Jane

[Jane @Tulip1000]

Just to reiterate….#IStandWithJKRowling

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

Dress however you please.
Call yourself whatever you like.
Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
Live your best life in peace and security.
But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?
#IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill

[Trevor Phillips @TrevorPTweets]

My thoughts on the @EHRC guidance laid yesterday; this is not about non-existent "rights". It is about the safety of women - mothers, sisters, wives, daughters. We men need to hear their voices. Virginia Woolf : "Though we see the same world, we see it through different eyes".

My intro on @TimesRadio yesterday:

Where I live there are two different routes to and from the tube station. One, let’s call it Acacia Avenue, is quiet and residential. The other, London Road, is a busy major route with lots of traffic. At all times of the day, I automatically head for Acacia Road. It’s just much nicer.

The women in my family, on the other hand, will never willingly make that walk after dark. They live with an anxiety that most men find it hard to imagine, and frankly, rarely think about unprompted.

Last year 739,000 women were sexually assaulted in Britain. Virtually all such assaults - nine out of ten - are perpetrated by men. One in four women have been attacked at some time in their lives. Acacia Avenue is exactly the sort of place in which most women fear that they become vulnerable, and they are right.

As the author Virginia Woolf once wrote " Though we see the same world, we see it through different eyes".

I think this is the right context in which to understand the furore over the guidance being laid today by the government, over the meaning of the words man and woman when it comes to providing services and facilities in workplaces.

Many men think this is about a rather arcane dispute about who gets to use what loo. For their mothers, sisters, wives and daughters, it isn’t.

In a previous life, as Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, I had a hand in writing this country’s equality laws, in particular the 2010 Equality Act. It never occurred to any of us that there could be any confusion or dispute over the meaning of the words man and woman. But it has taken a decade of campaigning, a Supreme Court judgement and now hundreds of pages of guidance to settle the issue.

This is not about so called trans rights, which are completely unaffected by this guidance, since no-one has ever had the right to walk into a changing room reserved for teenage girls.

What it does mean is that women and girls are guaranteed the protection they deserve, and that their safety, which we spent half a decade drafting law to ensure, is protected.

But the whole business illuminates some serious issues in our politics.

First that many of our institutions, in spite of the fact that they always knew what the right thing to do was, decided to ignore the fears of their women customers and employees, under pressure from noisy pressure groups. Instead, the people who were supposed to be the grown ups behaved as though the law said what campaigners wanted it to say, rather than what it actually said. They settled for what they hoped would be a quiet life.

In a democracy, there’s little point in Parliament deciding anything if the law is then made an ass by activists intimidating bosses in companies, schools, universities and the media into doing something different.

Second, at the heart of the campaign to undermine the Equality Act is an idea that we specifically rejected in 2010, so called self-identification. That is to say, that it should be up to the individual to decide whether they have what’s called a protected characteristic - are you male or female, are you black or white. The problem is that self-ID would destroy the operation of any law against discrimination.

Look, it would almost certainly have been to my advantage as a young man to self-identify as a handsome, white public schoolboy. None of those things is true of me. And at various points I am pretty sure it’s been to my disadvantage. It is certainly statistically likely to have been to my disadvantage.

But according to the logic of those who say that self-ID should be the rule and that anyone should be able to decide for themselves whether they are male or female, black or white or Asian, were I to complain about racial discrimination, it would be difficult for anyone prove that I’d been discriminated against because of my race since anybody to whom I’d lost out could just tell the courts that they too were black.

I know that sounds like Alice in Wonderland but you can google the case where a chap, both of whose parents are white, insisted he should get money from the Arts Council because he so identified with the black struggle that he considered himself black, and everyone should accept his point of view. In the United States and Brazil exactly such outlandish claims have been made and people rewarded to the disadvantage of people actually born into minority families.

I have even been told about firms who, when reporting their gender pay gaps have put men who just happen to like wearing dresses at weekends - nothing wrong with that, let me be clear - into the female column and told their women employees that they really haven’t got anything to moan about because statistically they are paid equally, and they should get back in their box.

So today’s guidance isn’t just another tiresome chapter in culture wars. It is , I hope, a halt to the efforts to undermine one of the most important pieces of legislation on the statute book, by people who, for their own reasons, would prefer us to be living in the 1950s world of Mad Men.

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

Earlier this month, the Women’s Rights Network, who obtained police data, published a report revealing that women and girls in unisex changing rooms are being targeted by sexual predators across England and Wales. 80 sexual assaults, 16 rapes and 65 incidents of voyeurism took place in leisure centres in 2023. https://t.co/tYfJVhamOS

A freedom of information request in 2024 revealed that 62% of trans-identified male inmates in UK prisons had committed at least one sexual offence.

https://t.co/vNDLXGyYNL

When you admit men who claim to be women into spaces where women and girls are naked or otherwise vulnerable, the risk to girls and women increases. The evidence is clear and those still determined to deny it - you, @bphillipsonMP, every trans activist determined to push their unfalsifiable ideas about gender onto the whole of society - will rightly be judged by history as having enabled harm to women and girls in service of a dangerous, quasi-religious ideology.

[Jane @Tulip1000]

@CUSocOfWomen After hearing Nimco Ali speaking about her own experiences and stories of many other victims of FGM, I’m appalled that the practice is defended by the British Med Journal.

[Nimco Ali (OBE) @NimkoAli]

Thank you to the incredible women of @CUSocOfWomen for hosting me tonight. It was a privilege to meet you all, and I’m grateful for the safe space to talk about women, our stories, and ending #FGM. Looking forward to many more powerful conversations. 🖤

[Jane @Tulip1000]

@sheawilliamsy @CUSocOfWomen @NimkoAli Define 'uni age' please?

[Mary Harrington @moveincircles]

Labubu Man has spoken

[Jane @Tulip1000]

@CUSocOfWomen @jo_bartosch A brilliant first event. Thankyou all

[Jane @Tulip1000]

@CUSocOfWomen Well done women. You have so much support from women within University of Cambridge.

[Maya Forstater @MForstater]

What BBC trans propaganda sticks in your mind?

For me it's this one: the trans identifying male rugby player who folded a female opponent "like a deckchair".

"I do feel guilty, but what can you do?" she says. "I don't go out to hurt anybody. I just want to play rugby."

[Sonia Sodha @soniasodha]

Only the BBC can save itself. I've written for tomo's @thetimes on how resignations aren't a fix: the BBC needs to confront the governance & editorial failures that have made it so vulnerable to unrepresentative groupthink on issues like sex and gender.

https://t.co/fYhIi79T9P

[Jane @Tulip1000]

Students launch women’s society excluding trans women https://t.co/no41xuexRL

[The Cambridge University Society of Women @CUSocOfWomen]

Our website is now live!
Women can apply for current student or alumnae membership, for free. We are also accepting donations to fund our events and campaigns. Thank you for all support so far.
https://t.co/FR5IKEG94b

[Jane @Tulip1000]

Cambridge students launch single-sex Society for Women https://t.co/GmxxDmLpcv

[The Cambridge University Society of Women @CUSocOfWomen]

We are the Cambridge University Society of Women.

As the only openly and proudly single-sex society for women at the university, our mission is to facilitate women speaking freely in an all-female environment.

We will be campaigning and fundraising to help women's sex-based causes.

Launching today, we are now offering membership to female students of Cambridge University!

Please contact us via X or Instagram for more information.

[Jane @Tulip1000]

In my workplace, as part of 'Menopause Awareness' twattery, we are told that
"Trans women may also experience menopause-like symptoms due to fluctuations in oestrogen levels related to gender affirming healthcare."

[Jane @Tulip1000]

@_BoldPolitics @ZackPolanski Woman = adult human female

[joseph chrysostom @josephchrysosto]

I have written an open letter to the young people of Britain who may be considering undergoing the unscientific and mutilating procedure known as “gender-affirming surgery.”
My purpose is to urge them to pause and carefully reconsider their decision.
Open Letter to British Youth Considering Gender Surgery
Dear Young People,
I am Dr. Joseph Chrysostom, a medical doctor who has served in the NHS for over 25 years. I am writing to you out of deep concern and genuine care — to warn you about what I believe to be some of the most harmful and deceptive medical practices currently happening in our country. These include the use of cross-sex hormones and surgeries such as vaginoplasty, orchidectomy, and phalloplasty, offered both within and outside the NHS. What I write here reflects my professional opinion and sincerely held belief based on my knowledge of human biology and surgical practice.
You have been told that you can “change sex.” But biologically, that is impossible. Every one of your body’s trillions of cells carries either XX or XY chromosomes — a genetic signature that cannot be altered by hormones or surgery. To claim otherwise is, in my view, deeply misleading. Any doctor or institution promising to “feminise” or “masculinise” the human body without changing its DNA is, in effect, deceiving you.
I believe this deception began early — in schools, through Relationship and Sex Education materials that claimed gender is fluid and that sex is “assigned at birth.” That is false. Sex is determined at conception, and by the seventh week of foetal development, it is already biologically clear whether a person is male or female. By teaching that doctors might have “assigned” you the wrong sex, these materials planted a dangerous idea — one that could easily take hold during adolescence, a time when self-doubt and confusion are common.
In my view, this was not education but indoctrination. Schools were instructed to hide these matters from parents — the very people best placed to support you through emotional confusion. This isolation mirrors the pattern seen in cult-like ideologies: separating young people from those who love them most. Once detached from parental guidance, vulnerable youth become easy targets for ideologues and, later, for those in medicine who profit from these falsehoods.
Sadly, some doctors, surgeons, endocrinologists and psychologists — knowingly or not — have become part of this system. Cross-sex hormones are being prescribed despite well-documented long-term complications. Surgeons have begun to perform irreversible operations on healthy bodies. When challenged, the professional institutions — Royal Colleges, GMC, NHS England, and the Department of Health — all pass responsibility between themselves. No one will say these surgeries are not deceptive. Yet none will take accountability either.
Let me be clear about what these procedures truly involve:
Vaginoplasty does not create a vagina. It creates a deep surgical slit-like narrow space lined with skin. It is a wound tending to heal and contract, not an organ. It lacks the glands, microbiome, glycogen-rich inner lining, acidic pH (to protect against infections) and natural functions of a female reproductive tract.
Phalloplasty does not create a penis. It forms a mound of skin and fat from another part of the body. It cannot perform erection, emission, or ejaculation — the defining functions of male sexual anatomy.
Mastectomy cannot make a female chest into a male one. It leaves irreversible scars and removes healthy breasts permanently leaving you incapable of lactation.
These are not restorative surgeries — they are destructive ones. In my opinion, they have the potential to turn healthy young people into lifelong patients, dependent on the medical system for repairs, revisions, and mental health support.
What you truly need is not surgery, but psychotherapy — compassionate, skilled counselling to help you understand and accept your biological reality. You deserve truth, not ideology. You deserve to be treated with honesty, not with the promise of impossible transformations.
I believe that within a few years, many of those who underwent these surgeries will express deep regret — but by then, it will be too late. Lost organs cannot be replaced. The physical and psychological scars are permanent.
I urge you: step away from the conveyor belt that starts in classrooms and ends in operating theatres. Parents and professionals across the world are now awakening to the dangers of gender ideology. Within the next few years this conveyor belt will be empty due to the alertness of current generation of parents. Accountability is coming. I believe, those who performed, assisted, promoted, or profited from these procedures will one day have to answer for them.
Thank you for reading this letter with an open mind. I write not to condemn you, but to protect you — before irreversible harm is done.
With sincerity and concern,
Dr. Joseph Chrysostom, MBBS, MS (Gen Surg), FRCSEd
GMC 5199143

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

I'm seeing quite a bit of comment about this, so I want to make a couple of points.

I'm not owed eternal agreement from any actor who once played a character I created. The idea is as ludicrous as me checking with the boss I had when I was twenty-one for what opinions I should hold these days.

Emma Watson and her co-stars have every right to embrace gender identity ideology. Such beliefs are legally protected, and I wouldn't want to see any of them threatened with loss of work, or violence, or death, because of them.

However, Emma and Dan in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right - nay, obligation - to critique me and my views in public. Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created.

When you've known people since they were ten years old it's hard to shake a certain protectiveness. Until quite recently, I hadn't managed to throw off the memory of children who needed to be gently coaxed through their dialogue in a big scary film studio. For the past few years, I've repeatedly declined invitations from journalists to comment on Emma specifically, most notably on the Witch Trials of JK Rowling. Ironically, I told the producers that I didn't want her to be hounded as the result of anything I said.

The television presenter in the attached clip highlights Emma's 'all witches' speech, and in truth, that was a turning point for me, but it had a postscript that hurt far more than the speech itself. Emma asked someone to pass on a handwritten note from her to me, which contained the single sentence 'I'm so sorry for what you're going through' (she has my phone number). This was back when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak, at a time when my personal security measures had had to be tightened considerably and I was constantly worried for my family's safety. Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness.

Like other people who've never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is. She'll never need a homeless shelter. She's never going to be placed on a mixed sex public hospital ward. I'd be astounded if she's been in a high street changing room since childhood. Her 'public bathroom' is single occupancy and comes with a security man standing guard outside the door. Has she had to strip off in a newly mixed-sex changing room at a council-run swimming pool? Is she ever likely to need a state-run rape crisis centre that refuses to guarantee an all-female service? To find herself sharing a prison cell with a male rapist who's identified into the women's prison?

I wasn't a multimillionaire at fourteen. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women's rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.

The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me - a change of tack I suspect she's adopted because she's noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was - I might never have been this honest.

Adults can't expect to cosy up to an activist movement that regularly calls for a friend's assassination, then assert their right to the former friend's love, as though the friend was in fact their mother. Emma is rightly free to disagree with me and indeed to discuss her feelings about me in public - but I have the same right, and I've finally decided to exercise it.

[Jane @Tulip1000]

This is unbelievable #toilets #kingsparade #camcitco

[Nicholas Boys Smith @boys_nicholas]

100% Trashing King’s Parade is totally needless. If a barrier really is required for the future then for God’s sake make it worthy of one of England’s greatest streets. This is depressingly similar to…

[Julie Bindel @bindelj]

Hear, hear.
https://t.co/BmCzo8rMKo