Transgenderism as a PC ideology: Denying Nature

Transgenderism as a PC ideology: Denying Nature

July 3, 2023/ by Richard Knight


Transgenderism can be seen as a politically correct ideology along with feminism, anti-racism and the others. The main things it has in common with them are a hatred and denial of nature and an impertinent urge to overcome it.

Feminism against nature

Feminists’ hatred and denial of nature are seen in their refusal to accept that the sexes are simply different. On the contrary, they say, they are essentially the same. Anything a man can do, a woman can, and so on. They back this up not by pointing to facts but with a taboo against saying the opposite. Like the exponents of every politically correct ideology, they have a special attack word for dissenters. In fact, they have two. Should you have the temerity to ignore the taboo, you will be called a sexist or a misogynist.

For some reason these techniques persuade many that what feminists say is true. Equally importantly, they silence those who are not persuaded, leaving feminists a clear field.

With no dissent to be heard, feminists proceed to ask why the sexes are in different circumstances. Why are women rarely found in leadership positions, they wonder, when the idea that men are more likely to compete for such positions and more suited to them is just a myth? Men must be keeping women down.

Feminists reason that to undo this injustice society must be reshaped to look as it would have done had they been correct, with women in half of all leadership positions. If the principle of equal treatment must be disregarded to achieve this, so be it. Thus, having denied nature, they seek to overcome it, or to give the appearance of having overcome it, at no matter what cost to society.

But then, having filled half the leadership positions in a certain field with women, they ask themselves why they should stop there. Why leave the other half to the oppressor? So they carry on, resulting in a fact such as that in 2018 almost every top position concerning the British police was occupied by a woman. This included London’s senior officer (Cressida Dick), the Director General of the National Crime Agency (Lynne Owens), the head of the National Police Chiefs’ Council (Sarah Thornton), the chair of the College of Policing (Shirley Pearce), the president of the Police Superintendents Association (Irene Curtis) and the chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (Anne Owers).[1]

About the only exceptions were the chief constables outside London, of whom by 2020 still only two out of 46 were female. Yet just eighteen months later there were fifteen female chief constables.[2] It is surprising even that as many as thirteen chief constables retired in so short a period. For them all to have been succeeded by women was proof indeed that women can not only do anything men can do but are likely to be able to do it considerably better. Or perhaps it just proved that if no man is on the shortlist, a woman will get the job.

Anti-racism against nature

Anti-racism proceeds just like feminism except that this time it is the races that are supposedly the same. The doctrine of essential racial equality might not appear to be true, but we must assent to it for it too is protected by a taboo. Point to a difference between the races, however evident, and anti-racism’s attack word will be attached to you: you will be called a racist. Again, with any dissent from its basic proposition stifled, we are asked to explain the fact that the races are in different circumstances, the only available explanation being that Whites have been oppressing Blacks. And again, the solution is not the removal of the discrimination but its reversal. Blacks must be favoured over Whites.

Thus feminism and anti-racism use the same playbook. They both employ the idea of essential equality to deny nature before seeking to reshape it to fit their Procrustean bed. Is it too tall? Chop its feet off! Too short? Put it on the rack!

Transgenderism against nature

That transgenderism hates nature and refuses to submit to it is obvious. It finds the most basic fact of life — that nature makes us male or female — too much to bear. What if I didn’t want to be male? Did nature think of that? It is time it learned that if I choose to become a woman I will jolly well do it.

How? Well, first I am going to adopt a philosophy that tells me that whatever I say is true: the philosophy of word magic. I will call myself a woman, which will make me one. Just in case, I will then embark on a lifelong course of cross-sex hormones and undergo innumerable surgical procedures that will make me resemble a woman or at least make me look a lot more like one than I do now.

What is more, I will get my medical insurance to pay for all this on the basis that my dissatisfaction with my sex is a psychiatric condition. At the same time, I will insist that I have no psychiatric condition but am simply an example of normal human variation. Then everyone will see that I am as much a woman as any woman and that there is nothing wrong with me. It was nature that got it wrong. As I might put it: “I was born with the wrong genitals. … I had a birth defect that I got sorted with surgery and medication”.[3] How incompetent of nature to give me that birth defect! How wrong nature was if it didn’t think I could get it sorted with surgery and medication! It must be feeling pretty silly now.

Punishments for thinkers

No politically correct ideology can tolerate considered thought, as we see in the case of transgenderism in some events from the last few years. In 2019 the contract of a woman named Maya Forstater was not renewed after she tweeted that “transgender women” were men.[4] When she contested what was in effect her sacking, the judge ruled against her, finding that her opinion was not compatible with human dignity.[5]

In the midst of this, J.K. Rowling spoke up for her, saying that biological sex existed. For this she received a “barrage of criticism”, yet she refused to apologise, said the news outlet RT in wonderment.[6] Six months later she mocked an NGO for using the phrase “people who menstruate”, asking whether there had not once been a single word for such people, which she seemed to remember had begun with “w”. This brought another “avalanche” of denunciation down on her, with someone tweeting that her words were “causing unimaginable pain”. Well, of course they were! How can a transgender person be expected to encounter a cryptic reference to the word “woman” without suffering unimaginable pain? Another commenter called J.K. Rowling a hate-filled weirdo.

In October 2021 Cambridge University’s Students Union issued a guide to spotting “Terfs”, these being feminists who think that there are two sexes and that one cannot switch from one to the other.[7] Predictably, the guide indulged in projection, referring to “Terf ideology” as though it were the views of Terfs that were  ideological rather than its own. It stated that Terfs had a “deep hatred for trans women”, when it was the guide that was spreading hatred, of Terfs. It alleged that Terfs had links to the far right, when there is nothing political about their position, in contrast to the far-left position of the guide.[8]

The same week, activists at Sussex University launched a campaign to get a philosophy professor fired. Kathleen Stock had asked whether a person’s gender identity could have more social significance than their sex and had doubted whether men should be allowed in women’s changing rooms. Students put up posters saying “IT’S NOT A DEBATE. IT’S NOT FEMINISM. … IT’S JUST TRANSPHOBIA … FIRE KATHLEEN STOCK.” She received death threats and was advised not to go on campus without bodyguards. Her union offered her no support but expressed “solidarity” with “trans and nonbinary communities”. Two weeks later she resigned.

What was noticeable about her defenders was their feebleness. The commentator Paul Embery said that she had merely defended the principle of biological sex and women’s right to single-sex spaces. Women’s concerns about having men in their changing rooms were perfectly legitimate. Transgender activists were trying to get everyone to take their view, he said. But biological sex is not a principle to which one might adhere or not; it is a basic fact of life, and women’s right to women-only changing rooms should be beyond dispute. Instead of saying that transgender activists were trying to get others to take their view, as though it were a view that could deserve respect, Paul Embery should have said that they were trying to get people to affirm a lie.[9] A philosopher named Arif Ahmed stated that Kathleen Stock’s persecution was making it impossible for “one side of a very important public policy debate” to speak. Apparently we had reached the point where the efforts of men to get into women’s changing rooms counted as a contribution to an important debate.

Transgender language rules

No PC ideology can leave the language alone, for unless interfered with, it has a way of reflecting reality. A previous article gave some examples of linguistic engineering aimed at abolishing sex–related words and the associated concepts with them. To give a few more examples, in 2023 Oxfam published an Inclusive Language Guide that illustrated its “commitment to gender justice”, defined as “full equality between women and men (including trans men and women) as well as non-binary people”.[10]

According to the guide, we must not speak of husbands or wives but must call them partners or spouses, nor must we use the words “mother” or “father”, which would assume “the adoption of gendered roles by transgender parents”. We must be aware that patriarchal systems perpetuate sexist and hierarchical power relations and legitimise “discrimination against and exclusion of women and gender non-conforming people”. Moreover, we must be aware that the word “people” itself, although it might not seem to specify a sex, can still express a bias because “in the context of a world based on patriarchal systems, ‘people’ is often misunderstood as only referring to men”. If we must talk about “people”, therefore, we should do it in a way that makes the word “as inclusive as possible”.

When it comes to personal pronouns, the guide tells us not to assume that it is correct to “describe someone as ‘he’ or ‘she’ based on their name or physical appearance”. The person might prefer to be called “they” or “ze”.

Like the British Medical Association (referred to in the previous article), Oxfam advises against using the term “expectant mother”. Not only does the expression “reinforce gender stereotypes”; the woman might not wish to continue her pregnancy. It does allow that pregnant people are women, however, although if we stress this fact we might be excluding “gender non-binary, trans men, or gender non-conforming people”.

The words “transgendered” and “transsexual” must be avoided in case someone referred to in this way doesn’t like it. “In a society that upholds the human rights to equality, freedom of expression, privacy and self-determination, we must respect how people wish to be referred to.” We must take an approach that “actively includes transgender people”. Ideally, “a trans-inclusive approach will identify the ways that trans people are specifically impacted by discrimination”. Presumably, then, rather than calling transgender people transgender, we should call them victims of discrimination in various ways that we will proceed to specify, who might be mistakenly referred to as transgender by the unenlightened.

Transgenderism against science

From the postmodern philosophy that gives it its belief in word magic, transgenderism also gets its belief in the priority of subjectivity over objectivity. But since it exists in a society that values science, it must do as other politically correct ideologies do and pretend that its dogmas are scientific, as when claiming that the evidence “strongly suggests” that gender identity is “usually established … by the age of two to three”;[11] that “the expression of transgender identity … is a healthy, appropriate and typical aspect of human development”;[12] or that “From a medical perspective, the appropriate determinant of sex is gender identity”. The last comment was made by a professor at Duke University School of Medicine, who meant that the best way for a doctor to establish a person’s sex is by asking them. “It is counter to medical science”, she continued, “to use chromosomes, hormones, internal reproductive organs, external genitalia, or secondary sex characteristics to override gender identity for purposes of classifying someone as male or female”.[13]

Of course, deception itself is characteristic of political correctness, on which subject it might be worth pointing out that a politically correct statement is necessarily untrue. This is because true statements, meaning empirically correct ones, can look after themselves. Only statements that are empirically incorrect need to be made correct politically.

Transgenderism and childism

A little-mentioned ideology of political correctness is childism, which transgenderism does not so much resemble as incorporate. Childism inverts the natural order by transferring the authority of adults to children, as seen one day in 1998 when BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour looked at the question of what to do with the children in the summer holidays. It didn’t ask parents for their ideas but asked a panel of children. Already in the 1970s Kahlil Gibran’s book The Prophet (1923) was popular, mainly for its advice to parents: “You may strive to be like [your children], but seek not to make them like you”. This gave rise to the idea that adults have more to learn from children than children have to learn from adults.

The children’s author Cressida Cowell expressed her childism when she wrote in 2020 that children “are the most creative people in the world”, raising the question of why Pope Julius II commissioned Michelangelo to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel when he could have got a better result by commissioning a child. Cressida Cowell hoped that children’s “magical powers of creativity, intelligence and empathy” would make them “come up with solutions to the political and scientific challenges facing the world” — not as adults, mark you, when they would have lost their magical powers, but now, as children.

But childism had reached its apogee the year before, when an assembly of world leaders asked a child to tell them what to do. This was at the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York, which Greta Thunberg, aged sixteen, was invited to address. Rising to her role as leader of leaders, the pigtailed adolescent expressed her advice by asking her audience how they dared to do this or that.

The natural complement of treating children like adults is to treat adults like children. This is the essence of “dumbing down”, which first appeared in the 1990s. Many adults responded by starting not only to talk and think like children but also to dress like them, going about in track suits that resembled romper suits. The infantilisation of adults has continued ever since.

Transgenderism incorporates childism by telling teachers not to talk to transgender children but to listen to them, and not to lead them but to follow. Thus in 2014, East Sussex County Council Children’s Services issued the following guidance to teachers: “Listen to the [transgender] child … and wherever possible follow their lead and preferences”.[14] Similarly, an American campaigning organisation says that “the most important thing we can do is listen to what our [transgender] children are telling us”.[15] Adults should learn from children, thinks Diane Ehrensaft, director of mental health at the Child and Adolescent Gender Center at Benioff Children’s Hospital at the University of California, San Francisco. Children are “our best teachers”.[16] The logical conclusion of this will see groups of grown-ups filing into the classroom to be instructed by infants wearing mortarboards.

Transgenderism requires doctors to accept not only a transgender child’s self-diagnosis but also its prescribed course of treatment. Medical professionals do as they are told for fear of their patients declaring themselves unsatisfied with the service they have received or accusing them of “transphobia”.[17]


If one views political correctness as a collection of ideologies, then transgenderism is just one of these. All tend to the destruction of our societies and culture; most pit themselves against nature. This suggests that their originators are conducting a war against God, for to say that something is as it is by nature is only to say that that is the way God made it. The rebels’ chosen battlefield is the West, where political correctness is mainly found. White people are their particular enemies on earth. If they can defeat us here, they will take themselves to have defeated God. At least, that is one way of looking at the situation.

[1] The Director of Public Prosecutions was also a woman: Alison Saunders, who was found to have been suppressing evidence of men’s innocence in rape cases.

[2] History Debunked, July 8th 2021, “Women in command; female leaders in the police and army”, Including Wales, after another six months there were 19 out 49 (Telegraph, Jan. 9th 2023, “Record 40 per cent of chief constables are now women amid anti-misogyny drive”,

[3] This was a man calling himself Bethany Black in conversation with Helen Lewis (New Statesman, Sept. 13th 2013, “What makes you a man or a woman anyway?”

[4] Maya Forstater made her comments, not while at work, during a discussion of possible reforms to the Gender Recognition Act.

[5] Her appeal, heard in 2021, found that her position was “worthy of respect in a democratic society”.

[6] RT.  Jun 7th 2020. “‘There used to be a word for people who menstruate’: JK Rowling gets denounced as transphobe AGAIN”.

[7] Telegraph, Oct. 13th 2021, “Cambridge University ‘Terf-spotting’ guide condemned as a ‘witch-finder’s charter’”, reproduced at

[8] MailOnline, “Cambridge Students’ Union publishes pro-trans guide claiming that being a woman is not just down to ‘biological sex’ — and accuses feminists opposing such views as being linked to ‘far right’”,

[9] GB News, Oct. 17th 2021, “Kathleen Stock: Paul Embery says abuse of academic after alleged ‘transphobic’ remark is ‘appalling’”,

[10] For an overview of the guide, see Oxfam, March 2023, “Inclusive Language Guide”, For the guide itself see

[11] Ryan T. Anderson, 2019 (2018), When Harry Became Sally, New York: Encounter Books. 2019, ibid., pp. 32-33.

[12] Ryan Anderson 2019, ibid., p. 38.

[13] Ryan Anderson 2019, ibid., p. 30.

[14] East Sussex County Council Children’s Services, Oct. 2014, “Trans* Inclusion Schools Toolkit”, (file no longer there).

[15] PFLAG, quoted by Ryan Anderson 2019, op. cit., p. 35.

[16] Quoted by Ryan Anderson 2019, ibid., pp 35-36.

[17] The Heritage Foundation, March 28th 2019, “The Medical Harms of Hormonal and Surgical Interventions for Gender Dysphoric Children”,

Free Speech Activist Gordon Watson — Incremental Shoving Back Against the ‘Trans’ Insanity


Free Speech Activist Gordon Watson — Incremental Shoving Back Against the ‘Trans’ Insanity


I had a mind to drive for Pearson College, which is just around the corner from me in Metchosin.  It would have been a good gig … but their policy on GENDER DIVERSITY is so bad it’s laughable … insanity writ large.

>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<
September 10 2019

Pearson College UWCAttention :
Tyrone Pile ; Deana Cuthbert ;  Shelley Seysener ; Susan Duffel-Warthe ; Reese Harrison

from : Gordon Watson
This is my notice that I hereby withdraw my application to be an on-call driver for the College.Having read the documents delivered by surface mail,  it is clear that my own position within the so-called “trans” controversy is antithetical to your  GENDER DIVERSITY POLICY    to the extent that I am not able to co-operate with such insanity.
I am a long-time political activist, lately on the front line of court actions to do with the “transgender” nonsense being pretext for outlawing freedom of expression.   I could submit a few hundred pages explaining why the whole “trans”  thing is a textbook example of mass hysteria, but one quick overview will suffice :   following by regular surface mail will be the essay   “Transgender is a fad worth rejecting”

I recommend that the College make  “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds” by Charles Mackay,  required reading for all-concerned … it’s the classic work explaining how human beings go crazy in herds, then regain common sense one person at a time.

As King Solomon said “this too shall pass”.  Meanwhile,  the College better pay attention to the lawsuits now underway in which parents of children who suffered at the hands of quacks in the ‘transgender’ racket,  are suing those practitioners and also the institutions which enabled medical malpractice.    As I write this, a lawsuit is being prepared by parents of children who were in care of the BC Children’s Hospital with that cause of action.  Being in the place of a parent for its students,  Pearson College has the duty to inform thy-self as to ALL of the readily available information on this topic before presuming the science is settled ; it most certainly is not.  In light of expert opinion on the harms done to individuals who once did present as “transgender”, then regained their sanity,   the College ought to get professional legal advice re    counselling an indictable offence /  ‘criminal negligence’

Yours truly
Gordon Watson

Radical trans activist hits Christian with $35K ‘human rights’ complaint for injured ‘dignity’

Bill Whatcott. David Cooke via YouTube
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin


Radical trans activist hits Christian with $35K ‘human rights’ complaint for injured ‘dignity’

PETITION: Tell Rights Tribunal to THROW OUT cases of trans ‘woman’ demanding females wax his genitals Sign the petition here.

VANCOUVER, British Columbia, July 24, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – A Canadian trans activist who has drawn global headlines for demanding female beauticians wax his male genitals and attempting to organize LGBT “swim parties” for children is now going after Christian activist Bill Whatcott for publicly referring to him as male.

Jonathan “Jessica” Yaniv is a man who “identifies” as a woman. He recently rose to prominence for filing 16 complaints against local beauticians who offer bikini waxes to actual women but have refused to wax his male genitals, then for seeking permission from the Township of Langley, British Columbia, for “LGBTQ2S” groups to hold topless-optional swimming parties for “all people aged 12+,” with parents and guardians barred from attending.

Whatcott is a Christian social conservative activist whom the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal fined $55,000 in March for distributing a flyer identifying trans activist and former political candidate Ronan “Morgane” Oger as a “biological male,” which the court deemed an affront to Oger’s “dignity, feelings and self-respect.”

In a post Tuesday at the Free North America forums, Whatcott revealed that Yaniv is seeking $35,000 for “gender identity or expression” discrimination for publicly referring to him in sidewalk preaching and a flyer as a “biological male” and a “transvestite deviant” looking to “prey on vulnerable biological women.”

The complaint alleges that by stating the facts of Yaniv’s gender and expressing a negative opinion about his public activities, Whatcott has caused him “immense injury to dignity and self respect,” “incited hatred towards myself,” and “clearly intended to injure and, regardless of his intent, did injure the my privacy, dignity, and economic interests by calling attention to my sex and gender identity in a hateful manner.”

“God has created two sexes, and your gender identity should align with reality,” Whatcott declares in the video the complaint highlights. “If you choose to believe something fake, if you choose to believe you’re a woman when in fact you were born a biological male, I feel sorry for you. But you have no right to impose that falsehood on me. You have no right to impose that falsehood on other Canadians.”

“Really, these so-called human rights complaints are all an offense to real democratic principles and when it comes to complaints involving so-called transgender complainants the process is an offense to reality itself,” Whatcott responded to the complaint. “What is clear to me is if these frivilous (sic) and vexatious complaints continue (and all indicators are the BCHRT is happy to spend taxpayer’s money entertaining them) the ability to use peaceful speech to challenge the mostly fraudulent claims of the LGBT agenda, especially as it pertains to so-called gender theory will be gutted.

“No doubt Yaniv and the BCHRT would be really happy if I incurred the cost of another lawyer and expended all sorts of energy to defend myself,” he continued. “I believe we Christians have to do something different and indeed we have to work to reform our country and remove the ability of cultural Marxists and malcontents to use the power of the state to silence our speech.

“Beyond pointing to Christ as our ultimate answer, I have no solution as to how to Canadians can regain our freedom,” Whatcott lamented. “I think the judgments I am facing and the ordeal these 16 female estheticians have faced at the hands of a sick predator and a corrupt human rights tribunal is clear evidence our courts and political system is corrupt and I see no mass uprising on the horizon of outraged Canadians demanding to have their freedom back.”

Apart from the transgender ideology issues at play, some speculate Yaniv may simply be a male heterosexual predator using “gender identity” as a pretext to prey upon women and girls (he identifies as a lesbian, indicating he remains sexually attracted to the people he wants to wax his genitals and share locker-room space with).

The Daily Caller reported that Yaniv has a record of disturbing texts about being in locker rooms with girls as young as age 10, asking questions like, “If there’s like 30 girls in the change room, how many of them would you say are out there changing freely with their vaginas and tits out?” and, “What are some things that girls do like in the bathroom stall and in the change room that I should be doing to make myself more a girl,” specifying that he was asking about “the gross stuff.”

Moreover, Oger himself has accused Yaniv of “outrageously inappropriate acts, some towards children who are tweens and teens,” spanning 2013 to 2018.” Yaniv is alleged to have attempted to solicit phone numbers from teenage girls online, and to have taken photographs of underage girls at a beauty pageant without permission.

For his part, Whatcott says he may be willing to sit down with Yaniv for mediation, noting that while he doesn’t have the money for the damages Yaniv seeks, “I have Good News that I can share and a treasure more long lasting and beneficial to his well being than money.”

it gets worse … the trans=bender cult / boil ready to be lanced

Prince Harry throws royal charity’s support behind transgender activist group

May 8, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Nowhere has the transgender ideology taken root more swiftly and more firmly than the United Kingdom. Rates of children identifying as transgender are up by 4,000%, triggering a government investigation into why these numbers are spiking so dramatically. Ordinary Brits expressing the belief that biological males and biological females cannot become the opposite sex are actually getting visits from the police and, in some cases, have even been arrested for expressing those views. Police officers are even getting trained by transgender activists in order to better police the “thinking” of British citizens (and no, I’m not making that up).

And now, the United Kingdom’s most prominent transgender lobby group, which bills itself as a “charity” for “gender variant and transgender children,” has attracted the attention of a very high-profile sponsor: Prince Harry. Mermaids — the organization is named for the mythical half-human, half-fish creatures who are sexless from the waist down — has “thrown his weight behind the cause of transgender children” with the announcement that the Royal Foundation will be working with the charity, according to the Daily Mail. The Royal Foundation functions as the “primary philanthropic and charitable vehicle” for the Duke of Sussex, his wife Meghan Markle, and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, who have not yet commented on the announcement.

Prince Harry, who recently had his first baby, met for a roundtable discussion some time ago with the CEO of the transgender advocacy group along with a number of other organizations at the Ealing YMCA. This perceived royal endorsement — and again, Prince William and Princess Kate presumably agree with the Royal Foundation’s support of Mermaids — was greeted with great glee by trans activists, who believe that Prince Harry’s public stance will assist them in further mainstreaming their cause. Mermaids, which was founded in Leeds in 1995, is a particularly controversial group due to the fact that it advocates for children to be granted easier and swifter access to puberty-blockers and medical “transition” (including mastectomies and castration).

In fact, Mermaids director Susie Green, a former I.T. consultant, took her own son to Thailand at the age of 16 for “genital surgery” — physical castration. Green told the Telegraph that Prince Harry’s support for the transgender cause is particularly gratifying because “I think it’s always really important to young people to see that people with the authority and credibility that Prince Harry has are supporting them and are listening and acknowledging the fact that they exist. This is somebody who has got that profile who’s showing clear understanding of the issues they’re facing.” Green went so far as to say that Harry’s public endorsement of a medically dubious cause involving children making irreversible decisions was similar to Princess Diana’s advocacy on behalf of AIDS victims.

Unless there is some disagreement between Prince Harry and Prince William that we are unaware of, it would seem that Queen Elizabeth II is the last socially conservative monarch of the House of Windsor. Prince Charles, next in line for the throne, is famous for his kooky ideas. William has indicated his support for groups that advocate for population control. Harry, who until recently was primarily known as the party prince, has lately been in the headlines for marrying progressive celebrity Meghan Markle, a well-known supporter of LGBT causes who caused a tempest in a teapot for breaking royal protocol and expressing her pleasure at the result of Ireland’s abortion referendum last year. The queen stays serenely above all of this, but she is surely aware of her progeny’s progressive bent.

Prince Harry’s endorsement, which may well have been inspired by his new wife’s activist leanings, takes the House of Windsor far beyond their traditional neutrality on social matters. Transgenderism is a dangerous ideology that is moving like wildfire through schools in the United Kingdom, primarily among young girls. The effects of the so-called treatments advocated by organizations like Mermaids are permanent, and children who transition at a young age will live with the scars of that mutilation even if they change their minds later on — and many of them will. The sons of Princess Diana have proven enormously popular with the British people, and it is for that reason that this new partnership between the Royal Foundation and Mermaids is so dangerous.

Free Speech Activist Gordon Watson on The Transgender Agenda, Misgendering, the RCMP & The Decline of Our Society

Free Speech Activist Gordon Watson on The Transgender Agenda, Misgendering, the RCMP & The Decline of Our Society
[To Henry Makow] Further to the reference in your twitter feed, about  the $50,000 penalty for ‘mis-gendering’ the complainant in the Ogre vs. Whatcott thing :

in fact : about 4 years ago, I moved  to Sidney British Columbia.  Driving a taxicab around town gave me a special perspective on the quiet, prosperous charming little burg.   I encountered a certain RCMP officer but I did not know her name at that time.  She was unremarkably just a lumpy broad with a crewcut lesbian hairstyle, in a rumpled regular duty  RCMP brown uniform with the yellow stripe down the pantleg, I’d guess not more than 40 years old. Back in my day  you’d never see an RCMP officer so sloppily dressed. I found it curious that she was obviously in such poor physical shape for a police officer.

A few years later,  I had trouble at the house I was renting ;  street people, to whom I’d rented rooms – not knowing  how verminous they are – had turned on me.  It was pan-demonium.  The cops were there 9 times in the last 3 weeks before I vacated as the place before it was  demolished.  This particular officer, then the RCMP Watch Commander, attended  a couple of the incidents. She was instrumental in cooling-out the altercation by taking charge of the little witch who was the worst troublemaker.   For which I was grateful.  I had no complaint about the officer’s  policing. She was always pleasant to me when we’d cross paths on the street, later.   At that point in time – spring 2018 – the woman RCMP officer had a noticeable beard, but it was very thin like a teenage boy.

A few weeks ago ( early 2019 )  driving the cab out to the ferry, a passenger remarked that she worked as a civilian employee at Sidney North Saanich RCMP detachment.  In a roundabout delicate way, I mentioned that I’d seen the RCMP officer with a more-or-less full beard. And my understanding was,  that the RCMP dress code prohibits an officer having a beard.  The passenger told me that the uniform code had been changed very recently.  Without me asking, she told me the name of the particular officer whom I’ll call Corporal X.   Even though I’d described the police officer as a woman,  my passenger was careful to refer to Corporal “X” as “he“.
century ago, Canadians considered the Bearded Lady a freak of nature, to be pitied. They were found in sideshows when the Circus came to town.   Yesterday I saw her go by on patrol in the Commander’s car. Worst of all,  as the Mao-ists informed us :  “political power flows out of the barrel of a gun!” .   Corporal X wears a loaded sidearm on her hip,  with power to imprison someone if he were to disobey the Order uttered by the BC Human Rights Commission arising from the case of Oger versus Whatcott. In that Soviet-style showtrial, we saw the naked face of evil … when the Tyrant figures she controls the Man with the Gun.  Namely =  fanatical Devyn Cousineau,  one of the ‘change agents’  seconded by BC’s Attorney General to ensure that thepolitical opponent of the New Democratic Party was vilified as an Enemy of the State.  If there’s one thing the antichrists cannot abide, it’s the prophetic type such as Bill Whatcott,  out in the public square,   denouncing sin … naming names. The Free Press is   the People’s Friend, The Tyrant’s Foe

I can’t help an ironic smile when I go in to the local copshop and see the big poster on the wall …    A classic image of a Mountie in full red serge, posed on a coal black horse, against a picturesque mountain backdrop. The propaganda we all grew up with … so far-removed from the present reality.   Would the white Christian men who made up the Force a generation ago …  upon whose dedication to duty our respect of the RCMP was based  … countenance ( so-called ) “trans-gender-ism” ?  Would they take orders from a female demanding to be addressed as a male?   What would they say about 2 Sodomites disgracing their uniform by dressing in it as they  ostensibly!  got “married”?

Like it or not, the Oger Whatcott ruling is the last word on “hate speech” in this poor suffering Dominion.   Cousineau’s Order  puts me in a quandary.   I had given Bill $60 to publish his flyers.  Even though I announced that I was his accomplice in the dastardly deed,   the Tribunal wouldn’t let me come on the hearing as an Intervenor.  So I have not yet had my say as to the validity of the 104 pages of Cousineau’s gobble-de-gook absurdity.   When I do, one of my chief arguments will be that when my Dad marched away from the RCR Barracks in London Ontario, in 1940, he assumed he was going to war against the very same mindset of the God damned fascisti as I face, here, 2 generations later. It cannot be that one of the foundational precepts in this country – preaching of the Gospel —  is illegal.   Adolph Hitler and his pals were national socialists who sent their critics to concentration camps  : Devyn Cousineau & the NDP are international socialists who send their critics to gaol.     See the difference?

I stood as a candidate in the BC provincial election in 2001.  I expect to do so again. Last time round, I had some very harsh things to say about the NDP ; all true.    There’s more of the same, and worse, that needs to be said, now.   Do I have to put me-self in jeopardy of going to prison, for publishing my political and religious opinion, which is ; that the New Democratic Party administration in BC is nothing less than Marxist thugs in 3 -piece suits … antichrists whose handmaids from Hell – Cousineau, Juricevic and Trerise –  formally outlawed the preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven?

How the above relates to the curiousity of Corporal; X the bearded lady RCMP officer, is :

Cousineau’s wicked Order in the Oger Whatcott Order thing, legitimizes the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Regiment policy re   ‘trans-gender-ism” …  a textbook demonstration of how the Frankfurt school of Marxists do their damn’d’st …  sabotaging genuine Christianity so sexual perversion becomes normalized.   No mere co-incidence that the lame-stream newsmedia published not a line of print,  informing the public what’s going on in the office of the RCMP Commissioner.    You sure didn’t see a fullpage article in the Trawna Grope & Flail about trans-gender-ism polluting police forces.  Rather =  puff-pieces as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau crows about his new version of “Core values” in this post-national state.  All the while he and his treasonous pals in high places undermine the very foundation of the Dominion  = ie.  presumption that we are a white, Christian society.  Evidence that Justin Trudeau was sired by Fidel Castro, is overwhelming, for those who can muster the intellectual honesty to examine the facts.  No surprise then that ‘the apple didn’t fall very far from the tree’.  Papa Fidel would be so proud of him … infiltrating the soft underbelly of capital-ism by stealth.    The antichrist Marxists know full well what they’re doing = installing rebellion to God at every position  in the institutions of government.

the ruling of the BC Human Rights Tribunal in the  Whatcott v. Oger matter is of utmost importance to all right-thinking Canadians : penalty of $55,000 against Whatcott … $20,000 of it punishment for  “mis-gendering”  the pathetic creature, Oger the Ogre ( or is it the other way ’round? )  … for the sake of him publishing his political and religious opinion during an election, mind you!   It directs Bill Whatcott  henceforth, to use the pronoun “he” when referring, in public, to the man in the dress, Complainant Ronan aka Morgane Oger.  Or go directly to gaol. ‘And no more posting to social media/ the public square, your quibbles about how  color of law was used to disguise Oger’s mental illness’.

Words fail me to define how profoundly evil is Cousineau’s monstrosity.   Suffice to use the Biblical language :   Wrong was put in place of right : right is now called ‘wrong’.    Such absurdity cannot be allowed to stand.  The good news, is: this too = the bizarre fad of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria =  will pass. But it’s going to take some ugly skirmishing and persistence and serious amounts of $$s  in the courts and on the hustings to re-establish our right to freedom of the Press.

Gordon S Watson
Justice Critic, Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think for Ourselves & Be Our Own Politicians

Metchosin British Columbia
April 30 2019