I actually think that they’ve done the very best they can within the IPSO guidelines with this report.
They don’t refer to him as a woman once. It’s always circumvented: the terms they use to refer to him are: Scot, former soldier, and Glasgow born sex offender. All of which, in isolation, are more likely to evoke someone male than female (whether because of male as default, or the fact that most soldiers and sex offenders actually are male).
They have to use “her” because of the IPSO guidelines, as others have said, but they couldn’t make it any clearer that this is a man, with the many references to “her” penis, and to people identifying him as male.
An article like this is a good way to wake people up to what is happening as a result of genderist ideology, how far the rot has gone, and the need to challenge these ludicrous guidelines - and the comments reflect that.
I certainly don’t get the impression the writer actually believes this a woman, or wants others to believe this is a woman, not for a nano second.
Of course it’s madness that they have to go along with the charade that there’s anything female about him, but I think they’ve done a pretty good job of getting around and even highlighting the madness.
The real scandal is that these IPSO guidelines were ever introduced, and are still in use; and that the Equal Treatment Bench Book was similarly drafted according to the demands of trans rights activists, making a mockery of the legal process in every one of these cases.
The near-total capture of the Establishment is the problem, and that’s what needs to be challenged. I think Fair Play for Women were bringing a challenge to the IPSO guidelines, though I’m not sure where that is atm. Anyone have any up to date info on that?