Mick Hartley

Politics and Culture

recent posts

email me

  • Licence to offend

    Well now….bring out the cliches. "You couldn't make it up"; "sounds like a comedy sketch"; "it beggars belief"; "what's the world coming to?" Licence to Offend exhibition cancelled in case it causes offence. 

    An exhibition of work by political cartoonists including The Times’s Morten Morland has been cancelled because of fears it could cause offence.

    Hours before a private viewing on Wednesday, organisers of Licence to Offend told guests not to go after a last-minute decision by the venue, the TownSq co-working space in Kingston upon Thames, southwest London.

  • Dragged kicking and screaming

    Oliver Brown in the Telegraph has long been an eloquent critic of these pathetic sports bodies that have spent the last few years pandering to the trans lobby, and finding excuses for why they can't manage to protect women's sport. No surprise then that he's not overwhelmed by the latest FA concession:

    Hallelujah. The national game has had to be dragged kicking and screaming to a position of upholding fairness for half the population, but at long last it has seen the light.

    When a trans-identifying male was accused in 2023 of causing a season-ending injury to a female opponent, the Football Association did nothing. When women massed outside Wembley last autumn in protest at a teenager being banned for six matches for asking a player “Are you a man?”, it refused to act. But with the aftershocks of last month’s seismic Supreme Court ruling that men cannot be women still rippling across the land, it ultimately had nowhere else to turn.

    The FA left no doubt that it took this decision, banning men from playing women’s football at all levels, with extreme reluctance. Even in the short statement it issued, there was no reference to the women and girls disadvantaged for years by its genuflecting to the fallacy that people could be whatever sex they purported to be.

    There was certainly no mention of the girl punished last year for stating biological reality, or of the many courageous women who have been publicly vilified for opposing the gender ideology it so keenly embraced. So forgive me for not offering a toast today to FA chief executive Mark Bullingham, for his soaring moral leadership.

    What was fascinating was the domino effect. One by one they fell: first the FA, which belatedly realised that the Supreme Court verdict meant it had to comply with the law, and then, within hours, England Netball and the England and Wales Cricket Board, who were saved by football’s abrupt about-turn from any need to make a stand on their own.

    Even on this long-awaited day, with three major sports accepting the imperative to exclude males from the female category from the grass roots to the elite, the language was pitifully lily-livered.

    “Complex”, the FA called it. What exactly is complex about banning males – forget the label “biological males” in this instance, given the Supreme Court’s clarity that there is no other kind – from competing against females in a contact sport?

    The only reason it was ever presented as some fiendish dilemma is because the FA, in common with many supine governing bodies, was more interested in pandering to Stonewall lobbyists and militant trans activists than in defending the truth. While the 2010 Equality Act was crystal clear in declaring that sports should be single-sex wherever a physical advantage existed, it has taken until 2025 for the FA to recognise what was staring it in the face. It is unforgivable.

    For sports read the overwhelming majority of the establishment – the NHS, the BBC, the Civil Service, schools and universities – who all bent the knee to Stonewall. It's a long walk back…

  • Led by science, not ideology

    Why the puberty blocker trial shouldn't go ahead:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Even a Trump-backed review can be right sometimes:

    An NHS puberty blocker trial is “not ethical”, according to a Donald Trump-ordered review of children’s gender medicine.

    The US federal review goes even further than Britain’s Cass Review by raising “serious concerns about medical interventions” of any form in children and teenagers.

    Its Department of Health and Human Services concluded that “the overall quality of evidence is very low” to justify giving puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to adolescents, including in trials such as the Pathways research planned by the NHS.

    The highly critical review likens the trial of puberty blockers by the health service to trying to test the harms of jumping out of a plane without a parachute.

    It was ordered by Mr Trump within days of taking office, having made gender ideology a central theme of his campaign in the run-up to the election.

  • An alarming case of mass social brainwashing

    Lionel Shriver in the Spectator – Why the trans debacle matters:

    Does this goofball movement even matter? The population swapping Y-fronts for knickers and vice versa may have soared, but it’s minuscule in comparison to, say, the population affected by a national housing shortage. Have we trans naysayers lavished our precious, finite energies on a trivial side issue? Maybe the fashion for aping the opposite sex is so overtly dumb that it should be left alone to collapse under its own absurdity.

    Yet I come round to the view that defeating this trans nonsense is important. I’m not the only one who kept her mouth shut for ages over this stuff; most of us did, and for far longer. Schools, universities, corporations, police forces and the NHS are still buying in. This is an alarming case of mass social brainwashing. In 2010, if you’d polled the public whether it was a good idea to induce widespread and often permanent in-abilities to orgasm and to reproduce in their nation’s children – or in anybody, really – almost no one would have said yes. Virtually overnight, the public has come to endorse child sacrifice.

    Any culture that squanders its efforts on drug regimes and plastic surgery meant to deceive both patients and the world at large that they are the sex they are not is profoundly decadent, if not debauched. We’ve a shortage of neither men nor women, and pretending to swap them back and forth is a waste of money, medical expertise and social aggravation. Private insurance and NHS coverage of this elective ‘treatment’ is a scandal. If people want to play fleshly dress-up, they should do so on their own dime.

    This entire fiasco is based on lies, and a society that embraces bald falsehoods is eating itself hollow. You cannot change sex. ‘Trans women’ aren’t women. There’s no such thing as ‘gender identity’, ‘brain sex’, or being ‘born in the wrong body’. Sex is not ‘assigned’ at birth; it’s observed. Sex is not a feeling but an external, immutable, biological truth. All these mystical notions are medieval, and in institutionalising them across the modern West we’ve made ourselves ridiculous.

    We’re inflicting those lies on a whole generation of children, who are taught that their sex isn’t a fact but a decision. We’re convincing misfits that the solution to their misery is mutilation. We’re enticing both kids and adults into an indefinitely medicalised future, and make no mistake: loads of these awful surgeries go wrong. We’ve still no idea how badly adults are damaged by skipping puberty. We’re emotionally imploding whole families.

    Promotion for a children’s graphic novel called Homebody describes it as ‘about trans identity and the importance of living authentically’. Authentically? ‘Trans identity’ is explicitly inauthentic. It’s a performance. It’s posing as something you’re not. Some of these thespians for life are better actors than others, but they’re all phonies. They’ve not discovered their true selves; they’ve adopted an artifice. Adults are free to make that choice – as I should be free to note that even successful imitation of the other sex isn’t ‘brave’, much less ‘authentic’, and it achieves exactly nothing.

    Until recently, dysphoria was a rare mental illness, which we’ve now elevated to a prestigious designer label. It’s still a mental illness, but the only one we ‘treat’ by nourishing the delusion – worse, a delusion we compel others, in the UK legally compel others, to pretend to share. Losing touch with reality is the definition of insanity. For more than a decade, the better part of the western world has been deranged. Myopic, destructive, unproductive and deeply sick, the trans mania suggests that collectively we’ve no idea what to do with ourselves and we lack a rational sense of purpose. As it does for susceptible individuals, the fad indicts a whole society’s weak sense of self. Does trans represent the demise of our civilisation? Maybe not quite. But it’s a bad sign.

    Body dysphoria in (mostly) young girls used to manifest itself in anorexia. No one suggested that these girls were right, that they really were fat, that starvation was being true to their authentic selves. And at least with anorexics cure was possible, and many many women now can look back on it as a stage they went through and came out of. With gender dysphoria "treatment" on the other hand – puberty blockers, hormone treatment, mastectomies – the damage is permanent.

  • FA trans change

    The FA finally sees sense:

    English football chiefs have announced that transgender women will be banned from playing in women’s matches at all levels of the game from June 1.

    The FA had put in place a policy on April 1 that allowed transgender women to play in amateur women’s competitions if they had had reduced testosterone levels for at least a year, but it has revised the regulations in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the legal definition of “woman”.

    The England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) is expected to adopt the same policy at a meeting of its directors on Friday.

    The FA said: “The Supreme Court’s ruling on the 16 April means that we will be changing our policy. Transgender women will no longer be able to play in women’s football in England, and this policy will be implemented from June 1, 2025.

    “We understand that this will be difficult for people who simply want to play the game they love in the gender by which they identify, and we are contacting the registered transgender women currently playing to explain the changes and how they can continue to stay involved in the game.”

    It added: “As the governing body of the national sport, our role is to make football accessible to as many people as possible, operating within the law and international football policy defined by Uefa and Fifa.

    “Our current policy, which allows transgender women to participate in the women’s game, was based on this principle and supported by expert legal advice.

    “This is a complex subject, and our position has always been that if there was a material change in law, science, or the operation of the policy in grassroots football then we would review it and change it if necessary.”

    It's not a complex subject. It could hardly be less complex, but the old "complex" excuse is always trotted out to justify their inertia. Men shouldn't be playing in women's football. Simple as that. Now they're moving in the right direction, but with as little grace as possible. The poor men who can no longer have fun competing with women who are much less strong and fast as muscular as them are the ones who get all the sympathy – those men who "want to play the game they love in the gender by which they identify". Far more sympathy than the women ever got.

    Fiona McAnena, director of campaigns at Sex Matters, said: “This is welcome but long overdue. The FA has had ample evidence of the harms to women and girls caused by its nonsensical policy of letting men who identify as women play in women’s teams. The requirement to lower their testosterone tells you that everyone knew they were not women.

    “Thankfully, the UK Supreme Court has now confirmed this, saying it is lawful to exclude ‘all men, including trans women, regardless of their GRC status’.

    “Every other sporting body now needs to re-establish a genuine women’s category, and this shameful period in history will finally be brought to an end.”

    Added:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  • Women with spines

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Full text:

    Trans activism divides women and rolls back our rights.

    Trans activism is a top-down movement; opposition has been a grassroots endeavor.

    Gender identity ideology is not feminist – it is a movement that enshrines male sexual predation as a "right" and reduces womanhood to a fetish.

    Enforcing laws that protect women's boundaries is not difficult. As much as such men desperately pine for their fantasy "genital checks," it is very easy to tell a man from a woman even when he's in panto.

    And finally, can I just say how tired I am of the term "moral panic." The burning of women alive as "witches" was a moral panic. Saying men aren't women is common sense. Women's boundaries, the safeguarding of children – common sense.

    When feminists opposed pedophile activism in the 70's – 80's, they, too, were accused of whipping up a "moral panic." I suppose we'll have to do this dance forever, but fortunately there will always be women who have spines, @NadiaWhittomeMP

  • The right side of history

    Admitting to gender-critical beliefs in the theatrical world now must be something like coming out as gay in the old world of football or rugby league. If you've any sense you'll keep it to yourself, and if you don't – well, god help you. Here's the latest:

    A group of actors who have appeared in the film adaptations of JK Rowling’s books have signed an open letter pledging their “solidarity” with the LGBT community.

    Eddie Redmayne, an Oscar-winning actor who appeared in the Fantastic Beasts films, and Katie Leung, who played Cho Chang in Harry Potter, are among the 400 stars who have raised concerns about the impact of the Supreme Court ruling on biological sex.

    It has also been signed by The Last Of Us actor Bella Ramsey, Happy Valley star James Norton, The Brutalist actor Joe Alwyn, Babygirl star Harris Dickinson and Bridgerton’s Nicola Coughlan, who previously said she was “disgusted” by the ruling.

    Other notable signatories include Paapa Essiedu, who has been cast as Severus Snape in HBO’s upcoming Harry Potter series.

    The list goes on. I'd like to think there were at least a few who, on being approached, told the luvvie activists to fuck off. I doubt it though: that would be a career-ending move. 

    The letter said that the film and television community had previously come together to further the Me Too and Black Lives Matter movements by “reflecting” upon working practices and “uplifting” a broad spectrum of voices.

    “We believe the ruling undermines the lived reality and threatens the safety of trans, non-binary, and intersex people living in the UK,” it added. “We must now urgently work to ensure that our trans, non-binary, and intersex colleagues, collaborator…s and audiences are protected from discrimination and harassment in all areas of the industry — whether on set, in a production office, or at a cinema.”

    It said: “Film and television are powerful tools for empathy and education, and we believe passionately in the ability of the screen to change hearts and minds. This is our opportunity to be on the right side of history.”

    Ah, the right side of history. Alas, they seem to be facing backwards. The tide isn't coming in: it's going out.

  • The Lush campaign – trans activism targeted at children

    Further to that Lush story of trans ideology pushed to seven-year-olds, this from Genspect:

    Across Ireland and the United Kingdom, a dangerous form of corporate activism is being quietly and purposefully rolled out.

    At Dundrum Town Centre in Dublin, and in all 101 Lush stores across the UK and Ireland, the cosmetics retailer Lush is using its brand power to market activist-led gender identity narratives to children and young adults.

    The current Lush campaign, built around bright window displays, free activist literature, and the sale of “Liberation” bath bombs — is not a simple act of solidarity. It is an overt promotion of medical transition narratives, combined with fundraising for trans activist organisations TransActual and My Genderation in the U.K, and to TENI in Ireland.

    Lush’s campaign, running from 23 April to 11 May 2025, features:

      • Window displays featuring cartoon children designed by trans activists Fox Fisher and Lewis Hancox.
      • A free 24-page booklet (Dream vs. Reality), advocating for expansion of “gender-affirming care.”
      • QR codes linking to trans activist-produced videos.
      • “Liberation” bath bombs with 75% of proceeds donated to TransActual and My Genderation in the U.K., and to TENI in Ireland.

    This marketing directly targets Lush’s core audience, young people aged 12 to 25 – many of whom are at critical stages of psychological development and identity formation, and who often shop independently of their parents.

    No information is provided about the irreversible consequences of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or surgeries. There is no room for thoughtful analysis, alternative perspectives, caution, or for truly informed consent. Serious risks, such as double mastectomies, osteoporosis, incontinence, permanent sexual impairment, and infertility, are entirely omitted. Instead, children and adolescents are presented with a single, activist-driven message: transition is fun – much like the bath bombs and soaps sold beside pastel posters celebrating gender-affirming care. The idea of the “trans kid” is promoted not as a complex identity, but as a cool, edgy persona.

    This is not marketing; it is trans activism targeted at children.

    And it's all based on the mythical "trans kid".

    So what is a “trans kid”? It’s an idea created by trans activists, designed to convince children they could be “born in the wrong body.” Let us be clear: there is no such thing as a “trans kid”. We do not have a choice in the bodies we are born with; we are born as our bodies and we die as our bodies. The latest research shows that children who identify as trans are socially vulnerable children, typically neurodiverse, isolated and seeking a sense of belonging.

    The dramatic 5,000% rise in adolescents identifying as transgender over the past decade cannot be explained without acknowledging the role of social contagion. In a landmark 2018 study published in PLOS ONE, Dr. Lisa Littman documented the phenomenon of Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD) and suggested that trans identification often occurred in peer groups, where multiple friends simultaneously declared new transgender identities.

    This is a deeply vulnerable cohort. It is not the cool, savvy kids who identify as trans; it is the socially awkward, lonely, and lost children who are most likely to be dazzled by Lush’s cheerful, pastel-coloured campaign. Notably, 62.5% of those with ROGD had pre-existing mental health challenges before ever identifying as transgender.

    The authors – Sarah Holmes and Sara Morrison – go on to compare this new trans marketing to the old marketing of cigarettes by tobacco companies, using cartoons and sweets to entice children, and portraying smoking as glamorous and cool. Plus ça change….

  • Theroux and the West Bank settlers

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Full text:

    He states: “In 1968, the year after it was occupied by Israel, a community of Jewish settlers moved in illegally. They now number some 700.”

    In 1895 the Jewish population of Hebron was 1,429. So there were more Jews in Hebron some 130 years ago than there are Jews in Hebron today. Why does Louis neglect to mention this?

    He interviews a Palestinian human rights activist named Issa. This man states: “This is my land. The settlers chose to come here. And if it’s not safe for them, why continue to build more settlements in my own city?”

    But let’s step back for a second. Why is it that the Jewish population of Hebron is smaller today than it was 130 years ago?

    Jews have lived in Hebron since antiquity. Biblical tradition holds that Abraham settled in Hebron and purchased the Cave of the Patriarchs as a burial place for his wife Sarah.

    Modern Jewish history in Hebron dates back to at least the 15th century. A visiting rabbi found at least 20 Jewish families living in Hebron in 1521.

    This small Jewish community grew over the years despite facing brutal discrimination and recurring pogroms. They were banned from praying at the Cave of the Patriarchs – one of the holiest sites in Judaism – until the beginning of the 20th century.

    The Jewish community of Hebron was only effectively finally destroyed in 1929 as a result of the Hebron Massacre.

    Dozens of Jews – including non-Zionist Jews who had lived in Hebron for generations – were systematically murdered by Arab nationalists. The British then ordered the remaining Jews to leave the city. Jewish properties and homes were looted. The Hadassah building became an Arab girls' school, the Abraham Avinu synagogue was destroyed and used as a goat pen, and the Jewish cemetery was vandalized and desecrated.

    When Jordan occupied Hebron from 1948 to 1967, they razed the last remaining Jewish synagogues and strictly prohibited Jewish access to the city. The Tomb of the Patriarchs was once again off limits to the Jews.

    Following Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six Day War, Jews were finally able to reenter the city and visit the Tomb of the Patriarchs. Louis Theroux only picks up the story here, when settlers “illegally” moved in.

    I want to clarify that I oppose extremist settlers in the West Bank. But if the Jews are to live anywhere in the West Bank, surely there can be a community in Hebron? I mean, how is it fair that a 500 year old Jewish community gets massacred and expelled and their homes looted and when they move back in 30 years later it’s “illegal.”

    No doubt the settler movement is peopled by some unpleasant people with racist views. However the prospect of Theroux – or anyone at the BBC – doing an equivalent hit piece on Hamas, with its proud boast that it aims to kill all the Jews in the name of Islam, is of course somewhere round zero – though Hamas is a far more significant force, and represents Arab Palestinian opinion, I would guess, to a much greater extent than the settlers represent Israeli opinion. The Beeb, meanwhile, continues to report all Hamas stories, and all Hamas statistics, as fact – to be prominently displayed as main news. So finding some nasty Jews to interview, as representative of Israel, fits the BBC agenda very nicely.

    Jake Wallis Simons at the JC – To demonstrate ‘impartiality’, the BBC shows the worst Jews they can find.

    Overall, it was impossible to form a proper opinion on the people we met due to the baked-in bias. Here was the world according to the BBC, in which Theroux’s every encounter happened to support the conclusions with which he had left Heathrow.

    Right at the end, he dispenses with his trademark light touch and treats us to a bit of raw dogma. “The settler dream shows no sign of abating, along with the dislocation, devastation and death that follows inevitably in its train,” he says. So here is the takeaway: the Jews are to blame for the bloodshed, not the Arabs, who tried to murder them from the start. Which is what we were supposed to think all along.

  • Resisting patriarchal oppression

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js