This video is called “Why Violating A Person’s Vagina is Worse than Violating Their Pronouns.” It’s in reaction to a spate of gender fraud court cases in the last several years. These are cases where someone deceives another person into believing they are the opposite biological sex they actually are in order to have sex and romantic relationships with them. And I don’t know what is going in Britain that produces so many individuals that commit this previously exceedingly rare crime, but there have been 6, yes 6 cases in that country where accusers claimed biological females impersonated males in order to gain emotional and sexual access to them. And often they did this to teenagers several years younger than they are. Some of these females are lesbian-identified, and some are trans-male-identified.

I wasn’t really sure what title I was going to go with for this post. I had some alternative titles, such as:

“Why I Wouldn’t Deceive Someone Into Fucking Me Based on My Self Perception & Neither Should You”

“Attack of the Uncannily Realistic Dildos”

“British Mamas Ain’t Raisin’ You Right”

“If Zir Says It’s Dick: You Must Acquit”

“Liberals Against Sexual Consent: How The Left Is Eating Their Own Babies”

But I decided that “Why Violating A Person’s Vagina is Worse than Violating Their Pronouns” really just gets to the point of what I want to focus on here.

There have been 6 gender fraud cases in Britain recently, all involving females. Of the British cases, a couple of them are extremely bizarre. But in at least 4 of them, it appears confirmed there was deception.

Jennifer Staines- a lesbian Justine McNally- a lesbian teen and admitted to the deception Kyran Lee- a trans man Chris Wilson- a 25-year-old who pursued a 15 and 16-year-old and lied to them about his age (I’d say in general, most 25-year-olds that have sex with 16-year-olds are sketchy, even if everything is on the table)

This shows that females can act in self-centered and manipulative ways just as males can. In most of these cases, the girls were younger than the perpetrators, which may not have been great enough to be illegal but could have been intentionally exploitive. Or is an indication of maturity level problems with the perpetrators.

The other 2 cases are very difficult to believe. In these cases, it really is questionable that the accuser didn’t know and possibly lied about not knowing what was going on. One involved Gemma Barker, who had multiple identities. She supposedly tricked a 15-year-old with not 1, but 2 of her alter egos. At the very same time, she was friends with her as her actual female self. The accuser broke up with her first alter ego. At which point, she created a second one and dated her again, all while hanging out with her also as Gemma. The accuser claimed she had no idea initially that both fictional boyfriends were actually her friend. I do not believe this case. I believe the involvement of the parents may have affected what the teen said here.

The most bizarre case was the Gayle Newland case (It’s so complicated I will list the details).

This case involved a lesbian-identified woman who apparently went to extremely elaborate lengths to deceive a woman that she was a male. She posed as a man on Facebook. This was an ongoing identity with her she started when she was 15 years old. She started dating the woman and bound her breasts and lowered her voice, telling her she was an Asian male. Every single time they got together, the accuser was blindfolded. The reason for this is that Newland told the accuser that “he” had horrible scars that “he” didn’t want her to see. They would get together and watch television and even sunbathe, all with the accuser blindfolded. Even more bizarrely, at the very same time Newland was acting as the accuser’s best friend as her female self, which makes this really unbelievable. This is similar to the Barker case. The couple had sex 10 times before the victim realized that she was using a prosthetic penis and it was actually her female friend. Newland claimed the accuser knew she was a woman and they were both involved in role-playing.

It’s really difficult to believe this case just because it’s so ludicrous and that this went on for such a long time. The only explanation I have is that the accuser was extremely naïve and possibly not that bright. And there are people out there like that and they are vulnerable to being exploited. But it doesn’t mean they deserve that exploitation.

Newland’s case is up for a retrial. But the original sentence in the Newland case was 8 years. This is a harsher sentence than this judge gave for pedophiles. But those aren’t the details I am interested in debating here. I currently lean towards Newland being guilty because of these text messages the accuser sent after the discovery saying,

How could you do this to me for two years? You have been a fake, you have manipulated me…Are you for real? You should be locked up for what you have done. You really are a piece of work. I have just one question, why me? You have no other explanation other than you are pure evil.

She genuinely seems shocked and horrified and Newland sent apology messages. Another person testified that she had manipulated them like this as well. But I don’t know for sure. But it’s not as if there wasn’t incriminating evidence here.

As far as my feelings in general about sexual assault, I do recognize there are, in fact, grey areas with regards to sexuality. I don’t go throwing the word rapey around a lot because its way overused in a hyperbolic way in a lot of cases. I don’t think “Blurred Lines” was a rape song. It talks about the reality that there is a push/pull with sexual dynamics. I don’t really agree with yes means yes laws (or affirmative consent laws). I think they have good intentions, but I believe they are overly intrusive. Some people don’t just want these regulations on college campuses but are trying to pass them in city ordinances as well. I don’t want the government regulating what my spouse, who I’ve been with for 19 years, says to me before I get rolled around. I’m not a child. Women are not children, and I don’t support a feminism that promotes that.

On the other hand, I feel very strongly that you have every right to go through life having your safety and boundaries respected. That’s not how the real world works. But we all need to try to operate living up to that assumption. It’s probably why I was really drawn to training in martial arts, which I have for years in various grappling, striking, and weapons styles from various teachers. But a lot of my training was under older lesbian feminists that started their own schools and taught some really well designed and well-researched self-defense classes. So I have spent a lot of hours of my life trying to work for violence and sexual assault prevention in classes I taught to girl scouts, to children in schools, to teens, foster kids and adult men and women. And the best way to do this is not to teach kids to be paranoid, but to also let them know about how the real world works. And stranger assault situations are rare. Mostly, people need to learn how to navigate interpersonal violence and manipulation, i.e. abusive parents, schoolyard bullying, and how to deal with the creepy uncle. So having everyone have his or her autonomy and safety respected has been very important to me.

But I acknowledge there are grey areas sometimes in sexual interactions. And I do believe it is possible for a woman, and especially a teenager faced with their parents, to falsely accuse a lesbian or trans man of manipulating them into sex. I definitely believe that is possible.

However, my adamant opinion is that gender dysphoria is not an excuse to violate another human being’s sexual boundaries. And there just isn’t any nuance-ing it. And I want to address the arguments that other people are making that it is acceptable. Because there are plenty of people out there doing that. I don’t want to go into how this should be handled legally. I’m not saying not to have compassion for people with gender dysphoria and lock them up and throw away the key. But I think there should be some recourse for these victims. Others disagree about the role of the state in this. But I mostly want to talk about the moral issue here, because some people are even questioning that. And that’s mostly what disturbs me.

Criticism of anything coming out of trans activism gets you accused of being a hateful bigot or a TERF. So I just want to make it clear I don’t think most trans people are predators, and most believe in disclosing. And over ½ of these cases actually involved lesbians. And I don’t want any women going around behaving this way either.

Here are some quotes from the accusers about the damage they say this has done to them because it shows this was as bad for them as getting pinned down and raped psychologically. And who are we to discount that. Carol, the victim in the Kyran Lee case said,

I didn’t consent to having sex with a woman; I consented to having sex with a man.

And:

What happened is still very much affecting my life. I was lied to and manipulated into falling in love with someone who deceived me. That has hurt me emotionally and physically. Finding out that Kyran Lee/Kyran Scott was a female shocked me to the core. I truly believed Kyran was a man. I don’t think he fully understands the pain he has caused me. I don’t feel that he feels any remorse. I don’t think I will ever be able to forgive him for what he has done.

Her lawyer said,

She was shattered when Kyran escaped jail, and now suffers anxiety so severe that she generally won’t leave the house alone.

So she not only got fucked literally, she also got mind fucked. And she has suffered damage. So when I hear people minimizing this it really infuriates me. The accuser in the Newland case said she would rather have been raped by a man. The other victims have made very similar statements.

Arguments coming from trans activists (some high level ones) as to why victims of gender fraud should have no legal recourse.

1) A person doesn’t have a right to bring any charges in these cases because it misgenders the trans person.

Here is a quote from a trans woman, activist, and lawyer Alex Sharpe,

…the state literally refuses the gender identities of transgender people or, at least, allows them to be trumped by cisgender complainant understandings of gender.” And “it is important to recognize that for some transgender men, a prosthesis is experienced as a penis. To insist on a distinction between the fleshy and the non-fleshy penis in legal constructions of consent is to misunderstand this important phenomenological issue and point of gender variance.

“Phenomenological “ A clusterfuck of a word for a clusterfuck of a rationalization. Using fancy words isn’t going to make this argument any more rational or any less callous towards the feelings of the victims.

What Alex Sharpe is saying here is that a heterosexual women is obligated to concede that she should subjugate her own sexual orientation and her right to only have something shoved up her vagina that she consents to in order to confirm the gender identity of a biological female. The idea here is that a trans person’s gender identity and sexual orientation are so sacrosanct that it gives them the right to completely violate the gender identity and sexual orientation of another person.

Not only is this position immoral. It doesn’t even hold up to basic logic. Asserting that your sense of self should take precedence over the sense of self of another person is delusional, and in the case where you do that in a way that traumatizes someone else, it’s a corrupt way of viewing the world in general. People have every right to base their sexual orientation on biology, not your personal feelings. And you are completely disregarding their rights to their own body autonomy and identity.

This element in trans activism, where to misgender someone is actually worse than sexually violating them, is the final lowest point of the narcissistic downward spiral trans activism has taken in the last several years. Which unfortunately is starting to turn former hard-core allies like me away from supporting the movement.

Here is another example of this attitude from Penelope Childs from the Plymouth Law and Criminal Justice Review a law student blog,

Is it possible to interpret McNally (the case) as being based on the notion that transgender boys are not real boys? If so, this would be to deny trans identity altogether.

So for people making this argument, that in order to respect the reality that trans people exist and deserve human rights, one must agree submitting to sex with them against one's knowledge is perfectly acceptable, and they must deny their own sexual reality. I’m going to make an assumption this writer is a liberal because its liberals that are promoting this idea mostly. This is all an example of the reality that the left has devolved to the point where it is eating it’s own babies.

The left, once the champions of women's sexual agency with it’s Take Back the Night marches, No Mean No programs, and affirmative consent laws, is now throwing out the concept of sexual autonomy, to affirm the feelings and self-perceptions of an oppressed minority group. There are other examples of the left eating its own babies like this. For example, feminist and lgbt groups attacking other feminist thinkers for being islamophobic for criticizing abuses of women and gays and Islam. Because multiculturalism is a higher value to uphold than exposing human rights abuses. And liberal feminists minimizing the problems with rape and other sexual violence coming from some immigrant communities in Europe for the same reason. In many ways, the left’s moral confusion is causing it to become traitors to some of those ideals

Alex Sharpe goes on to say that people can choose to avoid trans people in their own sexual relationships but if she is deceived,

What she ought not to be entitled to do is mobilize the power of the state against other men with whom she chooses to have sex. To permit her to do so is to rub salt into the wounds of a prior ontological assault – the denial of gender identity.

OK Alex. So she shouldn’t be able to “mobilize the power of the state” in this situation. But trans activists are perfectly fine mobilizing “the power of the state” to fine someone $250,000 for the crime of “misgendering.” This is the case in New York City now.

So some trans activists don’t think someone who has been sexually violated because they were lied to should have legal recourse, but to not utter a word someone demands is worth a 6 figure sum. Here it is perfectly fine to “mobilize the power of the state” not to protect trans people from violence, housing discrimination, or employment discrimination as the state should, but to force others to use recently completely made-up words like zie/hir, ey/em/eir and zhe. The bottom line here is having someone not validate queer theory is significantly more horrible than penetrating a woman’s vagina with something she didn’t consent to.

Jordan Peterson, a Psychology Professor At The University of Toronto is currently refusing to adhere to a Canadian Law that will make it hate speech not to use the preferred pronouns of the now 50 different gender identities that exist out there because he doesn’t support that gender ideology and he rightly states the government should not be allowed to force someone’s speech or thought police their views. And I agree, and he may lose his job over this or worse. Some activists want to force people to adhere to their self-perceptions and their ideology. Right up to who you decide to spread your legs for. This is completely unlike any other civil rights movement in the past.

2) It’s a god-given right for trans people to reject their own bodies, but it’s bigoted and transphobic for others to do so.

This view is a glaring inconsistency. Trans people claim their true nature causes them to reject their biological sex and thus their own natural body, instead choosing pretty extreme medical interventions. But if someone else rejects that very same body because of how they see their true nature, this is somehow bigotry.

I think it’s so much healthier for all nonconforming people in general, and that includes me, to embrace our outsider status and all of the difficulties and potential rewards that can come with that. Rather than exhaust ourselves insisting we are literally exactly like the majority, who in the case of the trans issue now, must accept being punished for using pronouns that don’t affirm someone’s identity, and gives them no recourse in the law when someone physically penetrates their sex organs in a way that violates theirs.

3) Lying about your biological sex is the same as lying about other things about yourself, something people do all the time.

Here is a quote by trans woman and activist Jane Fae in The Independent,

Since when has anyone told the whole truth prior to taking a partner to bed? Men and women lie, constantly, about age, income, job and marital status. These, however, are not frauds that perturb the legal system. Nor, it would seem, is the case of an undercover policemen lying about his day job.

Lying about being an undercover cop, which isn’t illegal, is probably the best example given to bolster this argument. Which I would agree is pretty violating. But I am not going to argue the dozens of scenarios we could go into here. I’ll just quote a gay man’s comment on a message board I read to address why gender fraud is different from lying about status or other things. “You’re not fucking someone’s diploma.”

4) The public must adhere to the trans community’s destruction of the meaning of language.

I want to address the role of the destruction of language in regards to trans identity politics. This destruction of the meaning of words causes many problems with this particular civil rights movement. But here is the best example of taking away people’s ability to communicate meaning effectively. Again Alex Sharpe in relation to an accused trans man,

His statement regarding penetration is not rendered untrue or deceptive simply because Jill assumed him to be referring to a penis, rather than a prosthetic device, which for some trans men is a semantic difference.

So, in this world there is no actual difference between a human penis and a silicone cock simply because someone says so. This, along with the other points I have made, puts trans logic so far down the rabbit hole that dropping LSD will only serve to make this seem more ridiculous. A dildo is not a penis. A penis is not a dildo. An Oompa Loompa is not Ruth Bader Ginsberg just because someone wishes it so.

5) The pain and suffering of the trans person is a mitigating factor and lack of sex is oppression.

Here is a quote from “The ‘Ethical Imperative’ Of Disclosure, or: How To Believe Your Victim Owes You An Opportunity For Abuse” by Natalie Reed on Freethoughtblogs.com,

And don’t we deserve a chance at love and sex and intimacy? Isn’t that a basic human right? Don’t we deserve giving people a chance to get to know us as a human being before discounting us as a freak

Absolutely, you aren’t obligated to tell them anything until you have sex with them. That’s where their right to refuse outweighs your rights to privacy.

Another quote about denial of sex as oppression from the same person,

…this act of conceptualizing us as de-sexed and unfuckable is directly attached to larger systems of oppression, dehumanization and invalidation we face.

I know I am not sugar-coating my opinions here but I am extremely empathetic to the rejection, loneliness, and frustration trans people feel trying to go out and date. But the argument I use against this is that trans people aren’t the only people who suffer loneliness and rejection. I made this point in another video I did called “The Collapse of the Lesbian Community,” when I talked about trans women who feel entitled to guilt trip lesbians who aren’t interested in having sex with them. Many people suffer loneliness, but it doesn’t justify sexual and emotional access to anyone.

I have always been an intense, die-hard, hopeless romantic with a raging sex drive. When I was younger, I had serious generalized anxiety disorder (which I have completely recovered from), which manifested itself in social anxiety disorder as well. Coming out and dating was extremely difficult. I had very bad luck. And the couple of experiences I had were brief and terrible. This went on for years. I fully understand what total desperation feels like. I still can’t imagine ever thinking, “How can I figure out how to get someone to date and fuck me, who otherwise would be really uncomfortable with it and not into it.” It’s a self-centered mentality that I don’t understand. I’m “unfuckable” to 97% of the female population. Many straight women are grossed out even by the thought of lesbian sex. People are entitled to their own desires and disgusts. And some of these disgusts aren’t cultural but often hardwired when it comes to gender identity and sexual orientation. So move to an urban area with a big queer scene and find other trans people and pansexuals who will love you for you. They are out there.

Gender Fraud and Lesbians

Almost all of the commentary I read on lesbian social media around this condemned this behavior, which I was happy to see, even if they thought some of the victims were supremely stupid, with a couple of notable exceptions. Carrie Lyell is the editor for the queer women’s magazine Diva in Britain and wrote this about the Newland case,

I’m not for a moment suggesting that the victim’s version of events is untrue, and I don’t want to cast aspersions on the testimony of a young woman, especially when so many do in rape and sexual assault cases. I am neither judge nor jury. But I’d be lying if I said I didn’t also feel sympathy for Newland, who sobbed in the dock last week as she was sentenced to eight years…What happened here was tragic and sad, and guilty or not, it seems to me that Newland, like the victim, is a vulnerable young woman who needs support – not eight years behind bars.

I would forgive Carrie Lyell for defending Newland if she just could not believe this went on for 10 sexual encounters without her partner knowing, if she just didn’t buy it. But that’s not what she is saying. She is saying we need to have sympathy and compassion for Newland, who “ like the victim,” is a vulnerable young woman who needs support.”

If Lyell is admitting this person’s guilt, she is completely excusing the extreme lengths this person went to, using remarkably manipulative behaviors, for her own personal sexual and emotional gratification. Carrie Lyell is exceedingly naïve if she doesn’t understand that there are some very selfish and narcissistic people out there, who will control everything around them to get what they want.

Julie Bindle, a staunch feminist and anti-rape activist who said, “I understand rape is only ever the fault and responsibility of the rapist,” has characterized this court decision in the Newland case as lesbian hating. Again, I wouldn’t be as bothered by this if Bindle just found this case so unbelievable. But she’s coming out strongly in support of Newland, ironic given the positions she takes when men who are accused of abusing women.

If Newland is guilty, she is a sociopath. These people usually have symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, and antisocial personality disorder. And some of these people are women. And lesbian and bisexual youth need to know that they aren’t completely safe from abuse because they are dating women. And I think these lesbian writers are clouding the reality of these violations and the right to consent with queer theory and misplaced compassion. I also view this as reverse sexism, especially in the case of Lyell’s comments. Lesbians don’t generally give men a pass for sexually abusive behavior. So men are responsible for their behavior, but women aren’t? If Newland did this, she isn’t a poor confused little lady.

I’ll be the first one to come out and scream bloody murder if evidence comes out that shows that Newland’s accuser was lying. And I will donate to her fund to sue the hell out them. But I haven’t heard anything convincing yet. And in the meantime, I’m not risking defending bad people.

What is causing this to happen?

One of the main things that has made this possible is the Internet, of course. The Internet makes it a lot easier for people to find gullible targets. But why have so many young females done this recently? It’s really important to look at what is going on with your own community. You would think that increased tolerance would reduce this kind of dysfunctional behavior. A relaxation of uptight sexual norms is a good thing in many ways. But sexuality needs structure, and young people need structure, and to learn at the very least to respect other people’s boundaries. And everyone in the LGBT community should get behind that concept and not defend this behavior, which is what is happening too often right now.

The selfishness of the anti-gender fraud movement

I want to highlight some of the blatant selfishness of the anti-gender fraud law crowd.

Here is a statement by a trans man and lawyer Stephen Whittle,

The REAL problem for Chris and the others in these cases was that they were isolated and not in touch with the trans community, so did not have the benefit of people like me telling them to spill the beans because it would probably just get the young women into bed even more quickly.

That’s great Stephen, that’s what’s really important to emphasis here. There wasn’t one single comment in this asshole's blog post that indicated one ounce of respect for other people’s feelings, one ounce of respect for other people’s sexual boundaries, or one ounce of respect for other people’s identities. The only issue that’s important here is a trans man getting laid.

Again Alex Sharpe,

Accordingly, we need to challenge the idea that sexual autonomy be viewed as an absolute right.

I want to repeat that again.

Accordingly, we need to challenge the idea that sexual autonomy be viewed as an absolute right. For some, this is tantamount to heresy or rape apologia. However, this is not a time for reticence, not while the attrition against trans and gender queer kids continues unabated. Sexual autonomy, as apparently understood by the CPS and by those who helped shape prosecutorial policy in this area, renders sacred the subjective experience of complainants, even to the point of denying others the capacity for self-determination.

I consider the view that sexual autonomy is not an absolute right to be selfishness taken to a pathological level.

Here is another quote from Natalie Reed, this argument is interesting actually,

Now… why is it her obligation to tell you, and not your obligation to ask? Here we encounter several layers of cisnormativity and privilege. There is, for instance, how you’re walking around simply assuming that everyone ever is cisgender… I’m sorry, but if the realization that some women are trans is something so far out of your mind that you can’t even be bothered to take into consideration and be responsible for your own feelings about that, we’re not going to hold your hand and take special care to remind you of this…Then we have the idea that although it’s your hang-up that is generating the potential conflict, we have to predict that possibility, account for it, and take it on as our own ethical responsibility. This is unbelievably privileged and selfish… And why didn’t you inform us you were a transphobe, huh? Isn’t it your ethical responsibility to disclose to a potential partner that you have major hang-ups about transgenderism prior to hooking up? After all, if I’d known you were a transphobe I wouldn’t have consented to sleeping with you! It’s rape by deception! :p

OK, I think your turn about argument is interesting here and probably the best argument I have heard actually. I still just can’t support that it is reasonable to expect the majority to constantly consider the minute possibility of every unusual situation. But if you pass well and want to conduct your sex life this way, go ahead. What they don’t know won’t hurt them I guess.

But in the real world what you are asking will actually make things more unsafe for trans people. And I don’t want that because I certainly don’t advocate for any violence against trans people, for gender fraud or any reason. If you have every young mucho buck asking every woman if she is trans on the dance floor, in bars, or in other superficial hook up situations, you risk being outed in potentially dangerous environments. If you like women, not so much. But that is what the effect is going to be with what you are asking in the real world of the heterosexual male. And we all need to navigate our safety as women in the real world of the heterosexual male, not the ideal world. I’m sorry but that’s just the way it is unfortunately.

In Conclusion

I think it’s one thing if a judge punishes certain groups they don’t like with harsher sentences in court cases. I think it’s one thing to question the believability of a case as crazy as the Gayle Newland case. I think it’s one thing to argue over how the law should handle these situations, if at all. But anyone that argues against the idea that people have a right to their body autonomy needs to be aggressively confronted as the selfish people that they are. A blogger with a site called the Idge of Reason sums up why perfectly.

Apparently she was asking for it. Was a bigot and therefore the man, who turned out not to be a man but a woman, had every right to do this to her. It was just a little deception. She is overreacting. The victim here is the woman who did this to her. She is lying because what she was subjected to is so unbelievable that it must be in her imagination. Even though there is a conviction and reams of evidence demonstrating the extraordinary lengths her abuser went to do this to her, this is an alleged offence. It’s not ‘rape, rape… Maybe if she hadn’t been such a bigot and been so squeamish and just said yes, and accepted her cunt was not a part of her body but public property to be used at will, the true victim of this crime would not be in prison… It’s not like when Julian Assange raped women and said the same thing. It’s not like Ched Evans. At all. This is one of those grey areas, where women need to get to grips with the fact that identity politics means that when they are raped by someone who isn’t an asian male it isn’t rape. Except it isn’t treated as rape when it’s an asian male. Or a white male. Or a celebrity. Or a footballer. Or a lesbian. Or a trans woman. Because what women need to get to grips with is that their bodies do not belong to them but exist entirely for other people to use when they need to.

Trans woman Jane Fae says,

This is not an easy question to answer, since it encompasses clashing rights, dissonant truths. There are no easy solutions.

No Jane, just no…no. This isn’t complicated. The right to not to fuck someone always outweighs the right to fuck them. And I don’t want anything to do with any lgbt lawyer, journalist, organization, or individual that believes otherwise. And find someone who loves you for you. They are out there.