Biggus Titus of Oxford University

That's in response to @ArabellaScott above
I agree but Queer Theory is the philosophy that underpins GI, 'trans' is just one part of GI. Non Binary isn't 'trans' its GI, the clap trap of pronouns is all GI, there is intersectionality between all of the heads of the hydra. The philosophy that underpins QT is post-modernism, and CRT, intersectionality, BLM are all developed from the it.
They're all part of the counterfactual narrative of postmodernism, it's all batshit crazy and destructive, because the aim is to destroy the modern world and replace it with a Utopia. Where actions like the ones of this pervert are all normalised, there are no barriers or boundaries, anyone can be whoever they want to be, do whatever they like, to whom they like, no age restrictions.

If QT wins 'trans' will lose, just like 'trans' rendered same sex attractive obsolete because you can be whatever sex you want to be so a man who thinks he's a women, who fancy's women can also call himself a lesbian, so QT will render 'trans' obsolete because QT says we are all genderfluid, but 'trans' is all about a fixed GI, is about men claiming to be women and vice versa.

I thought the rule was that if someone says they’re trans, they are trans. That’s the essence of self-ID, is it not?

Those feel like quite strong words for something complex. I think there are a range of meanings to “trans” that could encompass this guy… but also that there are a range of meanings to the phrase “it’s about” used above. I think you may be using it more in the sense of “is he / isn’t he trans”. Others, meanwhile, may be focussing more on wider perceptions of him in the context of the cultural trend of trans ideology. I’d say it’s very much “about” the latter, if this is what’s preventing people from challenging him. And I don’t see what else would be stopping them - or, at least, I don’t see a more apt way of describing what is.

It's all the same thing. Gender/trans/queer theory is all one piece. 'Trans' is all about 'Gender Identity'.

it is clear some sort of situationalist joke he is playing on his employers.

What leads you to that conclusion? When abusive men are ten a penny.

Thanks - although I think he is taking the piss whether you call it Trans or Queer.

Didn't he early on get reprimanded for challenging some trans poster or something.

And just too bring it back to the mundane, as there is no evidence he does his shopping and goes to the pub with his mates dressed like this, it is clear some sort of situationalist joke he is playing on his employers.

And on one level I wouldn't care if they are so stupid to fall for it.

But in this istance they should be looking after their students well being.

As well as not letting them think work can be a platform for rampant individualism.

So it absolutely is about trans. Otherwise the media and social media would be calling him out, and the college would have told him to desist or kicked him out.

Of course it isn't.

You saying that is allowing yourself to be over taken by the trans narrative.

The authorities probably have no idea either way but are erring on the side of its trans therefore we must accept it.

Why anyone on FWR would use as an arguement that because the media says it trans it is, is just farcical.

That's like saying because the media uses the "correct" pronouns we should.

Honestly that's just nonsensical.

I agree with Iwanttoretire it's not 'trans' it's Queer Theory, They/Them is GI which is QT.

Not defending trans ideology in any of its various forms, but this man's behaviour is NOT about trans.

It is about trans. If he was giving his lectures in blackface or pretending to be disabled or wearing a nappy and sucking a dummy there would be outcry.

Even if he's not claiming to be trans (and, as Arabella has said, he says he's a they/them), other people think he's trans, so he becomes one of the sacred caste who can't be criticised.

So it absolutely is about trans. Otherwise the media and social media would be calling him out, and the college would have told him to desist or kicked him out.

That doesn't mean he is.

Both him and the man in Canada were also said to be behaving like this to challenge the concept of trans.

And the man in Canada lost this "trans" support when it became clear he only dressed like this at school.

It would be interesting to hear if the male at Oxford is going out shopping, or playing sports continues to dress like this.

I doubt it as there would have been news reports about it, or social media chatter.

He uses they/them. So he calls himself trans.

Not defending trans ideology in any of its various forms, but this man's behaviour is NOT about trans.

It is about abusing his position in a place where young people are expected to comply with the service the university offers them.

There were some good posts about this yesterday.

What is does reflect if anything is the queer theory that all norms should be challenged.

Okay fine.

But not if you doing that impinges on others.

And to repeat what I said yesterday both this man and the one in Canada chose to do this where they have access and a power position over children / young adults.

The men themselves are to blame, but more so the authorities at the univeristy and the school.

Although of course the power of the TRAs in terms of everyone thinks they have to grovel to them, that has allowed the numpties who are the management have just assumed this is about trans.

But doubt that the TRAs will make a statement about how they dont support this exhibitionism because as we all know TW look like actual women. Not some cartoon music hall insult to women.

Archive link
https://archive.ph/Eb6Fs

And as in the Spiked article just upthread it's not that St Hilda's can't draw lines. Just try saying anything remotely critical of gender ideology.

Either Oxford deal with this or they are going to explode their reputation.

It's the absolute pinnacle of the Emperor's New Tits.

In terms of Britain (obviously Canada had the teacher wearing the ginormous fake norks) this is one of the maddest stories I've seen. The people online defending this guy and saying it's perfectly acceptable to turn up for work like this are quite deranged. Makes me feel like they're all deliberately winding me up for a laugh.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2026/04/29/why-is-oxford-indulging-a-lecturer-who-wears-his-plastic-breasts-at-work/

'Dr Dionne Joseph, a clinical psychologist who has drawn attention to Rattley’s conduct, agrees. She described it as ‘highly anti-social, abnormal, boundary-violating, paraphilic’, and criticised the University of Oxford for failing to take action. ‘I see it as a form of (mental) sexual assault and institutional coercive control.’ '

It's a feature not a bug.

Because "Transness" is incoherent and unreasonable-about, people can't trust their own judgment and experience, or extrapolate knowledge gained in one trans context to another, or from one trans person to another.

All they know is they don't really know why something is right or wrong, but getting it wrong is really bad (for example, believing women's minds all think a certain way is usually very wrong 'cos feminism, unless it's in the context of trans women being women, in which case it's very wrong not to believe it)

So they are forced to just follow what they told and take it on faith. The only way to be safe is to be lead. And that creates wonderful positions of social, and even corporate, legal or political power, for those with the arrogance, solipsism or just lack of critical thinking to take the lead.

It's terrifying. An anti facts and science, anti women, anti child safeguarding ideology being able to upturn society with even politicians spouting nonsense about the female penis shows how vulnerable society is to entryism from destructive forces.

I was reflecting on my teens girl friends. They are very aware and actively call out "traditional" male inappropriate sexual boundaries such as comments about their bodies or touching without consent but would never dare mention sexualised behaviour if the person was trans.BeKind has them terrified of bring cancelled.

Wolf's in sheep's clothing.

Well, absolutely.

There will be many who try to pass it off as harmless oddity, I suppose. Eccentric Oxford dons with their weird peccadilloes.

That's fine so long as one gives absolutely zero consideration to the girls/young women/female colleagues who have to deal with this man making an utter mockery of their bodies and knowingly, openly subverting their boundaries.

It's that western society reached this point so very quickly, too. From upholding these boundaries to condemning them in what, 30 or so years? You know how quickly things deteriorate for women in The Handmaid's Tale adaptation? This absolute inversion of accepted ways of thinking, and that it involves doggedly denying everything we always knew, really shows how vulnerable we all are to goodness knows what in the future. We're pretty much just as we were back in Salem, we simply pretend not to be - and that pretence makes us even more vulnerable in ways. Scary.

I will also note that its possible this man is traumatised, in need of support, is deeply confused, is highly intelligent, is vulnerable.

His dress and behaviour sets up a whole colonnade of red flags for women and girls - except for those who have been re-educated to think that its acceptable for a man to wear a pair of enormous fake breasts in a work or education setting, and who have learned to dismiss all the instinctive and informed skills of risk recognition that women and girls unfortunately grow up needing to acquire.

Grey rock, and removing oneself as fast as possible, without arousing any suspicions or creating any difficult situation, is exactly the most sensible approach.

One that women are well versed in.

It's not hard to recognise a creepy fucker with a fetish, who is using others and their responses for gratification.

What is absolutely astounding is that some people/sections of society are normalising this abuse. It's just insane.

Yes, that's probably what I'd do. Make an excuse and rebook. Of course, if I wanted a discrete way of ensuring I didn't find myself in there again, even the, "Could I see a woman / female doctor next time, please?" is being degraded by the Dr. Uptons of the world. I do think I'd say something too, on reflection. Better me than a young teen or very elderly woman. Goodness only knows how I'd couch it in the current climate, though.