Should a bloke be allowed to know if his “girlfriend” (or “bride”) is also a bloke?

This post is about a 2005 “Allman v UK” court case you probably haven’t read about yet.

Transgenderism is gender fraud.  Fraud always has victims.

#GenderFraud

 

Transgenderism

The pope had ruled that the “trans” doctrine “lacked substantiation“.  (Or so I quipped, in a punning tweet that I sent out when Pink News reported the story.)

The “trans” doctrine is a doubly-dualistic doctrine.  Not only does it make the commonplace distinction between body and soul.  Even more metaphysically than that, it distinguishes between “sex” and “gender”.   The doctrine, you ought by now to have noticed, teaches that some people have a valid grievance, because they were conceived as babies who grew bodies that were of the wrong sexes for the purpose of housing human souls of the particular genders which the aggrieved now feel they want to be.

As a society, we are encouraging the aggrieved to pretend to be men when really they are women, and vice versa.  But such gender fraud, like any fraud, has victims.

 

Please don’t say you weren’t warned.

I know someone who was sectioned for three days in January 2000.  This short spell of loss of liberty, in a self-described “hospital”, did no good at all to this chap’s then flourishing career.  He is now likely to die on benefits.  (But don’t worry.  His mental health, the doctors nowadays all say, is tickety-boo.)

Wanna know why he was sectioned?

A significant aspect of this anecdote is that the psychiatrist who sectioned him (seventeen and a half years ago now) considered a prediction that he had made before the said “shrink” had even met the “patient” concerned, to be delusional.

What was that “delusional” prediction?

Well, this fellow had insinuated that there was a conspiracy afoot, which (he predicted) would wreak havoc in maybe five to ten years time, or maybe in up to twenty years time. A conspiracy, he said, to force people, by law, to accept men as women if those men said they wanted to be accepted as women, and vice versa.

Where did he get that outlandish idea from?

 

In 2004, whilst listening in bed to the News Quiz con Radio 4 (as you do), with my then wife Mpumi Allman (nee Maqungo), I learnt of a so-called Gender Recognition Bill.  This (I felt at the time) marked the public unveiling of the no-longer-clandestine conspiracy about which the former mental patient (briefly) had theorised four years earlier, getting himself sectioned.

I reckoned I knew then what my duty was.  I did what I believed I had to do, in the light of this development.  I went into activist mode, and opposed the Gender Recognition Bill.

 

Baroness O’Cathain and Lord Tebbit led the valiant opposition to the Gender Recognition Bill in the Lords.  I thank both for their courtesy to me.  I regret that my warnings only came to their attention too late for them to argue against the bill in the most effective way possible, as Lord Tebbit admitted afterwards.   It was “a pity”, he wrote, that “nobody” had thought of my argument against the Bill, during the debate in the Lords.  After the final division was lost in the Lords, I was honoured that Lady O’Cathain phoned me whilst I was in a bible study as the Church of God of Prophecy, in Leeds, before she went off to meet with Simon Calvert in a hotel.

Once the Act had been passed, I sued the government (as you do, if you are an activist), hoping for publicity, if not actually to prevent the Act’s implementation:

THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF ALLMAN

-v-

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR CONSTITUTION AFFAIRS

[2005] EWHC 1910 (Admin)

 

It is now 2017.  Recently, there appears to have been some fresh stirrings of interest in the unsuccessful court case that I brought way back in 2005, to challenge the Gender Recognition Act, as the bill soon became.  This recent flurry of renewed interest in a past escapade of mine, has prompted me, twelve years on, to bring relevant court papers (including the judgment of Sullivan J) and contemporary press releases together, concatenated into one document, for the curious to read, here:

Gen Rec suit papers

Relevance?

Last Tuesday, I learnt of a recent article, which, rather strikingly, draws attention to the mentality that is gradually becoming compulsory, as predicted in that chap’s conspiracy theory of 2000, which led to his being sectioned for three days, losing his job, and (later) to the court case that I brought myself, when that person’s  year 2000 nightmare began to come true, in 2005.

Transgender Activist – Straight Guys Have ‘No Right’ To Reject Trans Women

 

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that my application was “inadmissible”.  That was because I was already married, and therefore not at immediate risk myself, of marrying another bloke unawares, deceived into believing that my “bride” was a woman, by the use of a falsified birth certificate provided by the queen.  Ironically, my wife died on 26th May 2006, two days after I had opened that letter from Strasbourg.

What do you think?  Was the bloke who was sectioned in 2000 right after all?  Should my arguments have won, in court, in 2005 (London) and 2006 (Strasbourg)? Or do you agree with Mr Justice Sullivan, and the ECHR?

Why do you think whatever you do think?

Have you read the papers I have linked to in this post?  What did you think of them?

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Family Rights, Homophobic, Human Rights, Law

3 responses to “Should a bloke be allowed to know if his “girlfriend” (or “bride”) is also a bloke?

  1. I remember chatting up a woman in a bar years ago when I was 19. She was gorgeous, she was into exactly the same things as me, read the same books. We got on well in conversation. Believe me when I say I was disappointed to learn that ‘she’ was actually a ‘he’. I’m glad my mate whispered in my ear about it otherwise after another pint or two I would have been all over this person and nagging to take her/him back to my room.

    Would it have made much difference if I had taken him/her back to my room? Your damn right it would have. Of course she/he should have told me he/she wasn’t a ‘she’ but a ‘him’.

    If I had known then what I know now, my reaction would be exactly the same. Nowadays there are over 70 different gender orientations and each one demanding to be spoken to in a ‘specific’ way each with its own prefix. In Canada, if you don’t abide by it, then you could land up in front of the judges for discrimination.

    So yes, I believe men have a ‘right’ to know what the biological sex is of a potential partner. That way an informed decision can be made on wether to pursue or not pursue, that being the question. We are not being discriminatory, no. If transgender men who call themselves women still have male parts then they have no ‘right’ to withhold such information from another ‘interested/decieved’ human. It’s common sense to avoid embarrassment on both sides.

    ‘Hello, I like you.’ said Babs.
    ‘Yes, you’re nice, fancy coming back to my place.’ replied Steve.
    ‘I would love to.’ Babs said,’ But I must tell you, I’m really a man.’
    ‘Thats ok.’ said Steve, ‘Im really a girl, but tomorrow I’m a man, and on Sunday I’m neither.’

  2. Reblogged this on Musings of a Penpusher and commented:
    What a mess.

  3. clairethinker

    The answer is Yes. A man has the right to know whether the person he dates is a man or a woman. A woman has the same right to know whether the person she dates is a woman or a man. And every individual has a moral duty to be truthful about their sex, because nobody has the right to tell lies.
    I admire you a lot for bringing this legal case and you should have won. Lord Tebbit is a man of sterling common sense and those who foresaw the calamity of trannie ideology taking over were very far-sighted. Tax payers should not have to foot the bill for this, which is enormous. The treatments are a burden on the NHS. In our local charity shops I have seen a haggard, six-foot-one man with skinny hips and a withered face, dressed in a skirt and high heels, carrying a handbag and browsing the racks of party frocks. The nail varnish just draws attention to his large hands, and the shoes are always too small for him. He keeps trying them on, like Cinderella’s ugly sisters.
    There are now more and more sad ex-trannies, who admit that their life of delusion led them down a wrong path. They poisoned themselves with huge doses of fake hormones and had operations to mutilate their bodies. The result was they became deeply depressed eunuchs, bald or bearded ladies, and an embarrassment to their families. Many wake up in late middle age and realise that they have wasted their efforts pursuing an illusion, and they have a high suicide rate. These ex-trannies need our love and support and they should be sent into schools to talk to children and warn them against making that mistake.

Likes, follows and comments cheer me up!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s