flora

Biker/Birder.
Women's Rights, Nature, Birds, Animals, Music...among other things...
The Rights of Woman merit some attention.

[flora @florabegora]

Absolutely stunning shot from my favourite account!🪶

[Carl Bovis @CarlBovisNature]

Look at the face! 😍
I was thrilled to get this shot of a gorgeous Red Kite today near Steart Marshes in Somerset! 😀
It was holding the flesh of some creature in its talons and was eating it as it flew right over my head! 😮
Zoom in and just Look at the face! 😍🐦

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

If there's a better hill to die on than the rights and safety of women and children, I've never found it.

[joseph chrysostom @josephchrysosto]

I have emailed to the Royal college of Anaesthetists. This is copied to the GMC, RCSEd, RCS London and the RCGP. The matter involves surgical malpractice (Resection of vital organs without pathology) in the so-called gender surgeries. I am posting it below for public to read.

Open Letter to the Anaesthetists Involved in Gender-Affirming Surgeries:
Dear Anaesthetic Colleagues,

I am writing to express serious ethical and professional concerns regarding the administration of anaesthesia for gender-affirming surgeries—procedures such as vaginoplasty, phalloplasty, vulvoplasty, penectomy, bilateral orchiectomy, and bilateral mastectomy—which are becoming increasingly common.

Considering the recent Supreme Court ruling that sex is a biological reality, I find no justifiable basis for so-called "sex reassignment" procedures.

These operations, in my view, represent a misguided and deceptive (very likely fraudulent) surgical response to what is fundamentally a mental health condition described in the DSM-5 psychiatry manual.

There are three deceptions, and they are:
1. Sex can be changed or re-assigned through the use of scalpel and/or hormones.
2. Vaginoplasty, Vulvoplasty and Phalloplasty operations creates Vagina, Vulva, and a phallus respectively.
3. Doing bilateral mastectomy of normal breasts in a young female will make that chest a male chest.

None of the above claims are true.

I have already contacted several professional bodies including the Royal College of Anaesthetists to convey my deep concern about the fundamentally misleading nature of these interventions. None of the professional bodies whom I have contacted have denied the deceptions involved.

The Royal College of Anaesthetists replied to me as follows:
“While there are no guidelines specifically for anaesthetists with regards to non-clinical issues in gender reassignment surgery, the GMC issues guidance on personal beliefs (please see attached document). The GMC’s position with regards to a conscientious objection to a treatment can be summarised as ‘you must make sure that the way you manage this doesn’t act as a barrier to a patient’s access to appropriate care to meet their needs’. They also note that the law doesn’t require doctors to provide treatments or procedures that they consider are not clinically appropriate or not of overall benefit to the patient.
In the case of gender reassignment surgery, given that a surgical colleague considers the treatment clinically appropriate, and such surgery is not illegal, the GMC’s guidance on conscientious objection (as summarised above, and detailed on pages 5-6 of the attached document) is relevant.”

From the reply given above, I can only assume that the clinical appropriateness of the gender surgeries will only be determined by the Surgeon who considers the surgery appropriate.

But clearly,

Surgeon seems to have decided on the appropriateness of these surgeries because they have received referrals from two “gender doctors” from the gender clinics (not a recognised medical specialty; No Royal College has been formed for such a questionable “specialty”).

Vast majority, if not all these gender doctors are not surgically trained and qualified as consultants with FRCS. Most of these gender doctors are either GPs or Psychiatrists. So, the surgeon seems to decide based on the referrals from non-surgically trained doctors.

Many of these hospitals quote WPATH SOC-8 guidelines as justification to perform such procedures. This guideline has now been found to have serious conflicts of interest in their formulation and hence discredited.

Moreover, WPATH is currently facing litigation in the United States from FTC and individual states with regards to misrepresentation.

FTC website states as follows:

“The Federal Trade Commission in the USA, along with Alaska, Iowa, Nebraska, and Texas, filed a lawsuit against the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), alleging the organization has provided the means for medical providers to make false and unsubstantiated claims to parents in order to sell pediatric medical transition services.

WPATH, an association of clinicians who profit from pediatric medical transition services, recommended medical interventions, including drugs and surgery, for children and adolescents who expressed dissatisfaction with or distress about their sex traits. 

In their complaint, the FTC and its state partners allege that these recommendations misled parents and children about the medical consensus and medical necessity, as well as the safety and effectiveness, of such services, in violation of the FTC Act.”

In the above context, I wish to point out to the Anaesthetists that as per the oxford handbook of paediatrics (5th edition), adolescence is defined as children between the ages of 10 to 24.

To the best of my knowledge and belief none of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons have recommended these surgeries. When I queried, Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh replied stating that “this matter is beyond their purview”. RCS London failed to reply to my correspondence.

The Royal College of Anaesthetists in the UK, as per this reply, does not seem to have researched if these surgeries are appropriate. So, they seem to shift the responsibility to the surgeons. This is deeply concerning to me as well as many parents of young adolescents (age 10 to 24) who are being lined up for such surgeries soon.

I believe, anaesthetists have equal responsibility to the patient’s long-term welfare regarding the appropriateness of the procedure involved.

The recently published Finnish study (ref: below) clearly shows that the mental health of these young people is far worse than the situation that existed prior to the surgery. With male to female so called Sex Reassignment Surgery it is at least 6 times worse and the so-called female to male SRS it is at least 3 times worse off as per the study.

In my opinion, the consent obtained from patients are invalid, as it is grounded in misinformation. These procedures do not, and cannot, create a functional or anatomical vagina, penis, or vulva, despite what is often claimed.

The correct names for these procedures should not be Vaginoplasty or phalloplasty, but instead “Perineal Woundoplasty” or “construction of a Skin and Fat Flap mound” respectively.
This amounts to a serious ethical violation, as patients are agreeing to irreversible surgeries under false or misleading pretences.

Gender dysphoria is not recognized in any unbiased, internationally respected surgical textbooks (Bailey and Love, Schwartz text book, Sabiston text book, Farquharson's operative surgery)as a condition that warrants surgical intervention.

A Welsh government document in Wales published by the Vale of Glamorgan council called “trans toolkit” clearly states that gender is a “social construct”.
This implies that gender dysphoria as a symptom is a socially engineered mental health condition that is engineered in schools and via the internet. It does not have any pathology or pathophysiology for a surgical intervention.

The Medical Director of my health board—a highly regarded senior physician in Wales—has described the current treatment protocols as "untested", with the principal risk of non-treatment being "psychological distress".
Historically, such psychological distress, often manifesting as anxiety or depression even with suicidal ideations, has been managed by psychiatrists and local GPs.

It is therefore deeply concerning that surgeons proceed to remove anatomically and physiologically normal sexual organs which are the primary participants in the critical human physiology of Reproduction. Anaesthetists participate in these procedures without raising objections.

These surgeries are never cosmetic when they destroy critical human physiology irreversibly.

This letter is not intended as a personal critique of any individual clinician, nor is it a denial of the psychological distress of those with the mental health condition of gender dysphoria. Rather, it is a call for honest reflection, professional transparency, and robust institutional oversight regarding surgical interventions that carry significant, irreversible, and often poorly studied consequences let alone permanently destroying the ability of these young people to have their own biological children and raise a family of their own.

As anaesthetists, your role in these surgeries is indispensable. But your responsibilities are not limited to technical proficiency — they are also ethical. You are not passive providers of anaesthesia; you are active participants in procedures that remove healthy organs thereby destroying vital physiology in the individual, irreversibly alter anatomy, and attempt to remodel the human body in ways that defy biological reality which may be against the law as per the recent supreme court judgement that reinforces biological reality.

Moreover, given the fact that as a fellow medical professional with GMC registration, I have raised objections through this letter to your participation in these surgeries, and have alerted anaesthetists including the RCoA regarding the deceptions involved, any court of law in the future will ask reasonable questions when adolescents who regret and feel betrayed by the medical profession approach the courts for justice.

In a context where long-term outcomes, satisfaction rates, and psychological impacts remain contentious and under-researched, it is legitimate — indeed necessary — to ask: what are our obligations as medical professionals in supporting or distancing ourselves from such interventions?

In the context of an increasingly clarified legal and ethical framework—most notably reflected in recent Supreme Court rulings on sex and biology—the surgical removal of healthy sexual organs, especially from younger patients, is likely to come under intense legal scrutiny.

What is currently accepted by a few bureaucrats and vested financial interests on shaky foundations as standard medical practice, may soon be re-evaluated and potentially classified as unlawful or unethical, particularly as legal standards surrounding valid consent, mental capacity, and the inviolability of the human body continue to be clarified.

I am firmly of the view that procedures such as vaginoplasty, phalloplasty, penectomy, bilateral orchidectomy, vulvoplasty, and bilateral mastectomy will, in due course, be challenged in the courts—possibly under statutes relating to grievous bodily harm (GBH) and female genital mutilation.

If it is later established that psychological assessments were inadequate or that consent was procured through omission, distortion, or deception, then such consent would be legally invalid, rendering the procedures non-consensual and potentially criminal.

Considering these concerns, I strongly encourage anaesthetists involved in these procedures to take the following steps:

· Suspend participation in these surgeries until formal ethical guidance is issued by the General Medical Council (GMC). Seek clarification from the GMC on whether these procedures constitute deception.

· Raise the issue with the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO), specifically focusing on concerns about deception, the validity of the consent process in these operations, and the safeguarding of vulnerable individuals.

No medical professional wishes to be complicit in harm — especially when acting in good faith. But in the context of the deception involved, increasing public concern, clarification by the supreme court, silence or unquestioning participation should no longer be considered good medical practice.

It is precisely because of the high ethical standards, clinical integrity, truthfulness, and sense of responsibility expected of our profession that I raise these questions and urge reflection.

Yours sincerely,
Dr. Joseph Chrysostom
MBBS, MS (Gen Surg), FRCSEd
ATLS Instructor, Royal College of Surgeons, London
GMC-5199143

References:
1. https://t.co/ZDJLH6eiYc releases/2026/06/ftc-states-sue-world-professional-association-transgender-health-over-deceptive-claims-regarding-treatment-children

2. WPATH's Trans-Care Bible "Is Not Considered the Standard of Care"—Unheard Testimony From the $2M Detransitioner Lawsuit.
https://t.co/jtoie72ntA

I strongly recommend in public interest and for the safety of so-called gender incongruent young adults that GMC as well as the professional bodies, Royal Colleges read Mr. Ryan’s witness to understand what the president elect of WPATH testified regarding WPATH “standards of care”.

3. Psychiatric Morbidity Among Adolescents and Young Adults Who Contacted Specialised Gender Identity Services in Finland in 1996–2019: A Register Study. Wiley on-line library published in Acta Paediatrica

Original article with open access.(Finnish study)

[Massimo @Rainmaker1973]

Derik M. was on the McMurdo Station in Antarctica as a US Coast Guard in 2017, when he spotted a family of penguins.

Suddenly, a piece of the ice broke and the clip turned out to be one of the most thrilling ever filmed.

[Steve @RobbieRaygun]

I'm not English, but I do like this.
#football #worldcup #soccer #goal #goals #england #footballsquad #HarryKane #Bellingham #sport #englishsquad #englandsquad #WorldCup2026
#fifaworldcup #fifaworldcup2026

[Heidi Bachram @HeidiBachram]

I spoke to Michael Marlowe at the @novaexhibition about his murdered son Jake. He was unarmed security at the festival and chose to stay and save ppl. Hamas shot him in the chest and as he was crawling away they shot him 8 more times. Never forget the MONSTERS they are.

[Carl Bovis @CarlBovisNature]

Juvenile Robin finding bugs on my lawn. 😀😍🐦

[#WOMENSART @womensart1]

Mola, traditional textile created by women of the Kuna people of Panama and Northern Colombia #womensart #SouthAmericanArtWeek

[Jill Foster @JournalistJill]

A lot of words have been written about what is happening with Amnesty but for those not following it closely, it can be summed up thus:
If you believe that Lexi Secker below is a man, Amnesty will brand you as ‘anti-rights’.

[🎸 Rock History 🎸 @historyrock_]

Rod Stewart singing "It's A Heartache" in tribute to Bonnie Tyler 🙏🏻

Rod and Bonnie were very good friends.

[Scottish Labour Women's Declaration @LWDScotland]

"The women Amnesty condemns are among the most committed human rights defenders I have ever met. They are part of the most effective feminist movement since the introduction of universal suffrage."

Thank you @euanmccolm - great piece.

https://t.co/57BdeaJ9d1

[alexmassie @alexmassie]

It really is extraordinary that Amnesty has decided that feminist organisations defending the rights of women are somehow “anti-rights”.
Extraordinary yet also somehow unsurprising.
Amnesty is a clown organisation these days.
https://t.co/s7QS3tmcfT

[James Dreyfus @DreyfusJames]

Since the repellent Boulton decided to focus on Ann W’s life as “a spinster, an old maid, a virgin & chaste” & mentioned she was friends with Edwina Currie, let’s now compare & contrast the statements from each one.

One from a friend & colleague.

The other from the media.

[#WOMENSART @womensart1]

Ana Teresa Barboza, Peruvian-born artist who works with textiles, embroidery, crochet and yarn #WomensArt #SouthAmericanArtWeek

[Carl Bovis @CarlBovisNature]

Baby Robin with attitude on my patio! 👀😁😍🐦

[Give A Shit About Nature @giveashitnature]

Let's bust a myth: if you find a baby bird on the ground and can see the nest above it, put it back. The parents won't abandon it because you touched it.

Nesting birds have invested too much time and energy into their young to abandon them over a weird smell. They identify their chicks by sight and sound, not smell. A parent bird that watches you place a nestling back in the nest will likely return to feed it, but excessive activity around the nest may cause them to abandon it though, so try not to linger.

The myth was well-intentioned, meant to discourage people from handling wildlife unnecessarily, but the consequences of believing it are real.

The distinction worth knowing: a nestling has few or no feathers, can't stand, and doesn't belong on the ground. Put it back if you can reach the nest.

A fledgling has feathers, hops, and is supposed to be on the ground while it learns to fly. Its parents are nearby and watching. Leave the fledgling alone.

[Dr Helen Fry | WWII Historian @DrHelenFry]

On 11 April 1945, a young Jewish American soldier entered Buchenwald concentration camp to liberate it.

Piles of childrens shoes and emaciated survivors greeted him.

The horrors he saw that day would haunt him for life:
(🧵)

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

They might as well carry a sign demanding that she be gangraped.

And of course no one will do a damn thing about him.

[Carl Bovis @CarlBovisNature]

This Rook flew in so close, I couldn't quite get it all in the frame! 😮😁😍🐦

[Carl Bovis @CarlBovisNature]

To cheer everyone up, here's the sound of a wild hedgehog enjoying a snack in my Somerset garden just now... 😍😁🦔

*Volume up! 🔊

[Kirralie Smith @KirralieS]

I have been ordered to pay $95,000 in "damages" to two men in women's sport because I apparently hurt their feelings. It is potentially going to be doubled because I didn't pay in 30 days. So that is $190,000 in total to reward two men in women's sport. I am appealing in the NSW Supreme Court, so for now, there is a stay on the orders.

@salltweets has been ordered to pay a man $20,000 for not allowing him on her female only app. His hurt feelings claim is hoping to be challenged in the High Court. Sall is still waiting to see if leave will be granted for the appeal.

Jasmine Sussex could have to pay up to $95,000 to a man with hurt feelings who falsely claimed he could breastfeed a tiny baby. Her case is still to be heard by a Queensland tribunal.

None of these numbers include the court costs which run into millions.

Others have lost jobs, been censored, gaslit or threatened if they speak the truth or object to the lie that men can be women.

Men who wish they were women not only want to dominate our sports, spaces and services, they are also trying to make money as they go. It appears quite lucrative if they succeed.

Stand with us. Men are not women and we should never be penalized for stating the facts - especially in court where evidence and facts are meant to be paramount.