Charity rejects disabled child for mother's GC views

[PaddingtonSwear]

Archive link here: https://archive.ph/zGGCc

Pretty shocking but it seems they think they're right.

Yes, you just need to look at Stephen Ireland of Surrey Pride or James Rennie of LBQT Youth Scotland to see how transideology has provided a means for abusive men to get access to children. It is interesting to note that in both of these organisations once their leaders had been found guilty of horrendous abuse, they did nothing to improve safeguarding within their organisations. And both continue to receive public funds.

Do you not think that the response from the organisation was a tiny bit over the top? The mother had written "Seriously?" on the form. That triggered a phone call to tell her off for questioning their inclusivity. I have no doubt that they were looking for repentance for her blatant transphobia in being disrespectful to their gender beliefs.

I have had occasion to fill in forms on behalf of people whose disabilities affect their language skills and cognitive capacity, and I can attest to how difficult it is to refrain from writing "seriously?!" to such questions.

This man has no idea what a pronoun is, and wouldn't notice if you used she and her to refer to him for the rest of his life.

DarkwingDuk Having worked with children within mental health it's heartbreaking to see how people like you make these kids feel ...
Some of these people have identified since they were 4-6years old, if it's affect a biological male or female it's affected them, and to deny that is pure ignorance.

I thank my lucky stars that you weren't working with me when I was a mixed-up gender-questioning dysphoric 4-6 years old!
I was lucky enough to be surrounded by people who knew that sex is binary and immutable, and that because I was born female I would stay female for the rest of my life, and who helped me cope with that fact, instead of filling my poor little head with falsehoods about 'transitioning' into being a boy.

It is cruel to hold up a mirage to little children that they are, or can ever be, anything other than the sex they were born into. Telling them that they will always be a boy, or always be a girl, but can make their own mind up about what kind of man or what kind of woman they will be when they grow up is the positive, self-affirming support that gender-questioning children need, not having adult labels like 'trans' stuck on them.

It is exhausting. But we have to remember that IncelsRus expend a surprising amount of time on here - tag teaming, posting drivel that they think shows why men must have access to women undressing, why sex crimes of voyeurism and indecent exposure must be de criminalised and insisting that safeguarding children from this adult ideology is right wing bigotry.

You spot the little sneers "you gender criticals", "of course your children will be trans you bigots" and the rest.

No matter what persona is adopted, there's a level of emotional incontinence that usually outs the extreme transactivists from the confused parents, the be kinders and those who are too scared to utter the truth.

And they do enable so many fantastic posts from posters well versed in challenging this dangerous to children ideology.

So I read this and had some questions because it seemed to lack some details. So I put it in Chat GPT and they said:

You said:
Did this happen: Hospital told police patient was not raped because alleged attacker was transgender
ChatGPT said:
You're asking whether the claim is true that a hospital told police a patient was not raped because the alleged attacker was transgender. Here's what actually happened, based on credible reports:
What’s the story?
In March 2022, Baroness Emma Nicholson of Winterbourne spoke in the House of Lords (UK Parliament) about an incident which had occurred approximately one year earlier.
She stated that a female patient reported being raped. The police contacted the unnamed hospital, which reportedly responded that the crime “could not have happened” because “there was no male in the hospital” — implying that the alleged attacker was a transgender man and therefore not considered male under their reasoning. YahooGB News.
According to Nicholson, this denial persisted for nearly a year, until CCTV footage, along with witness and staff testimony, clearly showed that a male-bodied individual had indeed been present—and the assault had taken place. YahooGB Newsmedicalbrief.co.za.
Nicholson linked this incident to what she called "Annex B," part of an NHS policy that directs staff to assign patients to single-sex wards based on gender identity, rather than biological sex. She argued this policy caused staff to mislead or deny the presence of male-bodied individuals on female wards. YahooSkeptics Stack ExchangeGB News.
Is the claim verified?
The only source of this claim is the speech by Baroness Nicholson in Parliament. Media coverage (e.g., by GB News, MedicalBrief, Ground News, etc.) largely echoed what she said, but no public hospital name or official documents have been released to independently verify the claim. National ReviewYahooGB Newsmedicalbrief.co.zaGround News.
A thorough examination on Skeptics Stack Exchange noted that the incident rests solely on Nicholson’s statement, and that media reports simply repeated it. They pointed out that there has been no further documentation or confirmation from the hospital or NHS beyond what was said in Parliament. Skeptics Stack Exchange.
Summary
What was claimed: A woman’s rape claim was initially dismissed by hospital staff/administration to police because the alleged attacker was trans and “there was no male in the hospital.”
Evidence: First voiced in a 2022 House of Lords speech by Baroness Nicholson, supported by media reports quoting her directly.
Verification: There has been no public confirmation from the hospital, NHS, or police beyond Baroness Nicholson’s parliamentary remarks. No hospital is named, and no official documentation has emerged.
So yes—the incident was reported to have happened, but it is based solely on one politician’s account without independent corroboration or official confirmation.

So because it is something that only one person reported to have happened and there are no verified sources of information to confirm it, I am left with questions.

For instance, who were these police officers told that there was no male? The management of the hospital. Specific nurses on that ward? Who checked this and how was it checked? It leads me back to a list with patient names and an F next to the name and someone high up just saying there were only women in the ward that day. Not the actual nurses who treated the victim and the perpetrator lying to cover it up.

The thing that I don't understand about this the most is that you don't have to identify as male to be convicted of rape, you only need to have a penis. So by today's standards, anyone with a penis can be convicted of rape if they penetrate someone without consent irrespective of their "gender identity". It leaves the possibility that the victim was sexually assaulted rather than being raped, and was reported in another case. This could be what she is referring to but in that case, it doesn't seem as if the person was not convicted of rape due to their gender identity, but because of what did and what didn't occur. It was a sexual assault.

Please read this post I made earlier.

There is no other context in which it would be reasonable to stop police investigating a rape report because the people documented to be on site were incapable of it.

So why are you suggesting it would be reasonable here? Hospital wards have all kinds of people coming in and out all the time, who may be mistaken for patients, or pretend to be patients.

Not estranged because they don't share beliefs about gender. Estranged because of their heresy in denying the belief system. Many parents whose stories I have heard directly (literally dozens) have not rejected their children, but have rejected their children's ideology; in return their children have rejected them, hence the estrangement. I know parents whose stories tell how they have disagreed on religion, on politics, on philosophy, on lifestyle, and it was only when the child took on a trans identity that the child cut himself or herself of from their parents. The ideology appears to demand this

Good grief, we're really scraping the barrel here (on a feminist board) when we have to explain why women are entitled to anonymity after they've been raped? You've really tried to discredit a woman's account of being raped for your own niche interests?

The site you're posting on has a "We Believe you" campaign in the face of this systematic disbelief, denial and failure to act promptly on disclosures of rape
"Rape and sexual assault are far more common than the world at large wants to admit, and the vast majority of rapes and sexual assaults are never even reported"

https://www.mumsnet.com/articles/we-believe-you-campaign-survey-on-rape-and-sexual-assault

Biut you crack on @Ihavetoask with your denial of rape and sexual assault on a woman in hospital and your repeated attempts to ridicule and deny the rights of parents to safeguard their children..

This really is a case if "When someone shows you who you are, believe them the first time."

This ideology has been embedded in too many organisations precisely because too many people say nothing. We need more people to call out this nonsense.

What have I just read? Sickening.

I bet the commonality will be that these parents all hold pretty rigid gender views despite their belief that they do not.

Absolutely not. All the parents I have heard on this subject whose children have rejected them are accepting of various "gender expressions" but are concerned about where trans identity is leading their children - hormones and surgery (typically mastectomies). Their children (our children) have rejected us, or at least distanced themselves from us, for not affirming enthusiastically.

Yes whatever. It doesn't change the fact that many of these parents if not most have rigid views about gender which they passed onto their children and essentially created their confusion.

Do you actually think that the hospital, the police or the victim would be giving details about a current criminal case to be spread on the internet?

Pop over to the NHS audit threads and #educateyourself. NHS hospitals have policies which explicitly state that staff have to pretend males are females if the males say so, and have to lie to the female patients who question that, or they will be disciplined and reported to the police for a hate crime. So yes the actual nurses who treated the patients would lie to cover it up, or risk losing their jobs.

You seem determined to believe that this was a data snafu, 'ooops we said James was Jane, soz'. It wasn't, it was deliberate policy to lie that men who said they were women, were women. Many NHS hospitals have not rescinded these illegal policies despite FWS.

The more you post the more ill informed on this topic you seem to be TBH. Yet you don't seem to want to learn from those who've been in the trenches on this for years.

They only start to vocalise this once their child "comes out" as a way to barter. If they held those views from the time the child was a baby, they wouldn't be where they are. That's my opinion based on what Ive seen.

I cannot believe that there is doubt being expressed here because a woman has not made her rape story open to the public. On a feminist board.

I happen to believe the Baroness because she is very capable to looking into and verifying what happened while keeping the woman's name and the hospital out of the press. Because releasing the details about the hospital would inadvertently lead to a greater chance of being identified.

Considering we have seen the policies of some NHS Trusts that still seem to be in existence, I also find it ignorant to declare that this couldn't have happened. When you have NHS Trusts with published policies that detail to tell female patients who ask if their fellow patient is a 'man' that 'there are no men in this room', and to treat that female patient as if they needed to be re-educated, it is no great leap to understand that of course the staff will likely answer 'there were no men on this ward' or whatever was said.

I haven't seen any verified reports of this occurring. Have you?

The thing that I don't understand about this the most is that you don't have to identify as male to be convicted of rape, you only need to have a penis.

MEN, only Men have a penis. Your transideology is showing.

Yes. The police usually do say that a crime occurred in this place at this time. There is no report of that except the case where someone was sexually assaulted in A+E. Can you produce any evidence of this occurring except what the politician said? Because without an actual factual report to go on, it is pointless debating what might have happened.

That is utter nonsense, and pretty offensive to those of us with trans identifying children.

Maybe it should be a wake up call. What messages have you really sent your children about men and women or boys and girls?

You mean you haven’t seen any mainstream media reports breaking the law by identifying a rape victim or providing sufficient information to do so? Of course that wouldn’t be enough for you either would it?

Have you any receipts at all for the offensive accusations you're making about the parenting failures of people with transIDing children?

Edited typo

I also have to question why some posters are expecting to receive deeply considered insights from AI. Over the past month we have had so many posters who don't do any of the long hours of reading and searching for original source information and resort to AI questions to shape their views and responses.

My only thought when I see this mentioned is, 'oh aye. Of course you did'. Because what is then posted rarely shows any depth of insight into the topic, whereas many of the posters on this board have been reading and reading original source material and listening to as many opinions on this as possible. In particular to transgender people themselves and groups who are supporting the prioritisation of gender over sex when sex matters. Very little has not already been discussed on threads here and in depth that I am sure would surprise some people using AI short cuts thinking that they will get the answer and posters here are just ignorant.

It is a commonality. I really think that people do a quick AI composite and think they have all the knowledge and that their view is the righteous one.

No I haven't seen any official report stating that somone was raped in a hospital ward. Ive seen a report just last week stating someone was raped in my local park and that there had been an arrest and bail in connection. Nobody identified either party. Was reporter though