Nov 08

The Weird World of ‘Transgenders’

6 comments

Skip to comment form

    • Rox
    • Rox on 9 November 2018 at 00:50

    The case of Capt and Mr Winterbourne is quite intriguing. To put this as delicately as I can, does their married life closely resemble what one might have expected if they were Capt and Mrs winterbourne, or do they (as a transgender couple) do something else ?

  1. The “trans” legal doctrine is that biological sex and legal gender are no longer synonyms, as they used to be in English Common Law. Since man makes the laws, that’s that. It is a fait accompli. How we can mitigate the ill-effects of it should be our question.

    By default, sex and gender usually still coincide, in which case any normal individual is said to cisgendered (or just “cis”). In certain exceptional circumstances, by statute law, sex and gender in the UK may nowadays be opposite, in which case the individuals are said to be transgendered (or just “trans”), and his or her legal gender is said to be his or her “acquired” gender, as opposed to his or her “birth gender”, which remains a synonym sex.

    I tried to make an issue of this in 2005, but I was before my time, apparently, because most prominent Christians ignored my attempt to challenge this change in the law. I am happy that you and a few others have at last recognised the importance of this issue, albeit thirteen years too late to fight it head on as we should have in 2005. Most of those whom I approached in 2005, have still not woken up to the trans issue. I am glad that you have now, if you have.

    The Gender Recognition Act 2004, facilitates the deception perpetrated by somebody who is trans, whose victim acquiesces in the assumption that the deceiver is cis. The ultimate victim of such “gender fraud” (or rather, sex fraud), is the person who marries somebody trans who is of the opposite gender to himself legally, unaware that his new spouse is of the same biological sex as himself because the British state facilitates this deception. The state facilitates the deception pursuant to the Act, by concealing the truth, and threatening with the criminal law anybody who is party to the secret truth who warns the engaged person at risk of marrying somebody of the same sex as himself unawares.

    The Gender Recognition Act provides the victims of marital gender fraud with a legal remedy. Nobody can therefore deny that Parliament recognised the problem it was creating, even if certain liberal Christians seem sceptical that marital gender fraud is the serious risk I think it is. The rememdy? The victim can apply to have his marriage annulled, on the grounds that he mistakenly thought he was marrying a member of the opposite biological sex, not just someone of the opposite legal gender. I took the Secretary of State to court in 2005, to prevent the implementation of the Gender Recognition Act, because, I said, that patlry remedy was too little protection, too late. The Gender Recognition Act ought not to make the state a party to gender fraud in the first place, I argued.

    I cited French legislation like the Gender Recognition Act, which required any birth certificate for the purposes of marriage to show biological sex, i.e. “birth gender”, as well as present legal gender (which might be an acquired gender). Proposed amendments along these lines had been resisted in the UK Parliament during the passage of the UK Bill. After Royal Assent, but before implementation of the Gender Recognition Act, I had the opportunity to challenge the state’s complicity in marital gender fraud. If, when I did this, my initiative had not been despised by those higher up the status ladder, reminding me of Judges 8 – if I had received support – then perhaps the courts would have prevented the Gender Recognition Act’s implementation, until the defect had been remedied.

    We now have another opportunity, because of the government’s review of the present Gender Recognition Act, to seek an Esther-like law, allowing us to protect ourselves from being tricked into marrying trans people who have pretended to be cis, by requiring brith gender to be shown on birth certificates produced for the purposes of marriage, like the French. If we are complacent, if we think, “God would never allow that to happen to a member of my family, or my church! Where is Allman’s faith?”, then we won’t ask for this change in the law. We will have only ourselves to blame, if our own sons are tricked into marrying other biological men who are so well disguised as women that they only realised when there were no children to the marriage.

    Stop gender fraud!
    https://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/2017/07/08/gra/

    Will Christian Voice join me, in my demand that any amendment to the Gender Recognition Act, as the first priority, puts a stop to state-enabled, marital gender fraud, so that our sons and daughters can no longer be tricked into same-sex marriages (and the consummation of them) unawares?

    Low probability (the usual lame argument in objection to my point) is no defence to state-enabled gender fraud. If only one Smartie in Tesco contains cyanide, nobody will dare buy a single packet of Smarties, or eat a single Smartie offered to them. The whole marriage market is contaminated, by the presence of those who are secretly trans. Think it through.

  2. I think you are onto something here by going to these conferences. Talk of people dressing as girls to abuse them is just the faff of the Daily Mail etc. You never learn anything as it is just fodder to shock you. What I’ve learnt in taking on unholy groups is you never learn anything from the PR they put out. What you have to do is mingle, and there is an art to it so as you can do it without raising an eyebrow. That way you can really learn what is going on, as those involved will be frank with you as they are not speaking to cameras.

    In doing this you might find something clicks that didn’t before. It could be anything, but keep your ears and eyes looking for anything that looks a bit odd, or what correlations you can see. Intelligence is everything in this game. It’s like a game of war. They put out a public front and have all of that covered. They know the media/political game, so you have to play things a bit Bobby Fischer-like, as in unconventional attacks. The attacks suggested by the press are covered for, as in false opposition. No doubt there will be new checks in the pipeline – that’s part two the ruse, so you then think everything about transgender it OK with some more regs You might though find out something they do not have an answer for or something that engages the public’s questioning.

    I’m talking from personal experience here, because about ten years ago I was trying to do similar things with a few local cults into evil occult worship. I learnt quite a lot more than I expected to by simply looking in places which were not like the shop window, figuratively speaking.

    I’d expect the conference itself to say nothing, but what with loads of attendees milling about you could be lucky. If you can find out what the motivation is, then you can probably work out how to demotivate them in supporting such a perversion. The conference itself will tend to function as a training session. See what manipulative psychological techniques are employed. I think some speakers can hypnotise the audience. You can spot it sometimes as they will look a bit dizzed out.

    • llooeegee
    • Luigi J on 10 November 2018 at 19:46

    When and where will the next Sodom and Gamorra take place and when will the ROYAL ASSENT assent to CHRISTIANITY

    • Child-of-God
    • A. K on 10 November 2018 at 20:24

    What a mess. A really high percentage of so-called transgender people were sexually abused as children, anybody would have mental health issues having suffered that. So it backs up the fact that this gender confusion is a mental illness even more.

    • llooeegee
    • Luigi J on 11 November 2018 at 17:00

    confused and scandalised children, due to the demise of the building bricks— the FAMILY. Thanks to Divorce, LGBT! ‘ ‘What GOD has joined together — let NO MAN put assunder !!!
    ” whosoever scandalises children,- it would be better for him if he had never born”

Comments have been disabled.