Susie Green & Mermaids UK - "Trans Kid Support Charity", Susie had her underage kid get GRS

[teriyakiburns]

She can’t actually sue him financially unless she can prove that he financially damaged her with this claim.

She'd be suing under UK libel law, which has far more latitude when it comes to causes of action. No financial damage is necessary.

I'm not sure financial damage is actually necessary under us libel laws, either.

 

[AnOminous]

She'd be suing under UK libel law, which has far more latitude when it comes to causes of action. No financial damage is necessary.

And truth isn't even an absolute defense.

 

[Tau Tack]

Susie Green mulls suing Graham Linehan after Linehan described her as having "groomed her very young child into believing he was the opposite sex then castrated him".

Do it, Suze. Stand up and defend what you did to your child.

 

[FinnSven]

She'd be suing under UK libel law, which has far more latitude when it comes to causes of action. No financial damage is necessary.

I'm not sure financial damage is actually necessary under us libel laws, either.

Yes. That is what I mean. It is easy to sue for libelous comments, but it’s only financially worthwhile if you can prove financial damages.

Online Defamation Lawyers London

Defamation Lawyers. Repairing Reputations. Restoring Dignity. If you or your business have been subjected to online defamation you have several legal options.

www.nathsolicitors.co.uk

That bunch of ambulance chasers explain it.

She could claim that the tweet cost her millions, but she has to prove that. Claiming millions in “projected earnings” doesn’t wash typically.

The people who tend to do it regularly and threaten it regularly can usually afford it, and they are more concerned with keeping rumors and misdeeds quiet than financial gain. E.g. The late Jimmy Saville.

She doesn’t strike me as the kind of grifter who plays the game properly, she would only start expensive legal proceedings if she was guaranteed a payout.

 

[Geranium]

Yes. That is what I mean. It is easy to sue for libelous comments, but it’s only financially worthwhile if you can prove financial damages.

Not necessarily. In England and Wales, defamation law is concerned primarily with damage to reputation (typically whether a “right-thinking person“ would feel less favourable towards the claimant in light of the defamatory comments).

Damages are awarded as compensation for the damage to a person’s reputation, and consider the distress and mental anguish the allegations caused.

The problem for Green, even if she had an open-and-shut case, is that Glinner is more or less broke after the entertainment industry cancelled him. “No-win, no-fee” is fine but you best believe there will be a fee if you win.

And truth isn't even an absolute defense.

It is, and has always been — the defence of “truth” under the Defamation Act 2013 replaces the common law defence of “justification”, but they are defined in the same terms.

The difficulty is that (in this case, for example) the “truth” of the accusation of “grooming” depends on what the definition of grooming is held to be. Typically libel cases are brought regarding claims that are difficult to prove definitively, but which a publisher might come to believe of the balance of probabilities.

 

[AnOminous]

It is, and has always been — the defence of “truth” under the Defamation Act 2013 replaces the common law defence of “justification”, but they are defined in the same terms.

So it's the same old defense as justification, just renamed. And there's also "fair comment." Having an opinion that a certain activity is "grooming" could be that even if reasonable minds could disagree about the "real" definition.

 

[Hongourable Madisha]

Helen Webberley of GenderGP (Susie Green's current employer) has actually won a tribunal appeal. https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/helen-webberley-vs-general-medical
Sarah Phillimore, at-terf-ney at law, breaks it down: https://sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/webberley-v-general-medical-council

 

[Trig.Point]

The problem for Green, even if she had an open-and-shut case, is that Glinner is more or less broke after the entertainment industry cancelled him. “No-win, no-fee” is fine but you best believe there will be a fee if you win.

Also say what you like about Glinner, but I suspect he'd drive himself into bankruptcy before he'd actually pay legal fees or even damages to Green.

 

[AnOminous]

Helen Webberley of GenderGP (Susie Green's current employer) has actually won a tribunal appeal. https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/helen-webberley-vs-general-medical
Sarah Phillimore, at-terf-ney at law, breaks it down: https://sarahphillimore.substack.com/p/webberley-v-general-medical-council

The worst part of this is the judge seemed to buy the nonsensical claim that puberty blockers are harmless and reversible.

 

[Geranium]

Appeal judgment is attached.

The worst part of this is the judge seemed to buy the nonsensical claim that puberty blockers are harmless and reversible.

It's not really for the judge to take a position on this matter in this case. The important point is that this is something Webberley, the General Medical Council, and the other gender quacks who reported Webberley, all agree on.

A lot of "gender-critical" people got quite excited when Webberley had to face the tribunal, but the outcome was always going to be limited because at that time (and still now, really, pending any post-Cass changes) the established medical guidelines support the treatment of "transgender" children with puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

Webberley didn't face the tribunal because she was stunting and sterilising children, but because she allegedly hadn't been thorough enough while doing so.

 

[AnOminous]

It's not really for the judge to take a position on this matter in this case.

But the judge did. I understand that under the circumstances, the judge was required not to disregard the factual findings of the lower tribunal, but it's still displeasing to see it in a legal opinion, for the reasons Phillimore pointed out.

Webberley still has a black mark on her record and any future cases will have to deal with things like the Cass findings, so the bitch better keep her nose clean.

 

[Geranium]

Not content to let Susie Green have all the terrible Twitter takes, Mermaids strike back at the Equality and Human Rights Commission suggesting that "sex" under the Equality Act 2010 should mean "sex".


@Mermaids_Gender, tweet 1643290267145887746 (archive)`

Mermaids (@Mermaids_Gender) · Apr 4, 2023 · 4:31 PM UTC
It’s extremely distressing to see the UK’s equality watchdog, the EHRC, seeking to strip trans people’s rights from the Equality Act 2010. By redefining sex, they support removing the rights and protections trans people have had for over a decade

Mermaids (@Mermaids_Gender) · Apr 4, 2023 · 4:31 PM UTC
With no supporting evidence to support such a stance, and no detail of how this would work in practice, the EHRC is doubling down on its politicised, anti-trans position.

Mermaids (@Mermaids_Gender) · Apr 4, 2023 · 4:31 PM UTC
This advice from the EHRC does not change the law as it stands, and any proposals to do so will face fierce opposition.
Read more about how trans people are protected under the Equality Act 2010:

The Equality Act — TransActual

TransActual UK offer information on UK law as it relates to transgender rights. There is information on transphobia, hate crime, the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act.

www.transactual.org.uk

It's an interesting argument to make: Mermaids claim that making the protected characteristic of sex under the Equality Act mean biological sex would "strip trans people's rights from the Equality Act 2010".

It's certainly bold, given that trans-identifying people are covered by the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (those “undergoing or having undergone a process … for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex”).

What Mermaids mean here is that there is a general reluctance on the part of organisations to use the sex protections of the Equality Act, for example to restrict a rape shelter to women only, as if they bar a trans-identified male with a Gender Recognition Certificate they could face legal consequences.

Changing "sex" under the act to mean only biological sex would make it clear: a GRC does not change matters. This has taken on a heighted importance as the Scottish government has attempted to bring in the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill — blocked for constitutional reasons — which would make it much easier for your average troon to get a GRC by removing almost all of the requirements. Easier access to GRCs means that rape crisis centre is even more likely to encounter a man with a GRC who they could not legally bar.

The campaign group Sex Matters has been running a campaign to press the government to amend the Equality Act in this way, and recently topped 100,000 signatures on its parliamentary petition — meaning that Parliament will have to consider having a debate on the matter.

Anyway, back to Mermaids' claims, which are further evidence that they are a men's-rights group: the EHRC letter suggests a definition of biological sex would largely benefit women, though there would be some disadvantages. And it is trans-identified men who would lose out:

• Equal pay provisions. At present, a trans woman with a GRC can bring an equal pay claim by citing a legally male comparator who was paid more. A trans man with a GRC could not. The proposed biological definition would reverse this situation. The effect would be to transfer this right from some trans women to some trans men.
• Direct sex discrimination. At present, a trans woman with a GRC can bring a claim of direct sex discrimination as a woman. A trans man with a GRC could not. The proposed biological definition would
  reverse this situation. The effect would be to transfer the right from some trans women to some trans men.
• Indirect sex discrimination. At present, a trans woman with a GRC could bring a claim of indirect discrimination as a woman. A trans man with a GRC could not. The proposed biological definition would
  reverse this situation. The effect would be to transfer this right from some trans women to some trans men.

In short: Mermaids are complaining because (apart from those fucking terf bitch slut women ) it is the gaydens (trans-identified females) who would benefit at the expense of the hons.

Edit: Almost forgot. Here's some new photos of Susie Green. I was going to joke about the caption being “Jack's not the only mutt whose dick I've cut off”, but the dog still has his penis, unlike her son. Maybe Fido chose the correct toys when he was a pup?

@green_susie100, tweet 1642929516044599310 (archive)

 

[Geranium]

Apologies for double posting, but Nina Paley’s drawing of Susie Green for her gender wars deck of cards made me laugh:

 

[White-Kettle Shufflepunk]

In short: Mermaids are complaining because (apart from those fucking terf bitch slut women ) it is the gaydens (trans-identified females) who would benefit at the expense of the hons.

You'd almost think the trans community was an excuse to enforce patriarchal norms that'd make a dissident Mormon blush, but honestly, those guys' polycules are slightly hotter. I mean, Bill Paxton's wives were all smokin'.

Edit: Almost forgot. Here's some new photos of Susie Green. I was going to joke about the caption being “Jack's not the only mutt whose dick I've cut off”, but the dog still has his penis, unlike her son. Maybe Fido chose the correct toys when he was a pup?

You ever wonder if this is all some secret Spartan style eugenics scheme to breed a generation of hyper gender-normed children?

 

[Falkor]

Found out recently that the post of Treasurer for Mermaids is a volunteer position. That strikes me as unusual for something that must involve pretty large sums of money.

 

[Geranium]

Found out recently that the post of Treasurer for Mermaids is a volunteer position. That strikes me as unusual for something that must involve pretty large sums of money.

It's really not; in a charity the treasurer is a trustee, and trustees are volunteers. The treasurer is there, essentially, to check the work of the (staff) finance manager. The treasurer is responsible (ie accountable) for the accounts, but is not responsible for actually doing the work of preparing them.

Susie Green has posted a long Twitter thread today in which she claims (among other things that we’ll get to) that Helen Webberley was "cleared" by the High Court of "all wrongdoing", as well as being "vindicated" more generally.

The judgment refers to "Patient C", a girl who believes she is a boy. Webberley was found guilty by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal (MPT) of serious misconduct for failing to discuss fertility directly with Patient C, and it was this finding that the judgment was made on.

Having read more of the judgment I have to agree with @AnOminous’s previous point about the judge making… questionable claims about the broader facts of youth transition. For instance, when M’Lord seems to believe that females can "achieve" "male fertility":

[16] [The] reference to discussing at the age of 14 which puberty would be the best for Patient C only makes sense if he were told how a male fertility might be achieved.

Or when he describes puberty blockers as being "fully reversible", a claim that infamously had to be removed from the NHS website and replaced with a statement that little was known about their long-term effects.

[124] The risks to Patient C’s fertility did not flow from the puberty blockers: their effects were fully reversible.

Anyway, the meat of the judgment is here:

[143] [W]hat the MPT singularly failed to do was conduct any analysis into whether the Appellant’s admitted failure to mention risks to fertility during the face-to-face consultation on 8th December 2016 […] amounted to serious misconduct in the light of the subsequent emails, the Appellant’s oral evidence, and all the circumstances of the case.

Essentially, the MPT made a hash of its consideration of serious misconduct, and so the charge was quashed on appeal. (Another option was to remit the case back to the MPT; the judge decides against it for what seem like fair, mostly procedural, reasons.)

---

With that out of the way, we sort of end up in a similar situation to Bell v Tavistock. The trans side likes to point out that Bell was overturned on appeal, which is true, but it was overturned because the Court of Appeal said it was for medics to decide whether children can consent, not the courts. The findings of fact at the High Court, and the blistering condemnation of the utter shambolic behaviour of GIDS, are not erased by the Court of Appeal judgment.

So it is with Webberley and her appeal against the MPT decision. The "serious misconduct" charge is quashed, but the other things discussed at Webberley’s tribunal are a matter of record. One thing that comes up in the appeal judgment is Webberley’s "lack of insight":

[94] Although she acknowledged her error, she did not say that she would change her practice.

Plus we should remember that the original MPT was a complete shambles that made the General Medical Council look like a Clown College in danger of losing its accreditation. JL wrote an article for Glinner’s Substack appropriately titled "Making it up as they go along" (archive). Plus, the GMC’s charges against Webberley were hardly the first:

She has already been found guilty and fined for running a separate online medical practice without being properly registered. She remains at Gender GP, owned by Hong Kong-based shell company Harland International, as a non-medical advisor on trans rights but retains a Welsh address.

We shouldn’t forget the damning character report from her appeal against her initial suspension in 2018, which makes for a sobering read. The Tribunal found she had lied to investigators saying "She has deeply ingrained attitudinal flaws which make it impossible for her to reflect in any real sense…" and "She does not show any recognition of proper governance. She is unsuitable."

Here’s more on that first point: Doctor ran illegal transgender clinic offering sex-change hormones to kids (archive). Here are some excerpts:

A doctor who ran an illegal transgender clinic where she gave sex-change hormones to children as young as 12 has been fined £12,000. Dr Helen Webberley, 49, ran a private transgender clinic from her home to treat children wanting to swap sexes. She offered advice online under the name Gender GP and charged between £75 and £150 an hour to patients looking to have "gender reassignment". […]

Married Webberley was refused a licence to operate her gender clinic by medical services watchdog Healthcare Inspectorate Wales (HIW) last year. But her firm operated without a licence between March 2017 and February 2018. […]

Judge Thomas said: "In this case there seems to be a clear refusal to follow the law and that is a significant aggravating factor."

And here’s a cracking article, again by JL, on what appears to be an attempt by the Webberleys to avoid legal consequences stemming from their running of GenderGP by having it bought by a Hong Kong shell company: These people should be in jail (archive).

Here’s the Times article mentioned at the start: Chemist sells hormones for trans children online | News (archive). An excerpt:

Clear Chemist in Liverpool can deliver the drugs thanks to a loophole allowing the dispensing of prescriptions from Switzerland or a European Economic Area country. The prescriptions are from GenderGP, a private company founded by Helen Webberley, who was fined in 2018 for running an unlicensed transgender clinic from her home in south Wales. She was suspended by the General Medical Council.

She moved her clinic to Spain and last year it was acquired by a Hong Kong-registered owner, Harland International. She still features on the website and is a non-medical adviser.

And from JL’s article:

Helen and Michael Webberley moved their operation to Spain and GenderGP remained in business. Last year it was acquired by Harland International, a company registered in Hong Kong in 2018 which describes itself as "LGBTQI specialists in healthcare". Other than that, very little information seems available.

While the Webberleys "moved their operation" to Spain, so they could continue to prescribe drugs which would be dished out by a UK pharmacy, I believe the pair never actually left Wales.

As recently as February 2021, GenderGP were dishing out testosterone to teenage girls after just a couple of video calls, with no parental involvement: How children can order life-altering transgender drugs from their bedroom (archive).

An undercover reporter posed as a 15-year-old girl and had only three Skype appointments with GenderGP staff before being prescribed a four-month supply of testosterone. GenderGP Staff did not request any parental consent or involvement. A single email from the girl’s 20-year-old half-brother, confirming that he would pay for her treatment, was the only contact with an adult which they required.

Of course, Susie Green and Helen Webberley have been as thick as thieves for a long time. Here’s Webberley and Green sat on the BBC Breakfast sofa in 2017:

@Newsround_Blog, tweet 851101884756762626 (archive).

Mermaids used to link to GenderGP from its website, until one of their funders, the National Lottery, got a bit queasy about how that looked. Mermaids’ forum was full of recommendations for Gender GP. And here’s Green herself offering to act as a go-between for Webberley when GenderGP seemed to be having email trouble.

---

So now (finally!) we get to Green’s 21-tweet thread.

@green_susie100, tweet 1646219343355576329 (archive)

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
1/21 It's been nearly weeks since the high court
cleared Helen Webberley of all wrongdoing. I thought it might be interesting for some of those that were following this ongoing story for some context. From my perspective.

https://www.gendergp.com/dr-webberley-wins-high-court-appeal/#:~:text=Helen%20Webberley%20in%20a%20huge,Helen%20Webberley.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
2/21 As an advocate. As a parent. As a friend. As a former charity leader, and now a member of the GenderGP team. When I first met Helen Webberley in 2015 she told me that she was going to extend her practice supporting trans adults to include trans youth. I was delighted.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
3/21 Why was I delighted? Because I was aware through my work with thousands of parents/carers of trans children and young people themselves of how badly they were being failed by the current service provision. An alternative to going abroad was a godsend.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
4/21 I warned Helen that she would face opposition. I had seen the way that others who dared to step into this space had been treated. In her usual indomitable way, Helen refused to be intimidated, and I duly added details of her service to the website of the charity I then led.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
5/21 Alternative provision in addition to the NHS service was welcomed by those that could afford it. As someone who took my child abroad to access gender affirming healthcare that was simply unavailable here in the UK, I wished that it had been available earlier.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
6/21 And for a while, all was well. Until it wasn’t. For a full breakdown, you can visit Helen’s own thread that explains the sequence of events.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
7/21 I watched her reputation being dragged through the mud. I saw her continued refusal to bow down because she knew that what she was doing was the right thing to do for those young people that desperately needed access to timely, affirmative and respectful healthcare.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
8/21 Was the service perfect? No. Did it save countless lives? Yes. Another excellent thread on the case can be found here.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
9/21 Whilst Helen was attacked, what happened to those families that sought aid from GenderGP, and what was the impact of the case on them and their children? And perhaps for those who would have sought help, but were frightened off by the negative media and their own GPs censure

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
10/21 For those families who continued to access GenderGP, despite the censure, they talk about a service that truly listened to their children, and to their experiences as their guardians. Even before the waiting lists reached their current state, and before Bell vs Tavistock.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
11/21 They also say that they were made to feel like criminals by GPs, family, friends and the media. Understandable perhaps when words like discredited and criminal were being bandied around openly on mainstream and social media. And those were the polite comments.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
12/21 Referrals to social services were made. GPs refused to help at all, the majority refusing prescribing but also monitoring and administration, forcing parents into making impossible choices.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
13/21 Having taken the step to access private care when my child was failed in this country, I was cheering on GenderGP from the side-lines and didn't hesitate to recommend them if families asked me what I would do. I do not regret for 1 second listening to my kid and never will.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
14/21 I faced censure for my outspoken criticism of GIDS. I stand by everything I said. Gatekeeping. Inconsistent. Enforcing stereotypes. But the worst was 'watchful waiting'. I supported families to complain about the barriers placed in their way.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
15/21 This all played out whilst I was CEO of Mermaids. I defended GenderGP despite attempts to force us to remove them from our website. Finally, when both Helen and Mike were suspended by the GMC I reluctantly bowed to pressure.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
16/21 Privately, when asked by desperate families facing impossible waits to be seen, or enduring appointment after appointment that failed to result in any progress for their child, what I would do, I told them. I refused to lie,

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
17/21 whilst trying to protect the charity I loved from the incessant and frenzied media scrutiny that would ensue if that perspective were leaked. I am now able to speak out, as a member of the GenderGP team. Helen is committed to unapologetic honesty. As am I.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
18/21 I can guarantee that despite the incredible challenges, those families that opted for GenderGP do not regret following their child’s lead. Nearly 150 individual charges were brought against Helen. NOT 1 WAS RAISED BY A PATIENT. And now she is vindicated.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
19/21 But at what cost? For those who accessed care, they were made to feel like criminals, forced to inject their children, criticised by friends and family, vilified by their GP. For those too scared or financially unable to take that step, they watched their children suffer.

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
20/21 Add to all this, Bell vs Tavistock and the shutdown of care in the UK for young people we see now. This open letter by GIDS clinicians to NHSE in Feb 23 raises serious concerns. Young people dying on the waiting list as all hope is removed. https://medium.com/@GidsStaffGroup/...ngland-from-concerned-gids-staff-4e075dd574d2

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 12, 2023 · 6:30 PM UTC
21/21 GenderGP was noted by the tribunal as being at the vanguard of trans healthcare. It begs the question as to when everyone else is going to catch up. But in the meantime, we are here for you if you need us. And if you were instrumental in the shabby witch hunt? Shame on you.

I was going to pick it apart but Green lives in her own little world, which only has a passing resemblance to reality. Below I’ve picked out some interesting bits.

The "worst" thing about GIDS was "watchful waiting", she says:

14/21 I faced censure for my outspoken criticism of GIDS. I stand by everything I said. Gatekeeping. Inconsistent. Enforcing stereotypes. But the worst was 'watchful waiting'. I supported families to complain about the barriers placed in their way.

When Mermaids, under pressure from its funders, removed the GenderGP link from its website, Green was still promoting it in private:

I defended GenderGP despite attempts to force us to remove them from our website. Finally, when both Helen and Mike were suspended by the GMC I reluctantly bowed to pressure

16/21 Privately, when asked by desperate families facing impossible waits to be seen, or enduring appointment after appointment that failed to result in any progress for their child, what I would do, I told them. I refused to lie.

And finally:

21/21 GenderGP was noted by the tribunal as being at the vanguard of trans healthcare. It begs the question as to when everyone else is going to catch up.

Yes, I can imagine something is going to catch up with GenderGP sooner or later.

 

[Feathers McGraw]

Yes, I can imagine something is going to catch up with GenderGP sooner or later.

God I hope this is true. I just finished reading the 'Time to Think' book about the downfall of GIDS and felt a bit disheartened about the implication that the NHS machine is basically fine with cowboy GPs prescribing cross sex hormones to children as long as they don't have to take any of the blame.

I generally am not in favour of big government, but when psychos start slicing the tits off teenage girls and chopping the dicks off teenage boys I start hitting peak trans all over again.

 

[Geranium]

felt a bit disheartened about the implication that the NHS machine is basically fine with cowboy GPs prescribing cross sex hormones to children as long as they don't have to take any of the blame.

In the service specification NHS England consulted on (for the interim service to replace GIDS while things are transferred to CAMHS) there was a bit about how use of private blocker/hormone providers would entail an automatic safeguarding referral. So, fingers-crossed.

 

[Geranium]

Sorry for double-posting. Here's something out of context:

If you are one of those parents that believes your children are your property, don’t read this. If you recognise that sometimes parents ARE the problem, this thread sums up the dangers of [something!]

Yeah, parents sometimes really are the problem, like when they have their confused 16-year-old son castrated on his birthday.

Oh wait!

@green_susie100, tweet 1648311573897785345 (archive)

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 18, 2023 · 1:04 PM UTC
If you are one of those parents that believes your children are your property, don’t read this. If you recognise that sometimes parents ARE the problem, this thread sums up the dangers of the latest moves to put kids at risk by disclosing their trans status against their will

Mermaids hasn't been as blunt, probably because they know they're under the spotlight at the moment, but reading between the lines it's clear they have the same position.

@Mermaids_Gender, tweet 1648349250793635843 (archive)

Mermaids (@Mermaids_Gender) · Apr 18, 2023 · 3:34 PM UTC
Mermaids knows from the young people we support that respecting their chosen gender expression, including their pronouns, in a safe and supportive environment brings transformational benefits to their lives. (1/2)

Mermaids (@Mermaids_Gender) · Apr 18, 2023 · 3:34 PM UTC
Schools need guidance that supports them to provide an inclusive and trusting space for all children, especially trans young people who are experiencing transphobic bullying, disproportionately low self esteem, and rising hate crime. (2/2)

This is about the new government guidance to schools that they must tell parents if their child wants to be treated as the opposite sex at school: Teachers 'must tell parents about pupils' gender changes’ (archive)

Personally I don't think teachers should keep secrets from parents, as it's a collosal safeguarding risk. Here's the first half-page of search results for "paedophile teacher UK", where I've added the names of each paedophile teacher to show that there are no repeats:

• Paedophile teacher, 35, abused girl, 13, for four years, is banned from profession for life | Daily Mail Online (archive) (Andrew Oldfield)
• 'Predatory paedophile' headteacher jailed for abuse - BBC News (archive) (Duggie Speight)
• British paedophile teacher who changed name to work at Madrid private school jailed for 138 years | Daily Mail Online (archive) (Ben David Rose)
• Questions over Aberdeen paedophile teacher’s past behaviour (archive) (Blair Paton)
• Clifton College failed to act on concerns about two paedophile teachers, inquiry hears - Bristol Live (archive) (Jonathan Thomson-Glover)
• Accrington teacher spared jail after he was caught in 'paedophile' sting | Lancashire Telegraph (archive) (David Simpson)
• Paedophile teacher’s sickening Snapchat messages to ex-pupil | UK | News | Express.co.uk (archive) (John Wickham)
• Teacher James Ndungu avoids jail over attempt to lure girls (archive) (James Ndungu)
• CPS could and should have extradited paedophile music teacher | UK news | The Guardian (archive) (Chris Ling)
• School faces £1m claim over paedophile teacher William Vahey | Education | The Observer (archive) (William Vahey)

But then I haven't been the head of a charity for vulnerable children.

 

[Geranium]

Triple-posting because I'm a triple threat.

Jack / Jackie Green has re-emerged after a long period of radio silence. I picked it up from this tweet of Susie Green's:

@green_susie100, tweet 1648614925017792514 (archive)

Susie Green (@green_susie100) · Apr 19, 2023 · 9:10 AM UTC
Jackie getting sassy

@JackieGOfficial, tweet 1648357714504867840 (archive)

Kirstie Allsopp (@KirstieMAllsopp) · Apr 14, 2023 · 12:15 PM UTC
There is a middle ground, we can debate sport and safe spaces and still respect anyone who wishes to be seen as, and addressed as another gender from that which they were born into. We can be kind, we can be understanding and we can be open to new ways of looking at things.

Sharron Davies MBE (@sharrond62) · Apr 16, 2023 · 10:15 AM UTC
I disagree Kirsty, if we conflate language we can’t protect anyone, and it’s not the truth. True acceptance of non societal stereotypes is way more progressive. Pretending children can change biological sex is simply lying to them.

Kirstie Allsopp (@KirstieMAllsopp) · Apr 16, 2023 · 12:14 PM UTC
Who is telling children they can change biological sex?

General Secretary Graham Linehan (@Glinner) · Apr 17, 2023 · 3:04 AM UTC
Susie Green of Mermaids groomed her four year old son into believing he was a girl and castrated him in Thailand at 16. Why are you commenting on this when you don't have the first clue about it?

Jackie Green (@JackieGOfficial) · Apr 18, 2023 · 4:07 PM UTC
NO WAY?!! That’s wild…

I'm not sure why Jackie would engage with Glinner in this way, it doesn't challenge anything that he's said. But then maybe there's are no paths left to take in confronting this claim that Susie Green groomed Jack into thinking he was truly a girl. After all, Jack has said publicly that he was "born in the wrong body" and that he had a "birth defect" (a male body with a penis) that needed correcting. At 16, this girl became the youngest in the world to have a life-changing operation, can you guess what it was? | Daily Mail Online (archive)

As Glinner pointed out a couple of years ago, in response to Susie Green's Ted Talk (since put down the memory hole on YouTube but archived here):

“At six years old she kept asking me when she could have the operation?” How did your six-year-old son find out about sex-change operations, Susie?

In plain sight - The Daily Glinner (archive)

Ditto with this response to a picture of himself (probably from a few years ago) making a phallic gesture:

@JackieGOfficial, tweet 1648620519099383809 (archive)

Edit: GenderGP quote-tweeted Susie Green's picture of Jack replying to Glinner.

@GenderGP, tweet 1648662330996031490 (archive)

GenderGP (@GenderGP) · Apr 19, 2023 · 12:18 PM UTC
You can't fight nonsense with sense, sometimes there's only one way...

Very professional. Please do spread the (true!) story of Susie having her son castrated at 16 in Thailand.


Jack's Twitter account remains the same, @JackieGOfficial, but he has a new(er?) profile picture:

Jackie Green (@JackieGOfficial) / Twitter (archive)

He's set up a new Instagram for his streaming, jackiepiecrusts: @jackiepiecrusts Instagram profile with posts and stories - Picuki.com (archive). His jackiegreen93 account is still private.

Some tweets about his streams:




Here's the bio on his Twitch about page:

Hi! My name's Jackie but you can also call me PieCrusts!

I Love playing Genshin Impact and making new friends in-game and on Twitch!

If there is anything you want to see on my stream let me know...! Just keep it clean ya filthy animals! Always looking to improve and make my stream more entertaining! My Stream is mostly me noobing my way around Teyvat whilst I talk fun and nonsense.

Total weeb and am always looking for anime recommendations so hit me up with yours!

Come on, lets play and talk ya goofball!

About JackiePieCrusts - Twitch (archive)

Last night's video (April 18) is the first one where he shows his face. !DROPS ON! - lets farm and FAIL at dodging! Join me as I noob around Teyvat and chat! - Twitch (archive)

He was out of focus for most of the time he had his camera take up the full frame, so it was difficult to get a clear still picture of his face.


I skipped through the stream, it's pretty boring and he has an annoying habit of putting on voices. He does sound like he's got a bit of an Australian twang, so perhaps he's lived abroad for a bit.

Intro and outro segments:

Bonus bit with his dog: