult humans who take risks with your heart and you just have to learn to live with the worry, and not nag too much, but please don’t get a motorbike, my love. And, later still, much much later, when the hormones start to leave your body this time, and you endure all the mortifications to which menopausal flesh is heir – brain fog, constantly looking for your glasses (they’re on the top of your head, you silly bat!), hair thinning, waist thickening, needing to wee before you leave the house like you always told the kids to do when they were little and needed you, and you miss them needing you and being little.

Women did not require Supreme Court judges to tell us what or who we are, thanks awfully. We’ve lived it, got the scars and maybe the mummy tummy to prove it. No, that ruling was for the benefit of people who succumbed to one of those manias to which human beings have always been prone. A spasm of scarcely credible madness in an age that fancies itself rational. Three years ago on BBC One, presenter Andrew Marr asked the then leader of the Opposition, “Is it transphobic to say only women have a cervix?” And Keir Starmer, just a fraction’s hesitation before he answered giving away the fact he sensed danger, said, “It is something that shouldn’t be said… it is not right.”

To be clear, the man who is now the leader of our country appeared on our national broadcaster and said that the courageous Labour MP, Rosie Duffield, was horribly wrong to insist that women alone could have a cervix.

Her boss knew better – of course it was possible to believe that a bloke could have a lower narrow neck of the uterus that connects to his non-existent vagina when believing that biological absurdity was essential to keep the trans activists who dominated the shouty, progressive side of his party onside. Seeking to clarify his position two years ago, Sir Keir dug another hole, saying that 99.9 per cent of women “of course haven’t got a penis” as he called for an end to a “toxic divide” over trans issues. (The only toxicity I noticed was coming from aggressive men who barracked sensible women as they tried to protect their intimate spaces from male intrusion, and their impressionable children from a cult of mutilation.)

Starmer wasn’t the only one making a fool of himself. That big numpty, the Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey, told LBC that women can “quite clearly” have a penis and the debate around transgender issues was “settled”. Nor do the Tories (a fearless Kemi Badenoch battling hard for women apart) have much to crow about. In 2017, prime minister Theresa May proposed allowing people to change gender without the need for medical checks, if you please.

The worst offender by far, though, was Nicola Sturgeon. Full credit to the former first minister of Scotland for bringing the entire ugly farrago crashing down. Had it not been for Sturgeon’s Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill which intended to lower the age people could change their legal gender from 18 to 16, removed the requirement of a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and reduced the waiting time from two years to six months of living in an acquired gender, then Westminster might never have summoned the guts to push back. Luckily, things came swiftly to a head when a double-rapist, Adam Graham, from Clydebank, who had been charged and first appeared in court in 2019 as a man, transitioned and took the name Isla Bryson before being remanded to a women’s prison, rightly causing public outrage. Until then, the “no debate” trans mob, spearheaded by Stonewall, had managed to terrorise people either into complicity or silence, but this time they’d gone too far.

Even the vast majority who wanted to treat trans people with kindness and respect were horrified by the sight of a heavily tattooed sexual offender in a blonde wig and skin-tight pink leggings which grotesquely showed off the male member that, in the name of “equality, rights and inclusion” was about to gain access to vulnerable female prisoners. It was grotesque, sickening. Well, since last week’s ruling, rapists and other male offenders will be sent to prisons that align with the sex they were born with, and how could any decent person ever have thought otherwise?

If he had any shame, the Prime Minister would have resigned last Wednesday, the day that the Supreme Court ruled a woman is someone who is female at birth. Then, he should have issued an unreserved apology to British women […] But the PM kept silent for five days, only breaking cover today to say that the Supreme Court “has given much-needed clarity” on the legal definition of “woman” in equalities law.

The Telegraph: continue reading

Featured image: x.com

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.