Biggus Titus of Oxford University

[Forecastsayssnowbutthereisnosnow]

Sadly, not a Monty Python sketch.

Matt Rattley, a large bearded bloke who wears giant fake breasts, appears to be happily working at Oxford Uni.

I was really hoping this wasn't true but there is even a youtube video with him talking while wearing the giant breasts and red lipstick, applied to a degree any circus clown would be accused of overdoing it. The video includes a slide stating he works as a lecturer and tutor in the Biochemistry Dept at Oxford. He's also on LinkedIn.

I mean, how obvious can it be that this is a sexual fetish which he is involving unconsenting students and staff in???

Dr P on X has been (correctly) very robust on this case:

""This is Matt Rattley saying, "I can do whatever I please and nobody can stop me".

This is highly antisocial, abnormal, boundary-violating, paraphilic behaviour.

And we should not be afraid to say so."

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.

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.’ '

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.

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

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

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.

Archive link
https://archive.ph/Eb6Fs

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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?

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.

Michael Foran is at Oxford. I hope he gets a chance to have a word with St Hilda's governing body about the law and how the hopefully inevitable court case might go for them.

You seem to have completely misunderstood what I was saying. As Catiette has explained, when I said "it's about trans", I meant that the whole situation has come about because of people who self identify as trans being a sacred caste who can't be criticised. I really have no idea what you thought I meant.

I haven't been taken over by anything, I'm just explaining what I see as the reason why this man is being allowed to behave in a way which would not have been allowed only 10 or so years ago. The reason is trans.

But as well as telling me how wrong I am, you seem to be agreeing with me:

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

Well, yes, that's exactly what I was saying. It's about trans.

To add to the above, someone earlier posted a really eye-opening analysis of how this movement - and, if we do call it abusive behaviour, this facet of that - rely on ambiguity and uncertainty. Oh, and catching up, Theywontletme has, too.

Maybe you could say that in debating the applicability of “it’s about trans” to this instance, we’re demonstrating the success of that. Equally, I guess, you could say that in shouting a big angry No! to all that, Retire’s challenging it by trying to decouple (sorry, pretentious sounding!) the two.

I just don’t think they CAN be separated that easily any more, though… Colloquially, trans has become a useful shorthand for anyone not fully versed in the various Rainbow flags and subversion of sex roles and stereotypes (which, with a worrying lack of irony, many such guys argue is what they’re doing… I guess from a male-as-default perspective, they are, while that argument wholly disregards the female perspective). And Stonewall included cross dressing til very recently, and similar orgs I think still do. It feels like trans has become a bit not just transing sex, but transing all facets of our unavoidably sex-based reality. But anyway, as long as trans ideology captures our institutions and trans is defined by an individual’s subjective internal state, it’ll be destructive. The ideological capture is authoritarian enough, and as long that’s the case AND trans is about self-ID… it leads as inexorably to thought-policing as Winston’s journey did to 101.

The sad thing is, I’d argue that guys like this are undermine the most vulnerable within the trans community. So you get halls plastered with Progress flags, acceptance of inappropriate prosthetics in the name of protecting and uplifting a community even as it’s almost certainly… not doing.

I hope the conjecture that this man is fed up that he can't express a mild sex-realist position without witch hunts and threats to his employment but he's allowed to parade around in porn-wear in front of female undergraduates is true and this is a protest. That would be the best outcome. Ridiculous that this is even a possibility in a University of all places though.

Just to add… I keep trying to remember that he may be vulnerable too. Thanks for others’ reminders. Early on I tried not to post more on that assumption. But I just find it so very, very upsetting that this is permitted even as our concern is silenced. I said elsewhere, I feel like it’s that vast gulf of inconsistency that drives threads like this. An attempt to redress an utterly undemocratic imbalance that the powers-that-be never should have permitted, which then leads directly to the ironic spotlighting of the very individuals they’d say they were seeking to protect in the first place. But also… educational professionals are taught to be very careful in curating an appropriate social media presence. Unfair in a way, but there’s a fairly clear consensus that modelling standards comes with the role. Which brings it back to exactly what concerns us.

I’m monologuing - sorry. Am off to the Aida thread to talk chocolate and get less carried away.

WHY are we still trapping ourselves with this Be Kind stuff??? It does not matter that Beardy Rubberjugs at Oxford may be ‘vulnerable’!! Why are certain posters falling over themselves to say this?

His behaviour is appalling wherever it stems from. His employers should be making it very clear to him that he cannot turn up at work looking like that and that if he wants help then he should go and see his GP. Or whoever you see when you’ve got a fetish / paraphilia, I don’t know.

Because it is of absolutely crucial importance that women and girls learn that a person can be vulnerable and also represent a risk, or damaging, or abusive.

It's not about being 'kind', its about learning what 'vulnerable' means. Which means they may need support. Murderers, rapists, and all sorts of other people may be 'vulnerable'. It does not mean 'harmless'. It does not mean all safeguarding must be abandoned. It does not mean that other people's rights have to be sacrificed because this person is or may be vulnerable.