When the Tasmanian Greens and Labor conspired with turncoat speaker Sue Hickey to ram through radical “transgender” legislation, the true threat of the changes was assiduously kept from public discussion. The transgender activists and their pet politicians carefully kept discussion of the bill focussed on its least dangerous aspect: making gender optional on birth certificates. Most Tasmanians rejected even that much – but the truly alarming aspects of the legislation – “self-identification” and criminalising pronoun use – were deceitfully glossed over by the media and politicians.

Now, another Australian state is setting itself up to repeat the same mistakes.

A feminist group has accused Victoria’s Labor government of introducing its proposed sex-change bill without adequate community consultation, saying the potential impact on women is significant and largely misunderstood.

“Community consultation” was the Big Lie in Tasmania, too. The Tasmanian public was not consulted at all about the new laws. “Community consultation” was nothing more than politicians and activists holding secret talks and all agreeing with each other.

The recently formed Victorian Women’s Guild wants to highlight concerns over the government’s Births, Deaths, and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill, which, if ratified, will allow transgender individuals to alter their sex on birth certificates without having to undergo sex reassignment surgery.

The response comes as ­Coalition MPs prepare to vote against the bill, to be debated next week, after opposition legal affairs spokesman Ed ­O’Donohue flagged concerns about the impact of the reform on identifying sex ­offenders and other prisoners.

Research in Britain using FOI has shown that half of all transgender prisoners are sex offenders or dangerous “Category A” prisoners. Given that they are also statistically likely to be biologically-intact males who are sexually attracted to women, then the spate of cases of “transgender” prisoners raping other inmates should surprise precisely no-one. Nor should it surprise anyone that other predators have rapidly weaponised laws such as self-identification.

The latest bill, introduced to parliament in June, removes the requirement for an individual to have had surgical intervention in order to “self-nominate” on their birth certificate as male or female or “any other gender diverse or non-binary descriptor”.

According to the guild, the legislation has potential impacts for women’s safety, medical care and sport. One of its biggest concerns is women will no longer have a right to the privacy of female-only spaces as self-identified trans women — including those who remain biologically male — would by law be entitled to access.

Of course, “progressive” activists have nothing to offer in return except unhinged abuse.

In its bid to promote debate, the group has been labelled “transphobic” by a group of University of Melbourne students petitioning the university to cancel the guild’s forum on the issue.

But actual women – as opposed to men in dresses – are beginning to wake up to the fact that the latest “progressive” fad is in fact deeply misogynistic. It’s no longer just a case of men stealing women’s glory – whether it be a biological male being crowned “woman of the year”, or biologically male athletes crushing the female competition – women are facing very real threats.

Guild spokeswoman Nina Vallins said while the Yaniv case had captured the public’s attention, there were wide-ranging consequences of the proposed bill, particularly for already vulnerable women such as domestic violence survivors and prisoners.

“These women have a right to safe women-only spaces. It would be unfair on these women who have been victims of male violence to have male people — or to have to worry about male people — in these spaces,” the lawyer said.

theaustralian.com.au/nation/feminists-reject-transgender-law-change

How dare vulnerable women, or any woman at all, ask for their own spaces? Pure bigotry.