Dr Adrian Harrop thread the fourth. "GMC do care & have taken it to the next level"

[R0wantrees]

(twitter account in screenshot apparently suspended from twitter following mass targetted reporting yesterday)

previous threads:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3354331-Dr-Adrian-Harrop-thread-the-third-yes-weve-edited-the-title

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3248676-dr-adrian-harrop-dr-misogyny-is-pursuing-another-woman

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3244781-dr-adrian-harrop-who-the-funk-does-he-think-he-is

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3399503-Adrian-Harrop-feeds-back-on-his-own-debate-on-Feedback

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3392510-Adrian-Harrop-also-chimes-in-on-Karen-White

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3408520-Cant-stop-laughing-at-Haddock

Perhaps "Steph" obtained an Overseas GRC Dr Octagon?
Or perhaps it is all smoke and mirrors?
Because ( rightly) we don't go round shouting "Papers!"

So the persona of "Steph" relies on people taking "Steph" for "Steph," not a Heinz 57 varieties of aliases.

For years on here Women have posted about the " in good faith" understanding Women had regarding Safe Spaces. This Forum is not anti Trans. It is very anti the con merchants and offenders who seek opportunities for themselves. To do this, they need the removal of Safeguarding and shout down anyone who stands up to them with the cry "transphobe".

The people I know who have a UK GRC, ( less than ten and I would not dream of even saying the jobs they do), and who did not go through the Overseas route, ALL had a long distressing time fighting for a GRC, and in some cases were initially refused, a UK GRC.

I may add, as far as I know, the difference with the persona of "Steph" is that the people I know, who are trans, have no convictions for violent sexual offences nor violent assaults. They are sick and tired of the "Steph and Company" weasel bandwagon.

Steph thought the GRC process was fine.

Read about how she did it HERE

She posted about it on Reddit. As she links to her blog on trans issues, I'm sure the mods are happy to leave this stand as she identifies herself clearly?

Had the discussion started in a constructive way with trans people saying:

1. "ALL had a long distressing time fighting for a GRC, and in some cases were initially refused, a UK GRC. "

1. We understand women have genuine concerns about modesty/dignity, equality and about the protection of vulnerable women and children.

We could have got a long way quickly.

Instead we have had...there is an issue with cost (which ffs is roughly the same as elderly have to pay for the two Power of Attorney documents they need), and with process, and so we need to open the barn door to anyone and everyone who might self-ID as a woman with whatever motivation. With a whole lots of noise about #nodebate, evil terfs, and so on.

The problem is that should the Tories stay in power there will probably be a decision that it is all too hot to handle so the staus quo remains, and if Corbyn and his mates form a Government, women's rights and safety are trampled upon without women having a say. Whatver happens there will be casualties, whether it is Stonewall's reputation, a problem pursuading talented young people to get involved in politices, Adrian and Lily's careers, and a generation confused by gender teaching.

Date of birth is 1985??

Avoiding dead naming should be social courtesy only. That is if one works with/ knows a law abiding person who has legally requested to be known as a different name then it’s polite to do so. I would expect to do so with a colleague, a friend, a family member or an acquaintance.

What CANNOT happen is any kind of law prohibiting talking of someone’s past. At the moment, only in exceptional circumstances is this done - for example if a criminal who might face reprisals has served their sentence, or if someone is given a new identity for protection purposes. Even then I think that’s subject to review, and their last name can be discussed, they just can’t be publically identified.

For us to have a situation where any discussion of someone’s past - especially a criminal past - is forbidden is dangerous territory. It opens the door to any criminal who wants to erase their past.

It increases the likelihood of dbs errors.
It reduces safeguarding because the person is effectively unknown in the public sphere.
It would stipnpolice putting out requests for info on historical offences.

It’s mindblowing.

I'll report my post.

Didn't realise there could be two Anthony George Hallidays.....🤔

en.everybodywiki.com/Luke_Nash-Jones

Seems Steph kept interesting company during their time at Birkbeck

Entryism: as old as Time.
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/entryism

Hahaha Floral surprisingly enough the photo with Corbyn was more restrained.

Seems Steph kept interesting company during their time at Birkbeck

Oh I thought it was only the so-called/faux feminists that consorted with the right wing

Whoops my above post is completely out of whack. I'm blaming time zone #straya.

Harrop's got an op-ed piece in the Observer this weekend so that's something to look forward to

Indeed. I shall look forward to it like root canal.

This from one of Harrop's chums (the one who identified David Challenor's victim on twitter). Am I being dense? I don't see what the two screenshots have to do with each other.

twitter.com/lisaquestions/status/1062428508398350336?s=19

Are they the same person? The poster in the MN shot was deleted for using an unsuitable user name.

Also I've noticed Harrop making a token attempt to tweet about women's issues recently. He RTd about period poverty today, and the story about women giving birth in prison yesterday. As did one of his followers, saying terfs weren't talking about it, except we were, both on twitter and Mumsnet (there was a Mumsnet thread on it by just after 8 am)

I suppose that could be it, melamin but what has the second screen shot got to do with Mumsnet or that user? Different iser name (are they related? I wouldn't know)It's not from here, and it doesn't seem to be referencing here - we don't 'upvote posts' , and if that is supposed to be a description of Mumsnet users, it couldn't be further from the truth!

It’s the strategy from “we’re still here” made flesh, to borrow a phrase from a well respected doxtor. They spoke about being seen to be more involved in period poverty etc as a way of legitimising their ability to speak for all women.

Oh so they did, Bonions, you're right!

I think from reading the thread that the second one is from reddit?

Can't think what the thread was that the dodgy poster was on but there was a string of posts removed. Anyone can post (and be deleted). I assumed it was a plant. Probably the same with reddit. I am not seeing any connection either.

Well yes that's the thing isn't it? Anyone can post here. The real test would be whether such posts would stay up and /or be agreed with. Surely if they had any real proof of any nazi-like tendancies, they would be aaaaaall over it.

They don't need proof. See their claims for the funding of FPFW or spreading lies about razor blades being hidden behind the penis stickers.

Apologies if this has already been suggested or acted on (have been away and no time to catch up properly), but has anyone contacted Harrop's Lead Employer with evidence of his twitter activity? I think there will be one NHS trust responsible for him (lucky them) for the duration of his training.

Or the "man with knife threatened me until I showed him my vagina". Yeah, you're right, although surely people outside of their inner circle must be getting suspicious by now? Surely?