Sarah Panzetta @bfaware

Britain bans commercial surrogacy, but allows people to go abroad, buy babies and bring them here. Now those people have the audacity to demand the surrogate mother lose her rights at birth. We object. If you do too, email your MP now: surrogacyconcern.uk/2026/07/23/tak…

“FWS is only ‘anti-rights’ if you don’t consider women to be entitled to any rights in law or public life. It’s a sad state of affairs that Amnesty has sunk so low as to defame prominent women’s organisations, including a rape crisis centre and support networks for abused wives and children." thetimes.com/uk/scotland/ar…

How SNP's deeply sexist policy on transgender prisoners was finally overturned – Lisa Mackenzie trib.al/PUX0eGC

Puberty blockers damage bone density, impair cognitive development and lead to infertility. So why has parliament voted to inject more than 200 children with these dangerous drugs? The Pathways Trial is a medical and moral scandal, says Jo Bartosch buff.ly/t9VY4dl

MPs are scheduled to vote on the puberty blockers trial TODAY. Drugging *physically healthy* children to stop them turning into adults? Madness. @LabWomenDec @AllianceLGB @SexMattersOrg

NEW: While the whole world is focused is on who will be our next Prime Minister, it’s quietly confirmed that the NHS-backed Pathways puberty blocker trial has bee reapproved, with some small changes. A minimum age of entry of 11 for girls and 12 for boys… gov.uk/government/new…

No Caspar, a single woman having a baby by herself does NOT present same red flags as a man renting a woman's womb to have a baby by himself, with the intention of denying that baby their mother. And no, the fact some women abuse children does not mean women pose same risk to children as men.

“In a free society, people can believe whatever they want. If you want to believe men can be women or you’re a man who wants to call himself a woman, that is your business. What you cannot do in a free society is force anyone else to accept it. What is at stake here is the ability to lawfully acknowledge reality. If you care so much about “trans rights” you can work out a way to get them without destroying the category of women in law, female spaces, sport, services, the entire reality of lesbianism, and punishing citizens for acknowledging reality. The fact that you haven’t even tried makes it appear that destroying the rights of women is the goal. Any politician who will look an Australian citizen in the eye and tell them that a man can be a woman is admitting that they will lie about anything and everything because the most obvious lie has already been told. If no one in this room can acknowledge reality and fix an obvious problem you are either malicious or incompetent. The days of dismissing this issue are over. This is not a culture war. It’s reality.” - my words, read by Alison Penfold MP, in parliament today. Contact politicians are tell them to BACK THE BILL - “Sex Discrimination Amendment- sex based rights bill 2026”

The NHS funds over 1000 double mastectomies a year for women with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. They can be referred at 17 and have surgery from 18. In 2024 and 2025 the NHS performed about 500 mastectomies each year for this reason on women aged 18-24, with an unknown number in the private sector. There is no evidence to support benefit, and increasing concern about harm and regret. Internationally, policies are shifting. The American Society of Plastic Surgeons is the first medical institution to break from the dogma of "gender affirming care" in the USA and take an evidence based approach. As a result the ASPS' new guidelines no longer support gender surgery until at least age 19. The same arguments about poor evidence and risk apply to older age groups, but in the US just stopping doing these procedures on children (some as young as 13) is a massive step forward. Scot Bradley Glasberg, MD, Past President of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons will be speaking at the Rethinking Youth Gender Medicine conference in London 5/6 July on "Breaking the Mold; How the American Society of Plastic Surgeons Decided to Put Evidence First" The implications for UK practice will be discussed. buytickets.at/clinicaladviso…

Surrogacy *at a minimum* should have adoption-level safeguarding checks. At the moment men can commission motherless babies from women with no meaningful welfare checks at all. bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…

Apparently it’s not my beliefs that are the problem. It’s the way I express them. So let me express them for you. I believe women have the right to single-sex spaces - particularly in intimate settings such as toilets, changing rooms, hospitals and domestic violence shelters. Not only because the overwhelming majority of violence against women and girls is carried out by biological males, but because women deserve privacy, dignity and comfort. I believe women have the right to fair sport - from grassroots to elite level. Not only so they can accurately compare their performance against other female bodies, or avoid losing medals, scholarships and financial opportunities, but so they are not placed at risk of injury - or worse - by competing alongside people who are typically quicker, heavier and stronger. I believe women deserve their own categories in awards across every field - including the arts, sciences and engineering. Because someone born male who identifies as a woman can never experience life as a biological female. So to do otherwise is not a level playing field. I believe humans cannot change sex. And that being a woman is not a ‘feeling’. It is not about dresses, make-up or long hair. And no amount of drugs, surgery or paperwork can change a person’s sex. I believe the words “woman” and “mother” should not be replaced with so-called “inclusive” language that erases women from motherhood. Because only female humans who have gone through puberty can conceive, carry a baby and give birth. And because clear communication in healthcare should take priority over identity-based language. I believe people who choose to live as the opposite sex are fully aware of their biological sex and medical history. To suggest otherwise is insulting. There is therefore no need to change medical language to accommodate those choices. I believe women and girls have the right to say ‘no’ to men in their single-sex spaces - including men who identify as women. Because women cannot know, on sight, which men present a threat. They cannot reasonably be expected to “pick and choose” based on how kind, feminine or non-threatening someone appears. I believe the risk of offending a small number of masculine-presenting women or females who identify as men, does not justify removing women’s single-sex spaces altogether. And that forcing women and girls to share their single-sex spaces with men - against their will - is a violation of their boundaries. I do not believe humans can change sex. Therefore I do not believe trans women are women. So I do not believe people who identify as trans women should have access to women’s spaces, sports or other female-only categories. I believe trans people deserve the same rights as everyone else. They already have those rights. Demanding access to women’s single-sex spaces is asking for additional rights - rights that conflict with women’s boundaries, protections and, here in the UK, the law itself. I believe a society that cannot accept women’s right to single-sex spaces - and that labels women hateful or bigoted for defending those rights - is an unhealthy one. I believe the majority of people agree with me. And find my views perfectly reasonable. But that a small minority within politics, public bodies and major institutions have embedded harmful ideologies that make others afraid to speak honestly. And the punishment is the process. There are real consequences for speaking openly: social ostracism, damaged relationships, reputational attacks, loss of income, loss of work and of status. I do not believe there is anything in this statement that could reasonably be described as hateful, abusive or offensive. Not that this ultimately matters. Because my tone is not the problem. The problem is simply that I am saying things some people do not want to hear. I am speaking truths some people would rather remain unspoken.

@TheCriticMag @jo_bartosch ‘Consent is a flimsy concept that carries a heavy burden… When it comes to acts that harm us, “consent” merely salves consciences, reducing the responsibility we owe one another to a tick box.”’

Sometimes, argues @jo_bartosch, we do know better than people who are harming themselves thecritic.co.uk/the-limits-of-…

This is a very good example of why the Assisted Dying Bill is so dangerous. Coercive and Controlling behaviour is hard to spot. Victims are used to hiding what is happening to them because they have been threatened not to disclose.

Activists have been lobbying the government to loosen the law around surrogacy to make it more like IVF. I've argued we should be doing the opposite: making it more like adoption in terms of the level of welfare checks. (Link next)

SurrogacyConcern @SurrogConcern

4 months ago

Our founder is quoted in today’s @thetimes expressing our concern about increasing numbers of single men pursuing surrogacy.

4 59 224 81K 17

Online pornography is not just entertainment, it has become a harmful form of education. It promotes the idea that pain for women is pleasure for men. It instils the notion that to be close to a woman is to dominate or degrade her.

Men who support women's right to things that also benefit men (abortion, contraception, sex work) but dismiss as trivial nonsense issues that benefit only women (women-only spaces, lesbian dating sites, maternal health, women's sport) are telling you clearly who they are.

Last week BBC Woman’s Hour covered egg donation (8 April). Hurrah, you might think. At last! Perhaps they covered the risks and known harms, or the £985 “compensation”? Or the Women and Equalities Committee inquiry (currently ongoing). Alas not🧵

Would love to see those famous men getting pats on the head for being so very concerned about incels and the manosphere finally join the dots and show some support for critics of the porn industry

‘No one now argues that factories should be free to maim their workers, or that confectioners should be allowed to lace sweets with poison. Yet for years, social media companies have enjoyed precisely that indulgence..’

The Critic @TheCriticMag

5 months ago

Social media companies must be held accountable for the consequences of their products, argues @jo_bartosch thecritic.co.uk/we-have-to-tam…

1 4 12 1K 1