Kate Birrell

@kamabi

Born one of Scotland’s many creative engineers. R Feynman is a hero and an inspiration. Not always obvious.

601 Folgt364 Follower1.156 Posts

Bluesky

Ist das dein Profil?Übernimm es — dann gehört dir kamabi.dirty.social.Profil übernehmen

Kate Birrell@kamabi· 5d

A perceptive and challenging article - thanks, Paul heartlandstribune.com/trans-rights...

EHRC Code: Why the Toilet Debate Is a Distraction
The campaign to reduce the Supreme Court ruling and the EHRC Code to a debate about lavatories is not confusion. It is strategy. Behind the toilet door lies the systematic dismantling of women's rights, funded, organised and prosecuted against women who should have been defended years ago.
A conjuring trick requires misdirection. The audience must watch one hand while the other does the work. Keep that principle in mind as you scroll through the endless, repetitive, deliberately narrowed argument about public lavatories, and the entire campaign snaps suddenly into focus.
The toilet is not the argument. The toilet is the frame.
It has been chosen with great care, because it achieves three things at once. It makes women's objections appear mean, petty, almost obsessive. It reduces a broad legal settlement about women's fundamental rights to a single, intimate, emotionally charged doorway. And it places women permanently on the defensive, forever justifying the existence of the boundary rather than those demanding its removal. The question is always
"why are you so obsessed with where people go to the toilet?", never "why is your campaign not about building new facilities for transgender use, but specifically about access to women's existing ones?"

The Supreme Court ruling and the EHRC draft Code do not persecute anyone. They restore legal coherence to a framework that was always intended to protect both trans people and women, and that was hollowed out, institution by institution, policy by policy, tribunal by tribunal, during a decade in which ideological performance counted for more than working class women's actual safety.
The campaign to reduce all of this to a toilet argument is intelligent. It is not honest.
The honest version of the argument would require its advocates to say plainly: we want the legal category "woman" to be defined by identity rather than sex, and we want that definition to take precedence over the sex-based protections women currently hold in law.
Made plainly, that argument would lose. It would lose because most people, without requiring a Supreme Court judgment to guide them, understand that bodies are not merely opinions about bodies, that the reality of male violence against women is not dissolved by a change of identity, and that half the population did not spend a century fighting for legal protections only to be told those protections were a form of prejudice.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· 12d

The apology says they ‘never promoted’ the report. Hmmm - does putting it in a parliamentary briefing not count, then? (A briefing that now cannot be downloaded from their website, surprise, surprise). Oh, well

PARLIAMENTARY BRIEFING
who do not 'pass', non-binary people and gender non-conforming people face the risk of being questioned repeatedly on whether they can use a single sex space.
Amnesty International UK has traced a growing anti-trans movement in the UK which has been organising since 2018 to stop the proposed reform of the Gender Reform Act. Only 3 anti-trans groups existed before 2017 and now there are 51. 'Gender critical' anti-trans narratives have been normalised by the press. Just four major UK newspapers published 17000 articles on so-called 'trans issues' between 2020 and 2025, an average of 9 a day. In the reporting trans people were mostly invisible in issues that affect their lives while prime ministers and party leaders were mentioned consistently suggesting that trans rights have been made a high political priority despite the size of the trans population (less than 0.5% of the population), their role in society and the low public interest in these issues. Indeed, ahead of the 2024 General Election, issues related to trans rights or 'sex' and 'gender' did not figure in the top 16 concerns of voters but were by far the most reported by the media amongst 'culture war' issues.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· 12d

From amnesty’s website, today

AMNESTY
INTERNATIONAL (plus candle wrapped in barbed wire)

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
ISSUES • GET INVOLVED - KNOWLEDGE HUB •
LATEST ABOUT
SHOP v
*O›
DONATE
Home / Latest
An Apology for A Growing Threat briefing, published on 8 July 2026
Posted
31 July 2026
We apologise for the publication of the briefing "A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK." This document should never have been published, and full responsibility for this error rests with Amnesty International UK.
The briefing was taken down within 48 hours of publication, as soon as management were notified of its existence, was not actively promoted, and will not be republished. We have an ongoing internal investigation into how this briefing came to be published.
Whilst we do not share the views of all these organisations, we recognise the concerns raised by those labelled as "anti-rights" in the document. To be clear: this labelling does not represent our institutional position, and we apologise for its inclusion. In particular, we apologise to Beira's Place and other groups, which we categorised as gender critical organisations, which we should not have collectively labelled as anti-rights. We have also taken down an earlier more discursive briefing (entitled Like A Snowball) which also referenced a wide range of organisations.
AlUK holds itself to the highest standards of research, evidence and editorial oversight in all its publications. We have concluded that this briefing fell significantly short of those standards. We will commission an independent external review to learn from this moment. |
AIUK remains fully committed to defending the human rights, dignity, and equality of all marginalised groups, including women, girls, and members of the trans community.
31 July 2026

Kate Birrell@kamabi· 24d

They didn’t like you repeating Amnesty’s slurs. Is Amnesty right, in your opinion, to hold that UK women deserve rights less than African women do?

For Women Scotland
‘Amnesty has campaigned for safe spaces in refugee camps to protect women from sexual violence, and it supports single-sex toilets in schools across sub-Saharan Africa so that girls can manage their menstrual hygiene in safety and privacy. Yet in an astonishing display of hypocrisy, Amnesty argues that Beira’s Place, established by author and women’s rights campaigner JK Rowling is ‘anti-rights’ because it is for women and girls only.’

THIS!

Susan Dalgety
The intellectual void at the heart of Amnesty International. My Scotsman column on Amnesty’s hypocrisy on the rights of women and girls to safe, single sex spaces.

‘Yet for years now, Amnesty has displayed an astonishing contradiction in its own understanding of human rights by singling out British women as hatemongers for standing up for their dignity and rights, while supporting women in Africa arguing for exactly the same thing.

Recent events have caused deep distress to many women defamed by Amnesty, while also exposing the intellectual void at the heart of the organisation. ‘We uncover the truth, and hold the powerful to account’, Amnesty states on its website. Now that the truth about Amnesty is clear, let’s hope its leadership is properly held to account.’

Kate Birrell@kamabi· 29d

Not sure what ‘war-adjacent’ songs you’re talking about. 80 yr olds now would be 9 when Rock Around The Clock first hit the UK charts. And 11 for Elvis’ All Shook Up.

In the UK, Haley's "Rock Around the Clock" was released on Brunswick Records (and Germany
as well), reaching number 17 on the UK Singles Chart in January 1955, four months before it first entered the US pop charts. 21] The song re-entered the UK chart to reach number one in
November 1955 for three weeks, and after a three-week break returned there for a further two weeks in January 1956.!22! It re-entered the charts again in September 1956, reaching number 5. The song was re-issued in 1968,
when it made number 20, and again in 1974, when it reached number 12. The song's original
release saw it become the UK's first million selling single and it went on to sell over 1.4 million copies in total. [231

"Rock Around the Clock" is often cited as the biggest-selling vinyl rock and roll single of all time. The exact number of copies sold has never been audited; however, a figure of at least 25 million was cited by the Guinness Book of World Records in its category "Phonograph records:
Biggest Sellers" from the early 1970s until the 1990s, when the advent of compact discs led to Guinness discontinuing the category. Guinness consistently listed "Rock Around the Clock" as having the highest claim of any pop music recording, coming second in sales only to Bing Crosby's 1942 recording of "White Christmas", which was also listed as having sold 25 million copies. Haley's version alone is estimated to have sold 15 million copies, with a total of 25 million copies counting all versions. 271128. A frequently used piece of promotion regarding the song is that it is said to be playing somewhere in the world every minute of the day.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· 29d

Possibly in this area at Wakehurst? (Tho you’d probably want to confirm before travelling - seems v hard to find specific trees, quite probably too small to come under the Champion Tree umbrella)

Kate Birrell@kamabi· Jul 12

@bellingcat.com, I hope you’re keeping track of Amnesty’s withdrawal of their recent (libellous?) report about anti-rights groups, which the author spoke about at length on your podcast in Feb? Many unhappy orgs, (+ their letters of complaint) are documented in a @newsandpics thread on Twitter

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Home
Briefing review
We have temporarily removed this briefing while it undergoes an internal review.
Amnesty International UK remains committed to researching and campaigning on human rights issues, incorporating our long standing and explicit commitment to gender justice, including the rights of women, LGBTQI and trans people.

Gethin Chamberlain @newsandpics
For Women Scotland posted at length about the Amnesty report and also issued a press statement.

‘For Women Scotland is only ‘anti-rights’ if you don’t consider women to be entitled to any rights in law or public life.

It’s a sad state of affairs that Amnesty has sunk so low as to defame prominent women’s organisations, including a rape crisis centre and support networks for abused wives and children.

We won a landmark case on women’s rights at the Supreme Court where Amnesty intervened with their best legal arguments against us. That the judges were unpersuaded should have given Amnesty pause for thought. Instead they have chosen to launch an ill-advised attack, and one that surely risks attracting the attention of the Charity Commission.

For Women Scotland @ForWomenScot

Bellingcat, which claims to specialise in investigation and fact-checking, allowed this woman to spread her vicious libel about feminist groups and lie about history and the law on their podcast.

Her position at @AmnestyUK provides the cover for this.

For Women Scotland @ForWomenScot

Bellingcat and Amnesty: if you are going to accuse women of being part of a global conspiracy awash with evil money, you had better back it up.

Snide innuendoes about Trump or only being ‘fronted’ by feminists or LGB activists to disguise our ‘evangelical’ intent doesn’t cut it.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· Jul 4

And if you’re all so offended/insulted/feel misrepresented by me saying you’re pro breaking the law, how come you all blocked me, rather than telling me how justified you are in doing it? ‘Right side of history’ vs Women’s Rights side of history We will see…

Recent post by @thatmarkelliott
‘Most significant social progress has at some point involved people breaking the law.’

Kate Birrell@kamabi· Jul 4

My mistake, 2 blocks now, and you’ve muted me too. I guess it was really unacceptable of me to mention that many BSkyers are happy to break the law. (You could all have argued your justification - but it’s easier to block/mute, right? Why get into the whole ‘Destroy women’s rights? Us?’ thing)

A post saying ‘Most significant social progress has at some point involved people breaking the law.
And a response from Alan saying ‘Well, yes’, with an image of Votes for Women campaigners.
Which is ironic, given that what they are not prepared to even talk about is that the position they advocate for aims to REMOVE women’s rights.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· Jun 19

Go, CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women) 1979

Amongst further relevant provisions of CEDAW, Article 3 provides that:
"States Parties shall take in all fields, in particular in the political, social, economic and cultural fields, all appropriate measures, including legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men."
Although the position has been argued for the Scottish Government in litigation, there is currently no legal basis for the view that CEDAW extends in the scope of its protection to biological males. If it did, CEDAW would be deprived of its central purpose and the rights it seeks to establish for women of all meaning.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· Jun 19

Of possible relevance as to how UK courts are viewing Article 8 rights (from today’s judgement in the Scottish Courts)

[181] All prisoners have rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Trans prisoners have rights under Article 8, but this does not extend to a right to be
accommodated in a prison for the opposite biological sex. Article 8 rights are qualified
and there is a justification for maintaining sex segregation in prisons. The statutory scheme imposes a bright line rule and sex segregation in prisons does not admit of exceptions on the basis of Article 8 rights.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· Jun 18

And here is ECHR Article 8 in its full glory. I don’t think an ECHR court case about the CoP would be the slam-dunk that ID says, given the final permitted exception, however much effort has been expended on research. (And any human rights lawyer advising so may fairly be accused of bias, imho)

European Convention on Human Rights - Article 8
Country: Austria
Article 8
1 Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2 There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· Jun 5

Yes, both direct and indirect sex discrimination under the EA. (Iirc, the SC said one aim was to make the EA coherent, or words to that effect)

Sex Matters
We have a hearing in the High Court on 3rd and 4th November which will answer the question about whether the City of London’s policy is lawful

Sex Matters has won its appeal against the High Court's refusal in February to allow us to challenge the City of London's gender-identity policy at the bathing ponds on Hampstead Heath.
The Court of Appeal recognised that "expert charities" such as Sex Matters have standing to bring claims for judicial review and called the City's arguments in defence of its policy "brief and unpersuasive".
The judge, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing, granted our request for permission for judicial review, and is sending our case on to be heard in full.

Our case has three grounds. We say that the City Corporation's decisions were unlawful, because the arrangements inherently amount to and inevitably give rise to unlawful discrimination:
1. direct sex discrimination against individual women by denying them access to the Men's Pond and against men by denying them access to the Ladies' Pond
2. direct sex discrimination against individual women by providing a "women-only service" where they are exposed to the presence of men when they are in a state of partial or full nudity
3. indirect sex discrimination against women because the arrangements for running the ponds put women as a group at a particular disadvantage compared with men.
We say it would be lawful to operate the bathing ponds as separate-sex services but the City Corporation decided not to do so and instead expressly disavowed any reliance on the single-sex exceptions under the Equality Act.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

Xander King @xanderking.bsky.social • 3d
Do you think you're coming across well here?

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

YESSS! This keeps being applicable, then I forget about it, then I think, actually it IS this again, isn’t it? 😩

Schrodinger's Trans:
Phenomenon in which women's spaces, sports, language, etc are so irrelevant and unimportant that women shouldn't mind giving them up while simultaneously being so consequential and necessary that men who call themselves women will die if they can't have them.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

You don’t ’do’ history, do you? The law has been re-stated; even if you don’t like it, it’s the law of the land. And like I said before, attitudes are not moving in your direction, even tho you choose to ignore that fact. Your specialist subject seems to be ignoring facts. 2020 vs 2024

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

Let me introduce you to the concept of autogynephilia, which helps explain 1/ why some transwomen are PARTICULARLY attracted to wanking in our loos and 2/ is also another really good reason for women to want them not to be there. Fetish-free zone, please. Can apparently be fuelled by porn

Autogynephilia is a term used to describe a condition where a person, typically a male, experiences sexual arousal at the thought of themselves as a woman. This concept was
introduced by sexologist Ray Blanchard and is part of his typology of transsexualism, which classifies transgender women into two main groups: homosexual transsexuals and autogynephilic transsexuals.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

Part 2

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

Talking about toilets and creeps… why women aren’t backing off, and shouldn’t back off (it could have been a child there when this happened)

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

Do keep up. The Olympics now care; people started caring about prisons when they saw a man start id-ing as trans AFTER being charged with 2 rapes; referred to as ‘she’ in court; sent to a female prison - Isla Bryson. Attitudes are changing - looks like people may be bothered, y’know 2020 vs 2024

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 31

The Workplace (Health Safety and Welfare) Regs 1992 are what govern workplaces (clue is in the title). Since 1992. Relevant sections 👇🏻 (It would be of course open to you to campaign for an additional para, re facilities for transfolx - might be better expenditure of energy than current squawking)

Sanitary conveniences
20.-(1) Suitable and sufficient sanitary conveniences shall be provided at readily accessible places.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), sanitary conveniences shall not be suitable unless—
(a) the rooms containing them are adequately ventilated and lit;
(b) they and the rooms containing them are kept in a clean and orderly condition; and
(c) separate rooms containing conveniences are provided for men and women except where and so far as each convenience is in a separate room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside.
(3) It shall be sufficient compliance with the requirement in paragraph (1) to provide sufficient sanitary conveniences in a workplace which is not a new workplace, a modification, an extension or a conversion and which, immediately before this regulation came into force in respect of it, was subject to the provisions of the Factories Act 1961, if sanitary conveniences are provided in accordance with the provisions of Part Il of Schedule 1.

Washing facilities
21.-(1) Suitable and sufficient washing facilities, including showers if required by the nature of the work or for health reasons, shall be provided at readily accessible places.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), washing facilities shall not be suitable unless-
(a) they are provided in the immediate vicinity of every sanitary convenience, whether or not provided elsewhere as well;
(b) they are provided in the vicinity of any changing rooms required by these Regulations, whether or not provided elsewhere as well;
(c) they include a supply of clean hot and cold, or warm, water (which shall be running water so far as is practicable);
(d) they include soap or other suitable means of cleaning;
(e) they include towels or other suitable means of drying;
(f) the rooms containing them are sufficiently ventilated and lit;
(g) they and the rooms containing them are kept in a clean and orderly condition; and
(h) separate facilities are provided for men and women, except where and so far as they are provided in a room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside and the facilities in each such room are intended to be used by only one person at a time.
(3) Paragraph (2)(h) shall not apply to facilities which are provided for washing hands, forearms and face only.

Facilities for changing clothing
where—
24.-(1) Suitable and sufficient facilities shall be provided for any person at work in the workplace to change clothing in all cases
(a) the person has to wear special clothing for the purpose of work; and
(b) the person can not, for reasons of health or propriety, be expected to change in another room.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the facilities mentioned in that paragraph shall not be suitable unless they include separate facilities for, or separate use of facilities by, men and women where necessary for reasons of propriety [F1 and the facilities are easily accessible, of sufficient capacity and provided with seating]

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

This theory

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

Back in the day… (Found myself looking up the meaning of volte-face, just to check. I think I’m good)

Ian Dunt Tweet from 10/06/2020, 20.24
Whatever people’s views on this issue, and regardless of whether they agree with what Rowling says here, this is a reasonable and entirely legitimate argument. She does not deserve the hateful commentary directed at her.

Subsequent tweet.
As it happens, and not that it matters, I disagree with a few bits of it. But I hugely admire her bravery, kindness and independence of mind

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

Nobody really talks about the Stonewall Diversity Champions Scheme now. It seems to explain why a lot of people believed the Equality Law 2010 said something it never did. It advocated ‘going above and beyond legal compliance’ in using ‘gender identity’ in policies. (A Bailey’s witness statement)

(271)
(272)
The Stonewall Inclusive Policy Toolkit was provided to Garden Court on 16
January 2019 (Bundle Page 1200). It was provided again on 17 September 2019 (Bundle Page 1758). The documents appear to me to demonstrate that Stonewall sought to use their Diversity Champion scheme, including in this instance with Garden Court, to influence internal organisational policies to reflect and embed their position and not the actual current legal framework under the Equality Act.
This is demonstrated in the removal of the word "mother" from policies, but also in the "scoping" that was apparently prepared by Stonewall before a
- Claimant's Witness Statement -
- 14 April 2022 - Page 86 of 167
meeting with Garden Court (Bundle Page 1248). The Stonewall Inclusive Policy Toolkit that was issued to Garden Court also advocated "going above and beyond legal compliance" in using "gender identity" in policies rather that the statutory language of "gender reassignment" which Stonewall referred to as only "a very narrow definition of what it means to be trans" Bundle Page
4517. This message is reinforced at Bundle Page 4464 (Bullet point 3).

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

Interesting. So did I. 1/ Stonewall Chair ‘22 2/ ONS discussions re Census with SW (will post link) 3/ Best selling book, written by multiple women about their experiences of this ‘debate’ K Stock? J Phoenix? Allison Bailey? fairplayforwomen.com/whos-behind-...

For Women Scotland
@ForWomenScot • 01/11/2022
So the new stonewall chair doesn't actually wasn't to talk to the bad women who disagree with him? That really wasn't how it came across on Sun.
Seems were back to #NoDebate & abusing lesbians for denying the dignity of males by, um, refusing to have sex with them.....
& lain Anderson & @iain _w_anderson 31/10/2022
There are many new and constructive conversations to be had, but my view is clear: Stonewall will not invest time arguing with groups who are working to remove trans people's rights or deny them their dignity.'

ONS allowed Stonewall to impose its #NODEBATE tactic
Following Freedom of Information requests, it can now be revealed that before a roundtable to hear the views of ALL stakeholders Stonewall gave ONS this advice:
Stonewall: "I'd strongly recommend that careful thought is applied to how the ONS can practically ensure that, depending on who is present at the roundtable, this is not a hostile environment for trans attendees"
To which the ONS dutifully agreed and offered Stonewall a private meeting ahead of the roundtable to hear more of their thoughts and concerns:
ONS staff member: "I fully empathise with your words that ensuring that a hostile environment is not created and can reassure you that ONS will consider very carefully how the meeting will be conducted. I will also arrange from a colleague to take a call with yourself ahead of this event to run through your thoughts or any concerns you may have."
The following day all 20 attendees were informed by email that they would be allocated just 3 minutes each to briefly outline their position in turn. At the roundtable there was no "discussion" or free exchange of ideas among stakeholders.
ONS is a Stonewall champion.
In March 2021 a Freedom of Information request was made for any correspondence between
ONS and Stonewall "relating to conditions the ONS was expected to fulfil, including policies the ONS was advised it was required to change, in order to meet any standards set by Stonewall".
ONS, the public body we trust with data, has, it says, lost all correspondence due to "staff changes".

The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht: Voices from the front-line of Scotland's battle for women's rights
THE
SUNDAY TIMES BESTSELLER
THE WOMEN WOULDN'T WHEESHT
EDITED BY SUSAN D
VOICES FROM THE FRONT-LINE OF SCOTLAND'S BATTLE FOR WOMEN'S RIGHTS
"A GENUINELY FANTASTIC BOOK
HADLEY FREEMAN
"THIS IS WHAT FEMINISM LOOKS LIKE' CRITIC
ALGETY 8.LUCY HUNTER

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

Oh, I identify as a realist, particularly on 🦋. Expect not to be heard by people of your persuasion. Because when I talk about women’s rights, I (+JKR!) am told I’m denying the existence of transfolx. So people won’t engage, which actually means ‘No Debate’. Sophistry Don’t deny MY reality!

The background to the "No Debate" slogan
Since the early 2000s, many in the trans community have taken the position that they will not discuss the validity or existence of trans identities; 'no debate' became the shorthand slogan for this position.
Over the years, the meaning of that slogan has been intentionally misappropriated to suggest that trans people and their allies were refusing to collaborate, compromise or discuss policy affecting trans people.

XX
For Women Scotland @ForWomenScot • 27/04/2025
Replying to @sharrond62 and @RestIsPolitics
It's exhausting, isn't it?
2018 us: Here are some important studies and some potential human rights issues, as well as concerns re lawfulness. Can we chat?
Them: TWAW! They should be running rape crisis centres, cycling on the women's team, and giving you smear tests!
Us: That sounds a bit excessive. We are not here to quibble about toilets, but could you at least promise you won't put a rapist in a women's jail?
Them: F off, bigots!
Us: we will have to go to court if you continue to put out unlawful information or put women at risk.
2025 them: How dare they get judges to restate the law?! Why couldn't you just compromise, witches?!
Us: <sigh>

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

You have a perfect right to disagree with my answer. But not to tell me I didn’t - that would be misrepresentation. Surely not, on lovely 🦋? Shocked face. Well, actually, not-shocked face

Kate Birrell @kamabi.bsky.social • 3h
I think the headline misrepresented the story; and that multiple media have been well-captured to push a pro-trans viewpoint, and don't need further assistance from voices of reason, as I have hitherto assumed you to be.
How else to explain the lack of coverage of this?
(see also Rob Burley)
We now know of at least eight cases in the last three years in which a senior Pride officer has tured out to be a paedophile. Most of these
Someone on Mumsnet nails it
There's about 150 main pride events and another 100 or so subsidlary pride events
entirely promotional
NO now know taste sonor on were bacooles
Stephen Ireland
Andrew Way
Jalled for 26 years
serous chosent abuse olen Aror buria chair, an cowations was etell
whereas fare
Tina' McCombe
I've worked for a company that had a few thousand employees and over 150
If 4 of the division heads and 4 other senior employees had been convicted of
But, shockingly, this is how our national broadcaster covers this story.
Ashley Boyd
Wille Pie
Cared westkuse
David Sutton
^ ALT
ALT
3
...
Kate Birrell @kamabi.bsky.social • 3h
That you believe that of JKR shows how much you've bought the line that to be pro-woman is to be by definition anti-trans.
(The same line that says there is no conflict between trans rights and women's rights, and that women lose nothing, why all the fuss). I see the contradiction, don't you?
...

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

I think the headline misrepresented the story; and that multiple media have been well-captured to push a pro-trans viewpoint, and don’t need further assistance from voices of reason, as I have hitherto assumed you to be. How else to explain the lack of coverage of this? 👇🏻(see also Rob Burley)

ripx4nutmeg @ripx4nutmeg. 3d
We now know of at least eight cases in the last three years in which a senior Pride officer has turned out to be a paedophile. Most of these stories were ignored by BBC News, which has a Pride section which is entirely promotional
We now know that at least 8 senior Pride officers were pedophiles

Stephen Ireland
Andrew Way

Founder of Pride in Surrey
Jailed for 24 years (plus 6 years on
extended licence) for several offences, including child rape
'Tina' McCombe
Founder of Belfast
Pride
Procured a child he met on a bus to work in a brothel
Founder of Welshpool
Pride
Jailed for 34 months after being caught in a paedophile hunters'
sting
Jake Radwell
Founder of People's Pride Southampton
Ran a children's party without disclosing to parents that he was a convicted sex offender

'Amelia' Connolly
Officer at Stirling Pride
Pled guilty to making sexualised images of children
'Kizzy' Wimbridge
Operations lead at
Newbury Pride
Charged with serious child sex offences against a child under the age of 13

Ashley Boyd
Chair of Swindon and
Wiltshire Pride
Carried out testicular examinations on multiple children for sexual gratification
David Sutton
Senior volunteer at
Pride in Surrey
Jailed for 54 months for numerous paedophile offences

ripx4nutmeg @ripx4nutmeg•3d
Replying to @ducksandchucks and @topgirls
Someone on Mumsnet nails it
...
There's about 150 main pride events and another 100 or so subsidiary pride events like Trans Pride Southampton.
So let's say there are 250 Pride events.
On average, each Pride event has about 10 officers, ie a chair, operations lead etc.
So let's say there are about 2,500 pride officers.
In just the last three years, four of those events' founders have been found guilty of serious child sexual abuse offences. Another four (a chair, an operations lead etc have been convicted or charged with serious child sexual abuse offences.
l've worked for a company that had a few thousand employees and over 150 divisions.
If 4 of the division heads and 4 other senior employees had been convicted of paedophilia I'd expect it to be all over the news and our CEO to be issuing us with regular statements as to what is going on.
But, shockingly, this is how our national broadcaster covers this story.
Mayor enters Pride debate after ambulance service withdraws
from event
"Homophobic letter shows why we still need Pride'
Birmingham Pride 2026: All you need to know
City Pride event faces 'financial challenges'
Ambulance service will not participate in Pride
BBC radio presenter to host city's
Pride
Pride chiefs say council funding ban sends message
"Nobody priced out' as Pride event made free
Wolverhampton - 15 May

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

C’mon Steve, you’re better than this cheap crack. Appearances to the contrary, not everyone on 🦋 believes everything is always JKR’s fault. Particularly not the paranoid delusions of clearly mentally-ill men in Ireland…

At the time, Bailey was under 'the delusional belief that the victim was a predatory paedophile, his lawyer, Patrick Gageby SC, told the court.
He believed that Marie, who is living with dementia, was a man dressed as a woman.
Bailey knocked Marie to the ground and threw her into a wheelie bin before applying pressure to the lia, CCTV footage showed.

Kate Birrell@kamabi· May 27

bsky.app/profile/scot...