Olivia
Online
Gender Atheist
@GenderAtheist2
Woman: adult human female | biology not ideology
UK
Joined March 2009
999 Following
129 Followers
325 Posts
My first ever article on X is the medical, psychological, ethical and legal case for why 'sex re-assignment' surgery should be criminalised. https://t.co/36zKO2PJ2f
We are pleased to launch Understanding Trans Identity, a free educational resource bringing together our books, articles, lectures and interviews developed over decades of clinical work.
We hope it contributes to thoughtful enquiry, careful assessment and informed discussion.
https://t.co/iAOBYiNeCK
@JamesEsses @Jebadoo2 @MrMennoTweets @Neverfallingfo1 @Jilliantweeting @sueevansprotect
The thing is, neither the men who believe erroneously that they’re women, nor the men who get a sexual thrill from dressing as women, are, in fact, women. They’re all men. Their motives are irrelevant. Men aren’t entitled to women’s hard-earned rights.
Four unions are boycotting the Labour Women's Conference because trans-identifying males will not be permitted to participate. In other words, Labour's long-awaited compliance with the law is being taken as an attack on men's ability to infiltrate women's spaces.
'This is absolute arrogance in the face of the highest court in this land.'
Gender critical activist Maeve Halligan reacts as four unions announce a boycott of Labour's women's conference over the exclusion of trans women.
This is an excellent point by Maya Forstater, and it highlights one of the many problems with the “gender incongruence” diagnosis.
The diagnosis is defined as a “marked incongruence” between a child’s sex and their “experienced/expressed gender.” But there is no objective way to determine whether a child’s supposed “gender” does or doesn’t match their sex. “Gender identity” is an ideological concept, not something that can be independently observed or measured.
The diagnostic criteria then refers to “a strong desire to be a different gender than the assigned sex.” Yet gender ideologues insist that sex and gender are different things. Even on their own terms, this wording is conceptually incoherent.
If “gender” refers to social roles, clothing, hairstyles, interests, or other sex-based stereotypes as pediatric gender clinicians and activists often claim, then saying a child “desires to be a different gender than their sex” makes just as much sense as saying a child has “a different favorite genre of music than their eye color.”
Children should not be subjected to experimental medical interventions based on a diagnosis that is this nonsensical and incoherent.
My scholarly article "Why There Are Exactly Two Sexes" has been accessed over 50K times, placing it in the top 8 of all articles in the journal's history.
Activists refuse to cite it or acknowledge it exists.
I'm still waiting for someone to publish a scholarly scientific takedown of it. You'd think this would be a top priority for those asserting "sex is a spectrum" who believe my work is bigoted, pseudoscientific, and actively harming a vulnerable community.
Until then, you can read it and arm yourself with a thorough understanding of the 5 major frameworks that activists and activist scientists use to undermine the binary nature of the sexes and why they all fail.
🔗https://t.co/k6VEmRcgqM
I’ve just seen a post from yet another man who thinks my position has shifted since I wrote my 2020 essay about gender identity ideology and the consequent clash of rights https://t.co/pasxBD1Hzl
For the avoidance of doubt, I stand by every word I wrote then. For instance: ‘woman isn’t a costume.’ If it surprises you that I say men don’t become women by wearing make up and dresses, you didn’t understand the essay. I’ve been crystal clear all along that I believe people are free to live and present themselves as the opposite sex if that’s what feels comfortable and authentic TO THEM. This appears to have been interpreted (most often, tellingly, by men) as ‘and it naturally follows that I, as a woman, will validate a man’s belief that he is now, to all intents and purposes, the same sex as me, and I will use only the speech he deems appropriate and will be very careful to protect his sensitive ego, no matter the cost to myself in pretending to believe a falsehood, or the loss of my own rights due to this pretence.’
Dress as you like within normal bounds of situational decency, wear lipstick, sequins and a beard if you want, call yourself whatever you like, have sex with any consenting adult you please: I wish you health, happiness and safety. What you don’t get is the power to compel my speech and belief.
When I call a man a man, I am speaking verifiable truth. It is essential to be able to accurately name sex when discussing fair sport, facilities and services for women and girls and the right of gay people not to be demonised for their same-sex attraction. In years to come, a lot of useful idiots are going to awake to the fact that they’ve been complicit in enormous harm done to women, girls, gay people who stood against the insanity, and some extremely vulnerable young people. I don’t doubt we’ll hear a lot of, ‘I thought I was just being kind.’ Such individuals, especially those in positions of power, should be asked why they never had anything to say about the loud, public, widespread unkindness directed against those who refused to adopt their fashionable, elitist beliefs, eg, the detransitioners being bullied and vilified by former ‘allies’, the whistleblowers who tried to stop an unregulated experiment on troubled children, the women who lost their careers and livelihoods by standing up for all women’s rights.
Some people appear to believe it a worse crime for a woman to call a man a man than for trans activists to call loudly and publicly for the assault and assassination of all women who refuse to bend the knee. I have never wished violence or any other kind of harm on a trans-identified person, but, like many other people who’ve defended women’s and girls’ rights over the past few years, I have received thousands of threats of death, rape and torture. The wilful blindness of those who bleat ‘both sides’ will rightly be judged harshly in times to come.
TL;DR Trans women aren’t women, and if that hurts your feelings, be grateful you live in a society where you are just as free to espouse gender ideology as I am to speak the truth. As Orwell said: ‘Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.’
Strong commentary by Anne Kalvig, member of our expert network, is now available in English on our website, ready to read and share: granting “gender identity” legal protection as fact represents a category error with far-reaching implications.
https://t.co/3p9gYTN7kF
I am never going to pretend a man is a Woman because he grows his hair, wears make up & mimics what he thinks is femininity (a social construct, there’s no right way to be a woman). I’m very happy to treat everyone with respect, courtesy & with equality in law. But female things that women have fought tooth & nail for, against huge male dominance, over centuries, belong to females.
A pantomine horse isn’t a horse.
An open secret isn’t a secret.
A hot dog isn’t a dog.
A shrinking violet isn’t a violet.
Crow’s feet aren’t feet.
Fair game’s not a game.
Trans women aren’t women.
If you believe free speech is for you but not your political opponents, you're illiberal.
If no contrary evidence could change your beliefs, you're a fundamentalist.
If you believe the state should punish those with contrary views, you're a totalitarian.
If you believe political opponents should be punished with violence or death, you're a terrorist.
Under this UK government, 15 year olds will be considered too young to buy an energy drink but 11 year olds will be considered old enough to take puberty blockers…
https://t.co/CPsUKeD1v0
With the sensational case of Christine Jorgensen in the 1950s, the private sexual fantasies of autogynephilic men quickly solidified into an all-consuming quest to undergo vaginoplasty.
Early psychiatrists noted how many of the men seeking these drastic surgeries reported being unable to think of anything else from the moment they heard such a surgery was possible.
It has long been recognised that the availability of a medical treatment has the power to iatrogenically create the demand for that treatment because it gives hope to people in distress.
In the 19th century, surgeons removed the healthy ovaries of women as a cure for mental illness. This led to a mini epidemic of women fixating on their ovaries as the source of their distress and begging surgeons to operate.
This often overlooked iatrogenic mechanism is one reason why the continued availability of puberty blockers is so dangerous.
As long as puberty suppression remains a treatment option, it will draw young people who hate their developing bodies into thinking that blocking that development is the miracle cure for all that ails them.
In today’s episode of Beyond Gender, @stellaomalley3 interviews me and the fabulous @TwisterFilm about wannabe amputees, trans, the weird world of fetishes, and much more.
🎧Premiering now
Sometimes it gets to you. Not most days, or even most years actually.
But just sometimes, you realise that it absolutely shouldn't ever have become just a 'normal' part of going to work and paying the bills.
@RosieDuffield1 @PomegranateGayM ...
You must remember this
A person born a female will always be a woman
A person born a male will always be a man
This fundamental thing will always apply
As time goes by . . .
Apologies to fans of Casablanca.
Imagine a group of white people saying that they know what it’s like to “feel black,” and that because of this feeling, and their enjoyment of stereotypically “black behavior,” they are now not just black themselves, but the most marginalized and vulnerable type of black person.
Imagine them insisting that they should be the main focus of all activism meant to help black people. Imagine them having taxpayer-funded operations to darken their skin and mimic stereotypically black features.
Imagine them walking around in blackface, and saying it’s better than being born black.
Imagine them being referred to as black in the press and supported by celebrities, with laws passed to make white people who identify as black a protected class.
Imagine these people demanding membership in black organizations, and demanding they be given awards created specifically to honor black achievement.
Then imagine them getting their way.
Now imagine mobs of them showing up to black events that don’t include them to drown out any speakers with noise, and coming up with slurs for any black person who doesn’t accept that white people are black if they say they are.
Imagine them calling for the rape, torture, and mass murder of any black person who disagrees with them. Imagine them getting black people doxxed, harassed, assaulted, fired from their jobs, and investigated by the police for saying that you have to be born black to be black.
Now imagine the government supporting their demands.
That’s exactly the position that women are in right now, with a few extras, like being locked in cells with dangerous men, the sexual predation of lesbians via coercion, and the increased risk of sexual assault in formerly female-only spaces.
Our greatest oppressors are now claiming not only the right to oppress us in whole new ways, but the right to erase our identities as women and rewrite the meaning of womanhood in ways that not just include, but prioritize them.
If you wouldn’t support this kind of behavior towards black people, you have no business supporting this kind of behavior towards women.
Open Letter to Scrub Nurses Assisting in Gender-Affirming Surgeries in the United Kingdom.
This letter is intended for scrub nurses and medical professionals. It contains graphic descriptions of highly controversial surgeries currently performed by some surgeons in the UK. It is not intended for members of the public or health care professionals who may find such content distressing.
You will find it hard reading, sometimes we must face reality.
If facing the truth about what is happening is difficult, consider that your discomfort pales next to the plight of the victims who are misled into giving consent for these operations.
Spare a thought also for their families and next of kin, who must witness the consequences of this pseudoscience.
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
Dear Nursing Colleagues,
I am writing to you as a fellow healthcare professional with deep respect for the critical work you do in the operating theatre.
You have the hands that pass the instruments, the eyes that watch every move, and the presence that helps keep surgery safe.
But in the context of gender-affirming surgeries—procedures such as vaginoplasty, phalloplasty, penectomy, bilateral orchiectomy, vulvoplasty, and bilateral mastectomy—your role goes beyond technical support.
You are a key participant in these ethically troubling procedures that demand urgent scrutiny.
Considering the recent UK Supreme Court ruling confirming that sex is a biological reality, the very foundation on which these surgeries are justified appears to be collapsing.
The belief that sex can be reassigned by surgery is a medical fiction.
There are three widespread deceptions involved in these procedures:
1.That sex can be changed or reassigned using hormones and surgery.
2.Those procedures such as vaginoplasty, vulvoplasty, and phalloplasty create vaginas, vulvas, or penises.
3.That removing the healthy breasts of a young woman somehow makes her chest a “male chest.”
None of these claims are medically or biologically true.
Two commonly held misconceptions — even within the medical profession — are that sex is assigned at birth and that a person can be born in the wrong body.
These unfounded beliefs have given rise to a branch of pseudo medicine that underpins so-called gender reassignment surgeries.
Biological sex is determined at conception and becomes clearly identifiable by the seventh week of intrauterine development.
There is no scientific evidence to support the notion that anyone can be born in the "wrong" body. At birth, sex is simply registered, not assigned.
Despite this reality, the language used during the consent process, in patient information leaflets, and even within the operating theatre often continues to imply otherwise.
If patients are not fully informed—particularly about what these surgeries can and cannot achieve—then their consent cannot be considered truly informed and will be legally and ethically invalid.
Terms like "vaginoplasty," "phalloplasty," and "vulvoplasty" suggest that a vagina, penis, or vulva is being created. In truth, this is profoundly misleading.
You are expected to support these operations without question—even when they involve the removal of healthy breasts from adolescent girls, the amputation of normal penises and testicles from young men, or the construction of skin and fat flaps that are misleadingly labelled as “vaginas” or “penises.”
You are expected to pass the scalpel into the hands of a surgeon who will first strip and de-skin the penis from the tip to the base, then proceed to disassemble the cylindrical structures of the hapless penis and then proceed to incise and amputate at the base of a perfectly normal penis.
They then incise the scrotum, gain access to both the testicles (they have no escape now), transfix, ligate and cut through the cord structures and remove both the testicles from the physically normal adult young Man.
Witnessing this in silence, you are to receive the severed organs into a kidney dish—alongside the bloodied blade. Afterward, you may be expected to dispose of them— discarding normal penises, testicles, and breasts from physically healthy individuals who are suffering from psychological or psychosocial distress (every human being goes through some form of distress in their lifetime which needs just psychological support). Your professional instincts may be screaming that something is profoundly wrong.
You may be told this is "gender-affirming care." You may be instructed not to question. But medicine is not a ritual of obedience. It is a practice of ethics, science, and humanity.
If your training, your conscience, or your professional experience is troubled by what is being done—listen to that voice. You are not alone.
These surgeries are irreversible. They remove organs that are not diseased. They mutilate bodies that are anatomically and functionally normal.
You are not just a pair of gloved hands. You are a thinking, feeling professional with the right—and the responsibility—to question what you are being asked to do.
Silence does not equal consent. And history has not been kind to those who said, “I was just doing my job,” when the job involved harm to patients.
I urge you: do not turn away from your discomfort.
Reflect on it.
Speak about it.
Document it.
You may be the only voice in the operating room who still sees the patient as a human being, rather than a set of parts to be rearranged or removed. Your voice matters.
Use it.
Let me be clear: Gender dysphoria is a psychological condition, listed in the DSM-5 psychiatric manual.
It is not listed in any reputable surgical textbook as an indication for radical, irreversible surgery.
The amputation of healthy organs like penis and/or testicles in response to a psychological diagnosis would not be accepted in any other context in modern medicine.
The Medical Director of my health board in Wales—a respected senior physician—has noted that the primary risk of not proceeding with surgery is psychological distress.
Traditionally, and always, such distress is managed by mental health professionals and general practitioners, rather than through irreversible surgical procedures.
Furthermore, the Cass Review highlights that many of these interventions lack a robust evidence base and have not been subject to long-term, high-quality research.
I know that scrub nurses are not the decision-makers in theatre. But you are not without power. You can raise questions, escalate concerns, and refuse to participate in procedures that violate your ethical judgement.
Silence and complicity, even with good intentions, can no longer be defended as professionalism.
I urge you to reflect on the following:
These surgeries permanently destroy fertility, sexual function, and normal anatomy in otherwise healthy young people.
You are helping to remove normal organs—organs that are later incinerated.
With growing awareness, public scrutiny, and court rulings upholding biological reality, these procedures may soon face legal challenges, possibly under grievous bodily harm (GBH) statutes.
If it is later determined that the psychological evaluations were inadequate, or that consent was based on distortion, omission, or deception then your participation in these procedures—however well-intentioned—may be reevaluated in a very different light.
Therefore, I urge scrub nurses to:
Seek guidance from your professional bodies and
ask whether it is ethical and legal to assist in operations that rely on misinformation to secure consent.
Escalate your concerns through hospital safeguarding teams or whistleblowing procedures, especially when young adults or vulnerable patients are involved.
Request formal clarification from the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) regarding your ethical obligations in surgeries where the consent may be deemed invalid due to the deception involved.
None of us entered medicine or nursing to harm healthy human beings. Yet these surgeries, I believe, cause harm—lifelong, irreversible harm—under a veil of affirmation and false hope. In this situation, ethical courage begins not with confrontation, but with asking honest questions.
You are not alone in your doubts. Many professionals— surgeons, anaesthetists, nurses, GPs—are beginning to speak out.
I invite you to join them.
With respect and urgency,
Dr Joseph Chrysostom
MBBS, MS (Gen Surg), FRCSEd
ATLS Instructor, Royal College of Surgeons of England
GMC-5199143.
A draft conversion practices bill has now been published. We will continue scrutinising the detail, but we believe this bill constitutes an indefensible incursion by the state into family life with devastating impacts for parents who are trying to support their children in what is already a hostile environment.
https://t.co/wWWdnWlaMY
Individual parents, parent-led support groups like @BayswaterSG, and healthcare professionals (including the NHS paediatric gender services) continue to be subjected to a barrage of false accusations that they are engaging in "conversion". This draft bill adds the threat of criminal prosecution to those wildly inaccurate claims.
Even if the bar for prosecution is high, the chilling effect and the detrimental impact on public understanding of transgender identity is profound. One thing we can be sure of is that accusations of conversion will come thick and fast, as they have done over the last decade. Escaping prosecution will be scant consolation for those subjected to this onslaught of fabrication and intimidation.
The threat of being prosecuted for corporate conversion means that schools will be even more inclined to affirm a child's attested cross-sex identity, despite safeguarding advice to exercise caution. The potential psychological and lifelong medical consequences for the child will be less of a concern to a school than its own legal risk under poorly defined legislation.
The press release for the bill claims "robust thresholds that protect open conversations, and free speech", but those are nowhere to be seen in the bill itself.
Instead, the bill relies on subjective assessments to define what constitutes criminally "abusive" conduct, stating that this would need to involve "controlling or coercive words or behaviour" or "use of psychological or emotional pressure".
Accusations of psychological or emotional abuse are rife when it comes to transgender identity. If this bill becomes effective, parents will justifiably fear that such accusations could now escalate into a threat of a criminal offence that carries a penalty of imprisonment up to 5 years.
But that is not the only concern for parents who must now worry about the prospect of a "conversion practice protection order" should they disagree with their child over the merits of a "transgender identity" as the explanation for the child's experience. Any parent who fails to affirm their child's "transgender identity" or who voices concerns about a belief that mind and body can be mismatched in this way could be accused of exerting "psychological or emotional pressure" under the terms of this bill.
None of this will help the parents of a distressed young teenager who is convinced that her "transgender identity" means she needs to source DIY testosterone to modify her body in line with her identity. Or parents frantic with concern over their young adult son, who is failing to hold down work or social relationships, all while pinning his hopes of happiness on a medical transformation with significant risks to his long-term health and well-being.
Most importantly of all, this bill will harm the very people it purports to protect by enshrining in law a belief that is inextricably bound up with rejection of the body and psychological distress.
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
241.2M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.1M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
112.8M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.1M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.3M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.3M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.4M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
89M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
82.9M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
74.4M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
71.8M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.4M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
64.8M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
64.6M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.4M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
62M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.8M followers