The EPP swings TERFward
The chaotic confusion of sex and gender in science
Ukrainian woman’s death in Albania exposes horror of commercial surrogacy
Turkey’s anti-gay crackdown linked to Belgian politician
Happy two-year anniversary of the magazine article calling for the murder of gender critical women
Paris afterschool paedophile scandal: second guilty man gets no prison time
Migrant (allegedly) beheads wife after she reports him for scamming the state
Policeman transvestite rapes teenage girl, German press calls him “she”
Lithuania: Kaunas Pride devastated by Kaunas Pride’s principled stance against the corporatisation of Kaunas Pride
Who can we thank? Étienne Deshoulières
EU’s biggest political party is turning away from the trans cult
In 2023, a gynaecologist in the French city of Pau refused to treat a very obviously male patient. The “woman” was turned away by the gynaecologist’s receptionist who informed him that gynaecological services are for females only. A negative Google review of the doctor immediately appeared online, calling him “transphobic”. The gynaecologist exasperatedly contested the negative Google review by replying that, as a gynaecologist, he’s only qualified to treat “real women”, not a “men who’ve had a shave”.
Activist NGOs mobilised to take him to court, and they got him charged with “sexist outrage”, for which he got a €1,000 fine. His professional association then suspended him for six months (five suspended).
Upon hearing of this incident, many of you might be wondering to yourselves: how the everloving Jesus did we get here? Why is a specialist in female bodies being punished for refusing to treat someone who doesn’t have a female body? Have you ever heard anything more deranged?
I’m glad you asked.
A couple of weeks ago in Ireland, it was revealed that a man who teaches male lactation fetishists how to induce breast milk for sexual gratification had been invited to speak at a conference on breastfeeding. The week after, it was discovered that the keynote speaker at a state-funded healthcare conference at a major Irish university is a midwife who doesn’t believe in the sex binary, and therefore, doesn’t believe there is any such thing as a “woman” (she prefers terms like “birth-giver” or “service user”). This same woman is a member of the UK’s midwifery professional council.
Why are these things happening?
The answer is very boring. For at least a decade, politicians have been quietly passing legislation and soft law under the tyrannical influence of the utterly demented LGBTIQ+ lobby. The laws and policies in question look innocuous to the untrained eye (inclusion and diversity? SIGN ME UP!), but they set off the ideological equivalent of a nuclear chain reaction.
A lot of the political figures responsible for these developments either didn’t have the intelligence to understand the implications of what they were doing, or they didn’t have the courage to challenge it. A lot of lawmakers thought the rainbow NGOs would be eternally powerful, and that would help shield them from negative attention forever. Some of them no doubt accepted the lie (circulated by the same NGOs) that anyone who objected to any of it was merely a far-right agitator.
But now that the consequences of the lie are all around us, and regular people are starting to get curious about our new reality, it’s a perfect time to start laser-focussing on the very boring blink-and-you’ll-miss-it developments that got us to this point — because they are still happening.
Last Wednesday offered a perfect case study. In Strasbourg (France), Irish member of the European Parliament Billy Kelleher presented his hallmark “Gender inequalities in health” report for a plenary vote. And while it’s non-binding, reports like this one can represent the first step towards something that is. But most importantly, they provide the ammo that NGOs can then use to pressure their governments into working on their pet policies.
Kelleher has promised this initiative will help fill the gaps in research into women’s health problems, most notably endometriosis and the lack of female participants in clinical trials (the bait), but the text was packed to the brim of trans nonsense (the switch). Not only does it have all of the reality-defying cult language we have come to expect, it even shoved in some very explicit queer activist demands that have nothing to do with women’s health: it demanded gender-affirming care, a ban on any operations carried out on children with DSDs (this is not backed by medical profession, who have no idea why they are suddenly being called ‘torturers’ for fixing newborn urogenital problems) and even a call for a ban on talk therapy for people going through gender dysphoria.
Before the vote started on Wednesday, Kelleher made sure to insult all the people who had tried during the drafting process to reintroduce some reality into the document (someone had even added an amendment that would make sure that no health practitioner can be dragged to court for not treating males for female complaints, like what happened in France). But Kelleher trashed the people who proposed these amendments, accusing them of being against ‘inclusivity’, pitting ‘communities’ against each other (he means women versus horny men who want to make moob juice) and engaging in “culture wars” (there’s that term again!)
The bad news is that this horseshit did pass, much to the delight of “Billy All Genders”, as he shall henceforth be known. But the good news is that it did not pass intact, and it did not pass with as many votes as it would have a couple of years ago.
There was a time when only two or three lonely hardcore right-wing women in the European Parliament bothered to go through these texts and pick out all the batshit crazy trans stuff. But now there seems to be an army of them. The list of people who put their names to the reality-motivated amendments is longer than it has ever been.
The EPP, the (so-called) centre-right party in the European Parliament, has pandered for years to the trans cult — as a way, one assumes, of looking hip and cool to young voters. But taking the past three votes in the Parliament that considered trans issues, their voting pattern has drifted from reality-denying, to reality-curious, to reality-aligned.
The vote was split, meaning MEPs could vote to ditch some parts of the text without rejecting the whole thing. As a result, we can see exactly who voted for which part. And EPP members overwhelmingly voted against the most ideological trans nonsense. To take one prominent example, in a part of the text that named “transgender, non-binary and intersex people” alongside women, EPP members voted to remove this text by 154 votes. In a paragraph that called out member states that only offer “limited access to gender affirming care”, the EPP voted 128-26 to get rid of it. There are other similar examples (However, on amendments submitted by the hard-right parties, which made it clear that sex is biological and that medical professionals should not be punished for acting accordingly, the EPP overwhelmingly abstained from voting either way).
The pattern was already emerging in the vote on the Gender Equality Strategy, in November 2025. On two parts of that text that related to trans ideology, the EPP voted against by about 3 to 1. Since then, the NOs have grown from 100 to 154 and the YESs have shrunk from 37 to 11. By December 2025, EPP members were getting used to their newfound bravery: they voted 141 - 5 in favour of an amendment that stated only biological women can get pregnant (in an abortion-related initiative!)
Compare all this to February 2024 when the LGBTIQ+ strategy was reviewed. That document called for the full suite of trans insanity; from legal gender recognition for kids, to a conversion-practice ban, to “SOGIESC mainstreaming” in everything member states do. The EPP voted 104-11 in favour of it!
It’s probably because of this shift that there has been no vote on the new LGBTIQ+ strategy, which was launched in October 2025. The closest proxy is a vote on a fundamental rights annual report (which took place in April 2026) which “welcomes” the new LGBTIQ+ strategy and attacks bans on legal gender recognition. The EPP voting pattern for that was 86 - 12 in favour (55 abstained).
What’s clear is that they are no longer reliably voting yes on anything that puts trans language in the same bucket as women’s rights or rule of law. The new habit seems to be to peel off any ideological nonsense out of proposals by asking for split votes. Very quietly, a page has been turned. What does it mean in practice? Unfortunately, not a lot. Most of the damaging laws and court case precedents are now in place across Europe (with the exceptions of countries in the East).
The only way back to reality is to repeal, repeal, repeal, and that would take some serious political bravery.
Billy Allgenders’ hot-shoe shuffle by Sandra Adams for Women’s Space Ireland
The chaotic confusion of sex and gender in science
Another problem with Billy Allgenders’ report on gender inequalities in health is that it’s plagued all the way through with the usual nonsensical conflation of the words sex and gender.
It is not uncommon. Some EU laws and many EU communications are drowning in a terminological soup of “sex and gender”, “sex/gender”, or sometimes just “sex” on its own and other times “gender” on its own. Other times you’ll even see “non-binary “ shoehorned in randomly as if it’s the most normal thing in the world (it’s not even real).
Here’s what I have concluded: most people don’t really know what they mean by gender, they just know they have to pay genderfaff lip service and the best way to do that is to sprinkle the word here and there and hope that nobody pays too much attention to it.
So let’s pay it some attention:
As technology advances, we are discovering that there are very few areas of human biology in which sex does not matter. Men and women are different. Normal systolic blood pressure in women is 110, while it’s 120 for men. That matters. Some genes expressed in male depression are not the same genes expressed in female depression. You might consider a drug ineffective if half the trial participants got no benefit. Were they men, though? Might that be why the drug didn’t work? It’s a no-brainer: sex matters in life sciences, for both humans and animals.
But political and academic activism has been butchering this very clear line with ideological talk about gender. In a given piece of text, you can often see a battle playing out between sense (sex as a biological variable, or SABV) and derangement (gender, gender identity, gender expression, and the entirely queer ideology derived “intersex”). Anything published post-2014 (that’s my benchmark year for when everything went off the rails) is inherently suspect.
Let’s keep it real, one paragraph of a policy document or research guideline politely demands, before the next paragraph bursts in like a drunk clown on stilts to smother everything in confused identity pandering. In any given text, it’s clear that half the drafting committee are clearly normal, a quarter of them have non-binary daughters and insist on militant #kindness, and all the rest graduated in the past 10 years which means they’re goners.
Most of the time the words sex and gender are just collapsed into each other, but here’s a list of the things they can mean.
Gender is a synonym for sex: we get it, you’re polite. You want to keep the option open to use gender instead of the S word. I, too, have Victorian sensibilities and wouldn’t dare say “trousers” in front of a woman. Or you’re Danish, in which case you’re no prude but you don’t have a word in your language that distinguishes sex from gender. You’re not alone: Finnish, Estonian and Swedish don’t have a word for it either.
Sex is biology, but gender is the identity you choose to live: this is why some European countries have decided that the best translation for gender is “social sex”. You want to do girly things or manly things? Ergo you have a girl gender or a man gender. In this instance, the word gender is acting as a stand-in for gender identity (very sneaky) and when you see examples of this in the wild, you can safely assume that the intention is to bake transgender ideology into our vocabulary while not leaving any obvious trace.
Dave wants to dress up like a schoolgirl and pretend to be one. Cool cool. That doesn’t matter for biological research, though, except that anyone treating Dave (or testing a drug on him) needs to know that he has potentially been taking synthetic estrogen, progesterone, and/or androgen blockers , and in rare cases (extremely rare cases) he’s debollocked himself. But this important information can more confidently be extracted from Dave by asking him if he’s taking any medications, or if there is anything else relevant that the researchers should know (being deballsed like a housecat would fit in here).
That’s far more useful to the clinician than seeing that Dave has filled in “trans woman” or (shudder) “gender fluid” on his participant intake form.
What can a researcher or a clinician glean from the information that a female participant in a clinical trial considers herself “trans masc non-binary”? It could indicate that she has mental health issues, is very likely to be autistic, and may be taking testosterone that is slowly atrophying all her bits to dust. But again: funky identity labels cannot and do not act as a reliable proxy for straightforwardly just telling whoever needs to know it that you’re depressed, you’re autistic, or you’re on T.
As we know, you don’t have to take any hormones (or be castrated) to be ‘valid’ as a ‘trans person’ — so what earthly use is there in recording it as some kind of relevant data point? There is none.
Gender is a set of norms and expectations that matter: ok here is my most charitable reading of the usefulness of ‘gender’ in biomedical science.
In the part of Africa where Ebola outbreaks tend to occur, the disease kills more women than men, but the discrepancy is not due to biology. It’s because in many of the cultures in that region, it’s a woman’s job not only to care for the sick, but to prepare bodies for burial. In a culture where men prepare bodies for burial, the rate of Ebola infection would be higher in men. It makes sense, therefore that gender (norms) should be considered if you’re looking at a lopsided epidemiology numbers and you want to know what’s behind it.
Other examples: men famously visit the doctor less frequently than women, meaning that early signs of disease are more likely to be missed. Men also tend to do the jobs that expose them to higher levels of harmful chemicals, or that put them at other physical risk. There is research that shows that men’s cortisol levels drop in the evening because their day is done and they can rest. However, women tend to keep going after work, taking care of kids and family, including elderly parents or neighbours, or seeing friends late into the evening. Women therefore don’t experience this cortisol drop at dinner time, because we’re usually in full swing. This has an effect on our health and it’s due to gender roles (but also hugely influenced by biology!)
In the design of a clinical trial, should researchers take these norms into account? How important and how useful are they in, say, the study of drug efficacy?
The most obvious thing to point out is that it’s all correlation. Being a woman correlates with having a second workload after 6pm. But that doesn’t apply to all women, in all places, at all times, at all ages. Even in the infectious diseases example above, “taking gender into consideration” is useless without knowing the country (and probably age, status/class, clan, religion or whatever).
And how would all this be “taken into consideration”, considering that anything that makes it actionable requires that it be combined with a bunch of other variables? Is “dead body-preparer” a gender?
Even in the case of men-go-to-the-doctor-less, is this stereotype a good substitute for simply asking a patient/trial participant how often they go to the doctor?
This gender role scale claims to be able to score individuals on their masculinity, femininity and androgyny to help differentiate the effects of gender on health outcomes after a stroke that cannot be attributed to biology. The score is based on how closely males and females adhered to traditional gender norms.
Female-typical activities (cook, clean, take care of people) and masculine-typical things (have no parental duties, work in a dangerous job) predicted the participants’ scores, which placed them somewhere along the spectrum between “highly masculine” and “highly feminine”. Here’s another study calling behaviours masculine and feminine, or another one that found differences in “masculine-people’s” exercise behaviours after a stroke compared to “gender undifferentiated” people (though not feminine people)
What’s the point of this?
Here we have again the direct outcome of gender ideology: like the concept of “trans people”, it recreates the very norms it claims to be seeking to deconstruct. Like, I’m very glad women’s work in the home is taken into account when understanding why our cortisol levels are more likely to be higher in the evening. Typical gender roles can help generate hypotheses, I guess. But a clinical tool that sorts people into feminine and masculine based on the activities they do in their day-to-day lives? Wouldn’t it be better to like, ask people what they do in their day-to-day lives? As opposed to what they are expected by the norms in their culture to do?
The scale from the GENESIS-PRAXY study linked above attributed the label “extremely feminine” to some men because they looked after their kids (whatever you do, please do not start telling men this). In contrast, according to the study, “half the women (involved in the study) scored more androgynous or masculine”.
How useful is that? If an unconscious man is being treated in hospital after a heart attack, do you assume he works down a mine shaft or a toxic waste treatment plant all day? Or should you just try to find out what he actually does for a living, if that matters to his treatment? Lots of women don’t have kids, lots of men are on the dole. What the fuck are we doing here?
If you enroll a woman in a clinical trial, should you take into consideration the fact that women often get their kids ready for school every morning, which might make it difficult for them to remember to take medicine at 8:30am? Is it useful to work on the assumption that women have kids and are responsible for school drop-offs? Is a woman’s sex standing in for the expectations for her sex? Would it be better to design your clinical trial in a way that takes into account that mornings are busy times for everyone, male and female, old and young, Biafran and Bulgarian, for various different reasons?
As I’ve written about before, the Commission is toying with the idea of making intersectional gender a mandatory embed in all future Horizon Europe funding. What a confusing and counterproductive mess that is likely to be.
Am I wrong? Are there ways that gender should be included in biomedical research/healthcare that I haven’t considered? Let me know!
‘World Center of Baby’ - Ukrainian woman’s death in Albania exposes the horror of commercial surrogacy
An international surrogacy trader called ‘World Center of Baby’ founded by Ukrainians and operating in Ukraine, Mexico, Georgia, Albania and Cyprus has allegedly gone bankrupt, leaving not just staff in the lurch, but also the purchasing parents and not least of all, the women being paid to deliver the purchased babies.
One pregnant Ukrainian woman called Yana stopped receiving regular payments from the company, and made a deal with the purchasing genetic father to continue the pregnancy in Albania, but she died in strange circumstances in the rented apartment in Tirana on 22 April. Her unborn daughter died with her.
You should read the entire investigation, which covers a complicated and ruthless web of international dodgy dealings. It was carried out by a Ukrainian media outlet called NGL.media in cooperation with OCCRP, Shteg and two Italian freelancers, published 12 September 2026.
Turkey’s anti-gay crackdown linked to Belgian politician
Mahinur Özdemir, a third-generation Belgian, leads the Turkish ministry that oversees the policy that resulted in raids on LGBTIQ+ venues last weekend.
On 12 and 13 September, raids and arrests were carried out across 15 different Turkish provinces. Among the venues targeted were bars, nightclubs, activists' homes, HIV support groups, a hammam, LGBTIQ+ associations, and a gay cruising spot, according to multiple sources.
The operation was dubbed “My Family Is Safe” and most of the people who were charged are accused of “violation of decency” and “aiding prostitution”. Associations accused of “promoting LGBTIQ+ and immorality” have been put under financial investigation. While the raids were ordered by the ministry of justice, the Justice minister Gürlek tied the operation to the 10-year “Decade of Family and Population” plan order, which is under Mahinur Özdemir’s mandate, meaning her department is responsible for the policy framework used to justify the raids.
Özdemir was a member of the Brussels parliament for ten years. She was kicked out of the cdH (centrist/humanist) party in 2015 after she refused to use the word genocide in relation to the Turkish genocide of the Armenians.
After a stint as Turkey’s ambassador to Algeria, she took up the post of minister for family affairs and social services in the Erdoğan government in 2023.
Her ministry has repeatedly attacked LGBTIQ+ people, even though homosexuality is not illegal in Turkey. On 13 September, the day the operation was announced, she thanked the Justice Ministry and other institutions for their efforts to protect the family, children and young people, according to the İHA news agency. Her (very few) direct comments on LGBTIQ+ issues have mentioned “genderlessness” as a bugbear of hers, as opposed to gay people or trans people specifically. Last year in November she gave the opening speech at a family-related conference in which one of the speakers compared LGBTIQ+ NGOs to the Kurdistan militants of the PKK, and said they were being funded by Israel.
Özdemir was Belgium’s first ever hijabi MP. She said at the time: “I veil my hair but I do not veil my mind, and I advise those who criticise my hijab to go to their eye physician because their eyes are veiled by prejudice”.
Happy 2-year anniversary to this article calling for the murder of TERFs
Two years ago next month, a website called paris-luttes.info, published an article called Trans ultraviolence in which the author(s) called for the “éclatage des têtes” (smashing of the heads) of Dora Moutot and Marguerite Stern, the two most outspoken gender critical women in the country.
The article, signed by an “armed group” said that opposition to “transphobes and fascists” should be physical and violent, and referred to telescopic batons and explosives. The website is tied to the Assemblée antifasciste Paname. The people behind the article should not be hard to find but according to Moutot, there were multiple mistakes made by investigators that made their complaints impossible to pursue. Most of these mistakes seem to relate to mis-transcribing names and phone numbers.
Two years later, and it’s still online. Dora has, meanwhile, been convicted of injure publique and a fine for alluding to the fact that transvestites have the same rate of offending as non-transvestite men, and both her and Marguerite face brand new charges of hate speech based on other reality-based pronouncements. Happy anniversary!
Read the call to violence against non-compliant women from paris-luttes.info
Shocking scale of the Paris périscolaire affair: no prison for paedos
Every year the city of Paris needs about 14,000 people to look after kids on either side of the school day. These are the people who supervise kids in the morning before lessons start, during lunchtimes and breaks, and at the end of the school day between the end of lessons and when the kids get picked up. They also take care of kids who need help going to the toilet, and to supervise naptime (the closest equivalent term that I could find to apply to the English speaking world is ‘afterschool care assistants’).
This is low-skilled work, and it requires little prior training. The pay is bad, contracts are precarious, and turnover is very high. Everyone gets a criminal background check to exclude anyone who’s been convicted of crimes like child sex abuse, but the reality is that lots of sex offenders never get caught (at least not yet).
Put all this together and you’ve got a recipe for child sex abuse on a mass scale. But of course. Paedos go where the kids are. This is exactly the kind of role where safeguarding is of paramount importance. But in Paris, it was not.
Since the start of 2026, 132 périscolaire staff have been suspended in Paris, 52 of them for suspected sexual violence. As of late August, 203 criminal investigations were opened. 143 concern maternelles (kindergarten), 36 concern primary school, and 24 concern crèches. 184 Paris schools are involved. Three trials have taken place, two animateurs were acquitted and one was sentenced to 18 months suspended sentence.
The reports have not stopped coming in.
Germany: Yemeni collecting welfare payments for other people’s children accused of beheading his wife
A 37-year-old international protection recipient from Yemen, Danon Mohammed Saeed G, is in court this week in Munich accused of brutally murder of his wife, whose head he sawed off after she attempted to divorce him. She also threatened to report him to the authorities for claiming benefits for children that were not his.
Inspired by his brother who had been successful in the same scam, the man brought two children who were not his own to Germany, along with his wife and their actual four children, and forced his wife to raise them as her own so that he could receive social welfare benefits on their behalf.
The woman, who is named in court documents as Shahirah A., was regularly beaten by her husband. He had taken away her passport, and kept her locked in the house. She eventually initiated divorce proceedings, threatening to reveal the welfare fraud that he had been committing. The man was ordered to stay away from their apartment due to his record of violence. He decided to decapitate her instead.
Losing the child benefit allowance is what drove him to kill her, according to reporting by Focus.de, but investigators suspect that the motive for this barbaric act was a kind of power demonstration. According to them, he wanted to punish the her for her previous behavior and show her, “even in the moment of her death, who was in charge”.
German transvestite rapes teenage girl in fast food restaurant toilet. Media calls him “she”
“I don’t want to testify if he’s present,” the now-16 year old girl said about the accused, a “trans woman”, an ex-cop and Afghanistan war veteran. While the man’s identity was censored by German media for “her” protection, an anonymous tip submitted to Reduxx.info revealed:
A trans-identified male is on trial in Traunstein, Germany, for the alleged rape of a 14-year-old girl in a restaurant’s washroom. The 55-year-old man, who goes by the name Maja Schmid, is a now-suspended German federal police officer, and also faces charges of possession and distribution of child sexual abuse material, and the production of material depicting sexual activity with an animal.
According to Bild, the 55-year-old has confessed to both raping a 14-year-old and to possession of the animal sex abuse and child abuse content. His punishment could involve a fine and a 3 to 3.5-year sentence.
Lithuania: Kaunas Pride devastated by Kaunas Pride’s principled stance against the corporatisation of Kaunas Pride
It’s been fashionable for many years in Western European countries to hate on “corporate Pride” parades. This has resulted in “fringe”-type Prides that reject the corporatisation and mainstreaming of Pride. These “off” events try to create a grungier and queer-er vibe than the main show, all in service of pretending that there is something rebellious about being part of the rainbow crew (there is not. It is the most conformist, institutionalised “subculture” that has ever existed).
This backfired on the organisers of the Pride event in the Lithuanian city of Kaunas this year, as the institution is apparently not established enough that its participants can afford to performatively bite the hand that supports them.
This post appeared on their LinkedIn account shortly after the “flop”, lamenting that the parade attracted only 500 marchers (compared to about 2,000 in 2021). The organisers rejected not just commercial businesses, but also institutional support (from, for example, embassies of progressive countries) and supportive politicians and even the mainstream LGBTIQ+ rights movement. They also tied the parade to Palestine and anti-capitalism, alienating normie allies. The low turnout, says Monika Antanaitytė (who works for the mainstream NGO, LGL) feeds the narrative that LGBTIQ+ supporters are a fringe concern engineered by Brussels.
Antanaitytė’s post:
“I hate saying it, but we have to be honest: Kaunas Pride was a #flop, and this one may hurt beyond ‘community politics’. 500 marchers. That wasn’t bad luck. It was the anti-strategy. By branding itself the “pure,” anti-corporate, anti-LGL, no-sponsors, no-institutions alternative, Kaunas Pride told our #allies they weren’t welcome, and they...listened. This is a massive gift to the #FarRight. A divided Pride of 500 writes that script for them, right as we head toward 2028.”
She added: “#puritypolitics that empties the streets is a luxury we cannot afford.”
Who can we thank? Étienne Deshoulières
Étienne Deshoulières is a French lawyer whose Parisian firm specialises in intellectual property and tech. His firm also has a dedicated LGBTIQ+ strategic litigation programme, and they work pro bono in collaboration with NGOs like Mousse and Stop Homophobie. He has been involved in a large number of cases (this source cites 200 legal proceedings over more than a decade) targeting homophobic or transphobic speech, involving politicians, the media, social media platforms, and critics of gender-identity ideology.
A recent example is the 2026 conviction of TERF Dora Moutot for remarks she made on TV about a man called Marie Cau who wants to force Moutot (and everyone else) to pretend he’s a woman. Deshoulières represented the NGOs in that case. He’s taken similar action against others for misgendering, statements that treat sex as distinct from self-identified gender, or that criticise medical transition for kids.
Deshoulières’ strategy has been most harmful in its ability to silence all criticism of trans extremism in France: disagreement over sex, sports, prisons, youth medicine, and women’s spaces are legally hazardous. He has personally done a lot to raise the cost of resisting trans nonsense, and you can thank him the next time you find yourself wondering why the resistance to this ideology has seemed so muted in France.
Here he is. Say thanks to Étienne.
In other news…
EU racism NGO certainly seems to have been defunded because of links to Islamic extremism… but they’re taking the EU funding agency to court. Won’t that expose them?
Charles Murray’s wife’s IQ is higher than his, according to Charles Murray
Belgian teacher was forced to choose between her hijab and her teaching job. She is now unemployed
EU Kids Act: the European Commission wants to card everyone using social media
Celine Dion, god love her, seems to be making it through her French gigs. Here’s my favourite thing about Celine Dion.
Is the EU planning on downgrading Montenegro’s sex self-ID requirement in new accession “roadmap”?
Left-wing parties stand up in favour of Muslim Brotherhood-linked NGOs in the European Parliament
Imprisoned Betty Lachgar gets feminist award in absentia from Belgian laïcité organisations
Mohammad raped and strangled jogger in a bush in Malmö. He said he "wanted to give her love"
After fifth rape, “too-dangerous-to-be released” Palestinian finally getting deported from Denmark
Send me your stories, I’m all (t)ears: roisinmichaux@gmail.com. I’m also on X/Twitter: https://x.com/RoisinMichaux
Do you think it matters that sex is being replaced by self-declaration of something called ‘gender identity’? I do, and I was fired for it. I made a bet that other people care about it too. So this newsletter is my new job. If you think my work is important, please take out a paid subscription.
The author merits respect and recognition - world wide. Thank you.
Róisín Michaux, I appreciate your dedicaition to speaking the truth. Your clarity and good humour shine through your reports.