The guardian have conceded women might have the right to discuss law that impacts them. Next year they will be considering the question of whether women are people. I smell fear and a growing realisation of the seriousness of the mess they have made and how visibly and confidently they have made it. Twats.
This is a debate about abusive adults who frighten MPs getting access to vulnerable children. This is a safeguarding debate. What the fuck? Frightened? You are adults with legal responsibilities to UK children and how dare you quiver and shake and say you are scared and throw them into the thing you are afraid of. Shame on you Westminster, shame. Shame on you all.
So in two days Sarah Champion, a hard working and committed MP, has been faced with an adult male who seeks access to children, regularly says safeguarding is an insult to his identity and expresses a desire to have access to children outside their parents view, saying he believes that contraceptives and puberty blockers are required so eight year olds can be ‘sexually active’ and not disrupt their lives, and chastised someone for suggesting this is a problem. Sarah has also used a lie about a real suicide to blackmail and attack women. Why would a hardworking, committed MP, do this?
Narcissistic abuse. It creates a mirror. It creates dissonance. One thing appears to be the other, the brain is confused, and there is zero chance that on either occasion she understood this. NO amount of explanation will show her this because dissonance has to fall. On its own, naturally. This is the power of the narcissistic reflex that trans rights activists have relied on and this is the power a media based democracy relied on. It will pass., but its a demonstration.
#Butterfly, the drama which is the high point of Susie Green’s theatre to avoid anyone asking questions about what caused the psychological break in her child, achieves the same. There is only one thing to do with this, and that is to be what the narcissist cannot be, refuse to be a mirror, call what you see in front of you, and keep doing so until dissonance falls. We are at the shouting stage and once that’s done, it’s done.
It’s hard to explain what it’s like being in the middle of this. How weird it is to see people you know, know something is bollocks, but when a mother was described as being ‘in thrall’ to Mermaids, that was the correct way to describe this. Its a thrall. Its an easily achieved thrall created sometimes intentionally, often not, and it’s this thrall and what it will make you do, at the centre of how fascism takes hold, and how the mob turn to harm people.
It’s worth observing and not being too hard on Sarah. She’ll figure it out eventually but in the meantime look at those incidents and learn from them and know THAT is what narcissistic abuse can do. And it can do it to you.
XChaminda Jayanetti is a journalist, and a very good friend of mine, we confuse people because like many brits Cunt is a term of endearment and telling him to die is equivalent to saying hello. Because trans rights activists cant find any examples of me being hateful because am not, I just got my twitter account locked for 6 days for hateful conduct to my friend. He is as flummoxed as I am but more amused.
I said I wouldnt but needs must. While am jobhunting my patreon address is patreon/lisamuggeridge. Its on my youtube and twitter. I cant promise patrons access to content that others dont get, I don’t really think that would work, but have activated it and the link is there and for the time being its necessary.
Sarah, you are an elected member of parliament, a lawmaker, and a political representative. You have responsibilities and one of those is safeguarding children from predatory and abusive behaviour. I would like you to recall your interactions with @transdevon. Transdevon has access to children, seeks access to children and routinely expresses disturbing views about safeguarding and children and sex. The ONLY unsolicited interaction I had with @transdevon was a response to a conversation I was having with someone about safeguarding and it was expressed that for @transdevon safeguarding should not applu to children deemed trans because their parents dont understand them and I dont know if you know Sarah, that’s a concern. That indicates a desire to groom children from someone with access to children. Ina conversation with you on twitter it was expressed that @transdevon believed puberty blockers were for preventing pregnancy in children as young as eight. I don’t know if you need a sign writer Sarah, but I am going to instruct you clearly on your responsibilities when this occurs.
You stop the conversation, you explain to the person that their comments regarding children are concerning and indicative of disturbing attitudes to both children and child sex, you check the bio and you state clearsly that as a member of parliament you have a responsibility to uphold safeguarding and as this is a person with access to children and a bio that says they seek access to children you will be taking this seriously. You make clear that you are an elected member of parliament and that comment was unacceptable and you end the conversation and follow it up with the your local authority and you make clear your concerns. THAT is your job. You are the site responsibility for safeguarding children, top of the tree. An elected member of parliament.
It is no more complicated than a woman creating extraordinary theatre to avoid discussing an extreme psychological break in a child, which indicates significant harm has been done. There is zero chance that te roots of this problem lay in the child’s body being wrong. Zero.
It may be the most extraordinary theatre I have ever seen whipped up in this situation, but theatre is what it is. Theatre to avoid discussing a central question Susie Green does not wish to discuss, theatre which has then allowed her to get narcissistic supply. Not even remotely complex. Really.
Butterfly is not a programme about trans children, ts theatre one women is escalating to avoid questions she doesnt want to look at. That is it. Common as fuck and the only reason this is notable is the scale of the theatre. Pattern of it aint even unusual.
I had been asked to do a video about Dr.Adrian Harrop but as he just seemed a run of the mill narcissist trying to get out of his NHS career by showing he is unit for practice I declined. Today Dr.Adrian Harrop defamed me, with a defamation specific to a campaign of targeted harassment carried out by a man and a woman, the man is violent. The defamation Dr.Harrop used before singling out a twitter account and demanding that others follow his lead, was a demonstration of Dr.Adrian Harrops abusive behaviour. I have no connection to Dr.Adrian Harrop, no interest in him, so am alarmed that an NHS doctor is targeting me and repeating defamation that can only have come from a violent male who targeted me and my daughter. THis is disturbing. And very unsafe behaviour. i will be contacting the General Medical Council on Monday.
This is a video making a matter of public record my concern over my local police force being used as a third party in harassment of private citizens, to prevent discussion of an erosion of safeguarding under the banner of trans ideology. When the police are used as a tool of harassment it not only causes distress to the victims but undermines the entire police force and the trust local residents are to have in it and the rule of law itself. it erodes democracy itself. I am deeply concerned and view this clear pattern of covert harassment using West Yorkshire Police is deeply disturbing. It only takes one of two individuals to undermine entire organisations with this pattern and I believe it is necessary to place on public record, that a member of the public and West Yorkshire resident has noted this pattern. Because it is undeniable and very concerning. While I do speak to both Posie and Glinner, its important to note we are not connected outside this and these incidents are both observed as part of a pattern of abuse and systematic intimidation that encompasses many unconnected figures.
When someone engages me about child sex abuse and they use that conversation to try and channel that discussion into a far right agenda and impose a culture of violence on those people, I first of all state that I recognise what it is, I state why it is harmful, why it is dishonest and then I publicly distance myself from the person expressing taht and I say why, so that someone whose understanding of this is more traumatic than mine, doesn’t find themselves misled as I would have been, if I had been engaged in this. I do this 100% of the time and and will always do this 100% of time. I do not believe anything worth having would be lost by me doing this and can think of a million terrible consequences of failing to do so.