38 Comments

Thanks for this. It's jaw-dropping. This supposed complaint caught my eye: "Some transgender attorneys were assumed by court staff to be defendants on prostitution charges simply due to their gender expression, specifically clothing and makeup."

Being mistaken for prostitutes would have made those men feel "affirmed" - and more. Indeed, no doubt that was a main goal.

Expand full comment

Intentions aside: It tells us quite a bit about how those attorneys think women should look like.

Expand full comment

Most women would NOT be mistaken for prostitutes under normal circumstances ,so what on earth were they wearing in their performance of what they think is " womanhood " ? Shows you how little they know about women !!

Expand full comment

A systems manager I worked for was a very nice woman, very intelligent, enormous cocaine habit. One day on her way to work the cops picked her up because she was wearing a sun suit! You know, like little kids wear. And that along with the extremely shaky eyeliner made her look like a streetwalker. Very, very sad.

The line Proxy Music quoted caught my attention as well. Men who appear dressed as prostitutes in court need to be reminded of appropriate court attire. And of course they know nothing about women; these men are creeps first and foremost. Women asked to define creep answered MALE.

Expand full comment

LinkedIn blows - just a worthless, garbage site. I check now and then but last login i was prompted to add pronouns, so i put Ob/Vi/Ous. Oddly, i haven't gotten any recruiter emails since then...

I've kept my profile out of date on purpose because someone tried to doxx me shortly after i started being GC online.

Expand full comment

I discovered that I was on it having never provided my details or signed in. How does that happen?

Expand full comment

They're long time scrapers of information. Be wary. I initially had 'we think you'd like to connect with...' and saw they'd scraped all contacts of contacts from any activity ever and any electronic device or email account. Any other apps they also own (now). Without my permission or consent. If you search someone's name online, or they you, up you pop. Or a mutual 'friend' or 'contact'. Was it exactly your name, location and education/work history? Also tricky if your name is unusual. I couldn't post much because of privacy but a previous boss splashed my job details online once without asking or warning me and I lost many years of carefully guarded privacy overnight.

My abusive ex and a bully of a boss (the one with lax personal security and web awareness) were two men I'd rather I wasn't connected with. It's a stalkers' delight tbh, more than for just the mildly curious which most of us are, and it angers me that to network and be seen as connected with any kind of professional profile you're assumed to be on it. And I wondered if it was tempting them to 'connect with' me too. I did start clicking no way to notifications very early on and trying to teach that magic sauce to delete and stop suggestions, then just ignored it. They buried where settings were, changed them to 'improve it' and made it tricky to navigate through like many sites do. If someone responds to something, then I will look further if I don't already know them and send an invite if I want to keep a track of their posts in my feed. A lot of academics and researchers use it and I have found things in feeds much quicker and with much more relevance to my fields than elsewhere online.

It wasn't great for women to be harassed online and 'rated' on how attractive they were deemed to be by trolls there as well as in the street and everywhere else online, so I try to keep as low key as possible. If there are profile images online choose them carefully.

It's like the rest of online - you can sometimes see when and who are clicking on your profile and if someone isn't in your real life, or willing to approach you directly, you do wonder why they visit your profile every other week...

Expand full comment

Thanks for that. I've never registered so wonder if my old place of work put it there. I remember getting loads of irritating emails from it back then but didn't respond. It is a stalker's delight! It only seems to show that one job which was 15 years ago and in a different country so I suppose it's a good decoy! Shocking that this can happen without any approval to be sure.

Expand full comment

Wow! Brilliant analysis and shocking that LinkedIn are taking this line. See what happens if I share on twitter next.

Expand full comment

What were the grown ups doing when they allowed this?

Expand full comment

Hells Bells, this lot will not stop. The acceptance of respectful deference will never be enough. It's maddening. I can only imagine what follows the pulling apart of this once it has weaved it's way in to every aspect of civil life and been rejected. I'm worried that we might be fucked either way.

Expand full comment

Same here. Even if it all stopped tomorrow, how many millions of children have already had their minds warped on this issue? And then they become the adults....

Expand full comment

While I completely understand that this ideology will leave behind it many mutilated bodies which other social contagions don't, or not in such numbers at least, it is interesting to compare it to those others. Recently (yesterday?) Graham shared an article about multiple personality disorders, and the spread of that showed many similarities to this. How did that end? What happened to all those people convinced they had multiple personalities? I've read that a common reaction of someone who detransitions is to refuse to talk about it & pretend it never happened. So much easier if you're an autogynephilic 45 year old man than a 20 year old woman with no breasts.

Expand full comment

Thanks for publishing this I saw the message from the author saying it had been banned. It’s terrifying - both the contents and (perhaps even more) that it was banned for hate speech.

Expand full comment

This was great. Thank you for sharing this. The tech world needs to stop the censorship of the impacts of gender ideology on women, girls and transboys like my kid. This ideology only privileges the males.

Expand full comment

"Gender dogma is backed by enormous power and unlimited wealth." What the hell is going on?

Expand full comment

Check into Jennifer Bilek’s work on The 11th Hour Blog. LOTS of money and power behind this, and trans humanist ideology, too. Really creepy, hair-raising stuff she exposes.

Expand full comment

Also big pharma and medics, getting young people hooked into medicalisation and being reliant on hormones / ongoing surgeries for life. In 2013 in the US there were 10 gender clinics where young people were treated, there are now over 300.

Create the dysphoria with the dogma, then treat the dysphoria = big bucks. Look up Alix Aharon, The Gender Mapper.

Expand full comment

Terrifying. We are going to stop this ideology. Not sure how, but we will.

Expand full comment

We have to ,for the sake of the whole human race . Extinction beckons with this tripe !!

Expand full comment

Oh, we're courting extinction every day in every way! And the billionaire freaks funding this stuff think they're going to live forever inside a computer (which is where they belong NOW).

Expand full comment

Indeed...gaslighting people on a major scale all for politics and money!

“The key thing to understand about trans rights activism is that, unlike gay rights activism, it is not just a movement seeking to ensure that trans people are not discriminated against. It is, rather, a movement committed to a fundamental reconceptualization of the very idea of what makes someone a man or a woman.” (Emphasis in original.)

Jane Claire Jones.

Expand full comment

Clare with no 'i' if anyone's looking for her work :-) https://janeclarejones.com/

Expand full comment

that is horrific - have just shared it to my linked in

Expand full comment

It's terrifying how the judiciary has been captured and is, presumably, blind to that capture. And how very telling that TW attorneys get taken for being defendants on prostitution charges. I recall seeing a photo of two TW on their way to court, one I believe was formerly in the world of boxing and the other a lawyer. On their way to court, both with skirts skimming the tops of their thighs and wearing thigh-high boots.

Excellent advice from Alexander S at the end there.

Expand full comment

What happened to smart office wear without it all hanging out?!

Expand full comment

I have a hard time believing there is not a generally acceptable attire for court.

Expand full comment

Extraordinary and terrifying, and yet totally par for the course in Batshitworld. These people are claiming victory in a debate they refuse to have. Is this censorship a way of preparing us for when the CCP rules the world? More and more it feels to me as if, as William and others have put it, this really is "reality's last stand". If such hateful crap is not fought and beaten, then there is no hope for us. It's not right vs left. It's far more important. If we can't get this right, we deserve the asteroid, frankly.

Expand full comment

This is an excellent and important article. I'm going to log in to linkedin to support the author however I can.

Expand full comment

A family court judge wrote this?Whilst I think he's right about the lack of impartiality regards adopting genderism as a court mandated approach, it sits right alongside the refusal to train family court judges in domestic abuse. The war against feminist understanding of male oppression is overt and covert in the courts, along with the Law Commission's recent refusal to make misogyny a hate crime. It seems that all oppression is recognised in law EXCEPT the hatred of women. In the UK, human rights legislation specifically excluded the domestic environment which is why family law/courts look like the shit show of misogyny that they are.

Expand full comment

What does this mean for those of us in the UK ? Do Forstator and Miller cases mean Linked In can’t censor?

Expand full comment