Stroppy Ambo Woman

NHS paramedic working around the middle bit of UK, sometimes found in primary care. Not always as cynical as I may seem.

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

Recently elected male MSP argues that he and any other men who fancy denying women safety, privacy and dignity should break the law.

[AC_SPARTAN @ACSPARTAN1]

A paedophile who changed gender while in prison for sexually abusing their own daughter as a child and sending explicit photos of her to perverts online has been quietly released back into the community.

Claire Fox, 61, who was previously known as Clive Bundy, who has six kids, served just seven years of a 15-year jail sentence, before being settled into a tiny market town on the Welsh borders.

Fox, who wears a black wig and floral dresses told neighbours, who knew nothing of fox's sordid past, that fox was an electrician from Bangor as they helped get settled into fox's new surroundings and helped furnish her flat.

Fox arrived in a sheltered accommodation block for older people in a tiny town at the start of June.

Fox was given new furniture, a television, printer, washing machine and crockery by the armed forces charity SSAFA because fox had once been in the Territorial Army.

Fox’s release from prison has appalled the daughter Ceri-Lee Galvin, who bravely waived her right to anonymity, having been abused by her father for nine years from the age of eight.

Revealing her astonishment, Ceri-Lee, 24, said: ‘My father is not a woman and I refuse to recognise him as such. He changed his gender in prison to make his life there easier.

‘But now he is out and already up to his usual tricks conning everyone he meets.
‘The fact he is now dressed as a woman makes him more dangerous as young girls are his thing and he has never shown any remorse.

‘My father is a highly manipulative man who has attended no sexual offender rehabilitation programmes, shown no remorse for what he has done and openly admits finding children attractive.

‘There have been no meetings I’m aware of to tell local schools about his presence, he has no tag and no curfew. He has just been put into this community and given all he could wish for – food, furniture and a home.’

Ceri-Lee, now a student paramedic, added: ‘I am in no way transphobic and I feel incredibly sorry for people who genuinely need to transition. They face stigma and worse because of cases like this.

‘But it should just not be an option for those convicted of sexual offences against children to suddenly say that they want to be a woman.

‘This only arose at the end of 2021 when he was due to be moved to an open prison but then had a fight with a fellow prisoner that was serious enough to stop the move.

‘That is when he went for the gender change – when he was almost 60, having been a macho man all his life and having had eight children and having never mentioned gender dysphoria before.

‘Now he is being indulged by everyone. The prison service gave him make-up and women’s clothes and now a charity for the armed forces have provided him with so much stuff when all he did was a short stint in the Territorial Army in his 20s.

[Róisín Michaux @RoisinMichaux]

Single-sex services for women are disappearing in Europe. Here's how it's being done:

There are two main ways via which single-sex spaces and services are slowly going extinct in Europe. The first one is, obviously, by allowing anyone to identify as the opposite sex. Once a male person is in a female-only space, let’s say a youth hostel dorm room for example, it is no longer a women-only dorm room. It is a mixed-sex dorm room. He may have had his nads removed, or he may even be wearing a dress covered in flowers. It is a mixed-sex dorm room once both males and females are allowed to sleep in it.

If you tried to get such a man out of the room, and return it to its status as a women-only space, you would be accused of discrimination against him on the basis of his gender identity (though depending on your legal jurisdiction, which in turn depends on the speed at which your country’s equality legislation is being transed, this may still be called discrimination on the basis of “gender” or even sex-via-gender reassignment, even if the “reassignment” involves nothing more than the flowery dress).

If a company, or service of any kind, tries to maintain a single-sex policy, they will likely have to battle it out in court as soon as a disgruntled transvestite sniffs out their heresy. And so in order to avoid being dragged to court by such men (and such women), companies and services are pre-empting legal action by just making everything mixed-sex, like the Germans are planning to do in new building regulations. Problem solved.

And while the end of women-only yoga classes might not bother you that much, there are some services that really (really really) need to remain sex-based, and they are underpinned by the same equality laws that are currently under threat.

First a little background: equal treatment laws are mandatory in EU countries. I can’t refuse to sell a man an ice cream from my ice cream van, just because he’s a man. You can’t refuse to polish a woman’s Fabergé egg because you only polish men’s Fabergé eggs.

Except, and this is crucial, sometimes you can discriminate on the basis of someone’s sex. And I bet you can guess what those circumstances are. It must be, as the TERF Islanders put it: “a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim”. This teeny tiny caveat, variously worded, carries the weight of women’s safety and dignity in public spaces and services in European countries. You can deny a man access to a women’s prison or rape crisis centre, and you can refuse to hire a man for a job in (for example) a residential care home if that job involves washing the intimate parts of delirious old ladies or intellectually disabled children (whose families can request female-only intimate care).

Do you know why a family of an old checked-out woman might wish for their mother’s genitals be tended to by someone female? You bet you do. Not All Men yadda yadda yadda. Save it for yer wife. Enough men are . that even gender-equal Scandinavian utopias can legally advertise for those jobs for women only. And men also have the right, for privacy reasons, to wish only to have men tend to their bits. And that’s utterly reasonable.

But by expanding equality protections to include men masquerading as women and vice-versa, the burden is on the management of such facilities to justify why they are excluding variously-identified people. The only country that has gone to court to establish in law that sex refers to biology, not identity, is the UK, but service providers eager to please noisy activists are ignoring it, leading to a bit of a crisis. Oh you’ve not read about this major policy issue in the newspaper, or seen a debate about it on the news? That’s not an accident.

Men stayed out of women’s spaces because both society and the law punished them if they did not. That norm is disappearing, and the law is disappearing — or being tortuously reinterpreted into nothingness — along with it.

[Stroppy Ambo Woman @Stroppyambo]

My conclusion is that I'm not angry enough.

[Stroppy Ambo Woman @Stroppyambo]

I read an article today about how British women are supposedly more angry than others. I thought, that's not me. Then I saw how many Labour MPs have signed a petition against the EHRC guidance, which, I remind you, simply upholds the law as laid down by the Supreme Court.

[Stroppy Ambo Woman @Stroppyambo]

And every time any of this is discussed, there is the constant NAMALT and feminist-blaming. And (yes, I know I shouldn't start sentences with 'and' but idgaf)

[For Women Scotland @ForWomenScot]

Fantastic read from @PaulKnaggs
"the political damage...is measured in every working-class woman who watches Labour MPs sign a motion against the legal clarity she has waited years for, and draws the obvious conclusion. It is measured in every constituency where the word ‘Labour’ no longer carries the meaning it was intended to carry. The party that was built to represent the interests of those with the least power in society has, on this question, positioned itself against the sex-based protections of half the population."
https://t.co/iE0WyJcxBU via @Labourheartland

[Diana Alastair💚🤍💜 ⚢ ❌❌✡️ @sappholives83]

That’s your response? I tell you that women and girls are getting raped and you lol? Let me tell you a story, and if you still feel like laughing afterwards, then at least we’ll all know exactly what you are.

See there’s a man named Tremaine Carroll. This man, in fact. He’s imprisoned in California as a third strike lifer. His third offense was armed robbery, but his first two offenses were kidnapping young girls and forcing them to fellate him.

Mr. Carroll does not take estrogen. He does not use a woman’s name, and he does not dress in women’s clothing. Nevertheless, he told the state of California that he was a woman, so they put him in a California women’s prison, even though his prison psychiatrist wrote a report saying that he was a manipulator and a predator, and should absolutely not be placed in a women’s facility.

So not only did they put this man in a women’s prison; they even put him in with a female cellmate. He impregnated her. Legally it’s rape, because by law prisoners can’t consent to sexual activity, and no one is sure whether or not he impregnated her by force.

That didn’t stop prison officials from giving Mr. Carroll a second female cellmate . He flat out raped this one, and when she reported him and they took her to the hospital to get a rape exam, they kept her in chains throughout the entire experience.

When she returned to the prison, she was placed in isolation because while she was gone Mr. Carroll – who is 6 foot two and weighs 250 pounds – had claimed that she had raped him. She went on lockdown, and Mr. Carroll got a third female cellmate.

Whom he also raped.

It was at this point that the prison officials finally decided that it was time to put him back in a men’s facility. He is now facing charges for two rapes, and the judge in charge of the case has dictated that everybody, including the victims, must referred to Mr. Carroll as “she.”

This means that the victims will be forced to sit on a stand and say “she forced her penis into me.” That’s perjury, and it denies the victims the truth of what was done to them.

This is Tremaine Carroll, and if you have any decency at all, you’ll take a few minutes to think about what it must have been like for his victims to be held down and forcibly penetrated. The fear when the cell door slams and the guards walk away. The weight, the smell of his breath, the bruising grip of his hands, and the pain as he jams himself into you. That’s what your movement has facilitated — and not just twice, or three times, but dozens and dozens of times over the past few years. One woman had her sentence extended by five years because she objected to being stared at in the showers. And your movement is responsible for all of it.

So look at this man. Really look at him. Because this is what you and yours are inflicting on women across the western world.

Now here’s my question – how committed are you? Are you willing to look this man’s victims in the face and tell them that their pain is acceptable collateral damage in the pursuit of rights for men like their rapist? Or will you lol again, and show everybody exactly what you are?

[Alexander Horne @AlexanderHorne1]

A useful list of the MPs who don’t appear to believe biological women are entitled to single sex services (on the grounds that they oppose the latest guidance from the EHRC).

Alarmed that there appear to be (at least) 42 of them.

https://t.co/gFq1xzE834

[Stroppy Ambo Woman @Stroppyambo]

This is good news. Let's give him a chance to take appropriate action rather than give him a hard time for his change of heart.

[Helen Saxby @helensaxby11]

Unequivocal statement from new health secretary @jamesmurray_ldn. He would no longer say 'transwomen are women' and he agrees with the Supreme Court judgement that women need single-sex spaces to be based on biological sex, including in the health service.
Well said 👏
#r4today

[Helen Saxby @helensaxby11]

Unequivocal statement from new health secretary @jamesmurray_ldn. He would no longer say 'transwomen are women' and he agrees with the Supreme Court judgement that women need single-sex spaces to be based on biological sex, including in the health service.
Well said 👏
#r4today

[Stuey Beef 🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @stuey_beef]

Ed Davey has written to Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson demanding she WITHDRAW official EHRC guidance protecting female-only spaces in toilets and changing rooms.

Let that land.

The Equalities and Human Rights Commission — a statutory body — has produced legally grounded guidance telling employers and public bodies that biological men should not access women’s single-sex spaces.

This is not opinion.
This is not politics.
This is the settled legal position following the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on the meaning of “woman” under the Equality Act.

And Ed Davey wants it gone.

His stated reason?

The guidance is not “compatible with long-standing British values.”

British values.

He used those words to argue AGAINST protecting women’s single-sex spaces.

The same Liberal Democrats who lecture the country about tolerance, inclusion and human rights are now lobbying a Labour minister to tear up statutory guidance that protects every woman in Britain who walks into a changing room, a refuge or a hospital ward.

This is not a fringe position within the Lib Dems.

Their leader wrote the letter.

The party has chosen its side.

It is not the side of women.

Repost if you think women’s single-sex spaces should be protected.

[Miss Jo @therealmissjo]

Further evidence this week that girls simply don’t matter to the judiciary.

On July 2, 2021 a 15 year old girl from Geel, Belgium was invited to a friend’s place to watch the Belgium V Italy UEFA Euro quarterfinal match.

She was offered a drink and accepted it. She remembers nothing about the rest of that evening.

Later, when she woke up in the basement she had bites all over her and felt a searing pain in her vagina.

Fast forward to 2023, and she saw a video of herself being gang raped by three men. The video had been circulating at her school and clearly showed the assault and the men treating her like a “play doll” even though she was unconscious.

Sadly this led to her being bullied, slut-shamed and has had a lasting impact on her and her family. She is afraid to go outside.

In late April 2026, two of the main perpetrators known only as YG (22) and JVU (23) were prosecuted for rape, assault, filming and voyeurism. The third accomplice was a minor and dealt with separately

Just this week, the two adults were found guilty, each given a 3 year suspended sentence, sent on a training course and told to pay Euro 12,500 to the girl and Euro 2,500 to her parents.

That is all they for raping a minor, recording it and disseminating it. No prison time, a training course and a fine.

[Bev Jackson @BevJacksonAuth]

The trade union UNISON says “Change the law”. But it does not spell out to its members what that would mean. It would mean amending the Equality Act to change “Sex” into “gender identity” - introducing “gender self-ID” in law.

But the UK does not want - and will never accept - “gender self-ID.” That is a project pursued only by a shrinking group of deluded fanatics.

Meanwhile, UNISON is urging MPs to reject the EHRC guidance - which is not the law, but merely helps service providers and associations keep to the law. Defying it will cost them more money in lost court cases.

Employers don’t need the guidance. For them, the Equality Act as clarified by the Supreme Court together with the 1992 Workplace Regulations are sufficient.

So who is UNISON serving?

Everyone who cares about the rights of women and girls is delighted with the Supreme Court ruling. Everyone who cares about the rights of LGB people is delighted with the Supreme Court ruling.

The law is clear.

UNISON’s defiance of the ruling shows contempt for all its female and LGB members whose rights were clarified by the Supreme Court. They pay their dues - for what?

UNISON is wrong on every level to oppose the guidance. It is confusing its members by saying “Change the law” while attacking the guidance. Its betrayal of its female and LGB members is shameful. What is more, its open contempt for the law is encouraging the reactionary forces that oppose trade unions.

[UnHerd @unherd]

JK Rowling mansplained, by Sarah Ditum (@sarahditum)

What happened to JK Rowling? If only there were some kind of primary source that could tell us why she became interested in the clash between trans activism and women’s rights — say, a first-person essay.

But alas, the archive is silent. It must be, because why else would two male podcasters have taken it upon themselves to solve this supposed mystery?

This week, the ‘Origin Story’ podcast, hosted by indistinguishable journalists Ian Dunt and Dorian Lynskey, bravely shouldered the burden of analysing Rowling over the course of two episodes.

Do they succeed? Not remotely. But they do offer a fascinating insight into what happens when a certain kind of progressive man becomes radicalised by Bluesky.

Read more below ⬇️

https://t.co/FQG6I59mww

[Diana Alastair💚🤍💜 ⚢ ❌❌✡️ @sappholives83]

Judy Walcott, a woman in New Hampshire, has been banned from her local Planet Fitness because she objected to the presence in the women’s changing room of a man who is a convicted child predator, domestic abuser, and stalker.

This man, Christopher Beaulieu, also has additional convictions for changing his name without reporting it to authorities as required by law — remember when we told you this would be one result of SelfID?

In addition to hanging around watching people in the women’s changing room at PF, this creep also makes a habit out of hanging out at Chuck E Cheese (which is such a red flag that every cop I know thinks that any mentally able adult man found there by himself should get an automatic hard drive check).

Judy reported this man’s presence and behavior to PF staff, and was ignored. When she told another staff member about Beaulieu’s behavior a few days later, and the employee called her “transphobic,” and told her to quit coming to the gym if she didn’t like it.

A few hours later, Judy received a call from the assistant manager, who cancelled her membership, forging her signature in the process.

If you’d told me 20 years ago that by 2026, women would be banned from gyms and stores, and even criminally charged, for not wanting to change clothes in front of leering male transvestite sex offenders, I’d have laughed in your face. The world has gone mad.