Independent Leyton Orient Forum

It’s not strange when you realise that it’s deliberate, because of policy decisions made by people who have taken their editorial stance based solely on listening to and adopting recommendations of mainstream trans activist organisations.

It’s the natural outcome of what I’ve said from when I first came into this thread - the mainstream version of trans activism *is* extreme, and every mad news story is an inevitable consequence of fundamental positions held by stonewall and various lobby groups

BBC story already edited to say that he came out as transgender aged 12.

CEB wrote: ↑Thu Jul 06, 2023 11:34 am

TRUMP Plumbing wrote: ↑Thu Jul 06, 2023 11:29 am

CEB wrote: ↑Thu Jul 06, 2023 10:44 am

Because Sussex police unambiguously has a trans inclusive policy whereby they use claimed gender identity and not sex as the pertinent information as to whether or not somebody is a woman; their definition of “woman” is “person who identifies as a woman”; there is nowhere where they make clear whether there are circumstances where they use “woman” to exclusively refer to adult female people, and in fact the refusal to recognise “woman” as a term to exclusively describe female people is pretty much the crux of feminist opposition to trans activism/policies designed by trans orgs

So every time Sussex Police issue a statement, it's ambiguous because of this policy? (A policy that I and most others know nothing about).

I still think not mentioning race is just as big a flaw in the identification process.

When related to sexual offences it’s a specific issue that matters more than in other contexts, because of how significantly different the offending rate is in male and female people. This particular story highlights it further because of the height, which is vanishingly rare in women but not anything like as rare in men, adding to the lack of clarity in this instance.

Agree that not mentioning race is also a problem.

This exchange from last year - where I claimed that a Sussex police statement that they were looking for two exceptionally tall women in connection with a crime - is worth re-reading in the context of the reporting of this murder.

Do you see now what I meant at the time about how the fact that the report said police were looking for “women” was ambiguous?

CEB wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 3:10 pm A man who murdered a man and live streamed himself putting a cat he’d killed into a blender has been sentenced.
The BBC lies that this man is a woman, and refers to him as “she” and “her” without any reference to them being terms used at the murderers request, due to a trans identity.

For avoidance of doubt - this isn’t a man who has had any sort of operation, isn’t a man so utterly distressed by his sex that he’s taken steps to remove/alter his male genitals (which wouldn’t change his sex anyway) - this also isn’t a man who has gone through a legal process to change his legal sex. This is a *man*, no ambiguity about it.

Who does it suit to record and report male crimes like this as female crimes?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-o ... e-68401335

Interesting that he will serve his sentence in a men’s prison

Stay classy metro

CEB wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 8:53 am Stay classy metro

Did they mention he is being sent to a men's prison?

That’s maybe the third time you’ve mentioned mens prison. He’s male, of course he’ll be sent to a men’s prison. The brief period where men were being sent to women’s prisons if they said they were women is over. Phew!

Story of O thinks about men's prisons an awful lot, doesn't he.

The crimes by the man Scarlet Blake have been officially recorded as having been committed by a woman, and will contribute to statistics of female crime.
Scarlet is male, has not had “gender reassignment surgery” (not that that changes one’s sex anyway) and does not have a gender recognition certificate; his crimes are recorded as female for the simple reason that that’s how he wants them recorded.

That is some shameful sh*t.

I imagine that someone in the MOJ decided that everything about her presents as female, and someone else would’ve put “male” but was worried that it might show that her veil had slipped

Be kind.

I wonder if me mentioning the recording of this man’s crime as female counts as part of the 20% interesting debate, or part of the 80% unhinged paranoia? RTW? Let us know please mate, as I want to rein in the paranoia and only do the interesting stuff

Why are they sending scarlet to a men's prison then?

Because he's a bloke.

Because the action taken on this is being done on the fly by organisations who stupidly spent the last decade adopting Stonewall policies, who never bothered to realise whether in their rush to be seen as progressive they might not be considering the potential negative outcomes. The recent “far right culture war” has, strangely for a far right culture war, dragged the impact of this ideology on women into the mainstream, so various organisations are having to navigate all of this pretty much case by case until the scandals mount up enough.


It’s happening so fast and so often now that it’s barely even worth a mention that the NHS has today released an urgent warning to GPs to not refer people to Gender GP, the discredited, unlicensed,discreetly Singapore registered dispenser of hormones, on the basis that the company offers no psychological or physiological support whatsoever to the children and adults it sells hormones to

The cat killing murderer of Jorge was, it turns out, a patient at The Tavistock. I wonder if they screened him for other mental health issues that could cast doubt on the claim that he has the soul of a woman?

(Paranoia or interesting debate?)

CEB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 8:33 am I wonder if me mentioning the recording of this man’s crime as female counts as part of the 20% interesting debate, or part of the 80% unhinged paranoia? RTW? Let us know please mate, as I want to rein in the paranoia and only do the interesting stuff

The 20% bit.

I applied for a job yday and there was a question about if I was trans. One of the options was unsure, which I picked, obviously

Be sure to tell me when you see an 80% bit!

Speaking of surveys the equalities bit at the end of one from Sainsbury's the other day had "What best describes how you think of yourself?", as the sex/gender question which is possibly the first time I've seen the whole thing reduced to just vibes.

It’ll be adopted from Stonewall recommendations for how to get a better score in their Diversity Champion scheme.


It’s the trivial looking outcome of the systematic lobbying for the idea that we should enshrine in law that whether you’re male or female is “vibes” based.

And it’s *that*, that when taught to children: “boy or girl is about how we feel!” that means in practice that schools are now *literally* teaching children that “boy” means “masculine child” and “girl” means feminine child. That’s *literally* what’s happening, with the only relevance of actual sex being “btw if you’re a feminine child but have a penis, we need to get you on puberty blockers so you don’t grow up into the wrong sex!”

(20% interesting debate or 80% paranoia?)

80% now

Apart from the obvious, what is it that defines a man/woman? No two people are the same, so you could have feminine traits but still think of yourself as a man. So there has to be something that makes a person feel they are in the wrong body