Abigail McGyn

Prescient. 1989. Could have been written today. Few would even be able to write this today (although I'm thankful to now know several women who could). "You're a man. Piss off". We should have listened to Greer then and seen this coming. We didn't. We should listen now.

Feels like a good day to go back to Johann Lamont’s review of Frankly. frontlinewomen.substack.com/p/issue-7-the-…

Polanski nodding away as a doctor dismantles his position on sex and gender to his face should show people he's not a serious person.

This is an extraordinary story: deserves much wider coverage but won’t get it

My article on Vivienne Taylor, a psychotic trans-identified man, sentenced to 21 months in jail last week. Will he ever be safe to release?

@mar2vickers Does that mean none of the nine GRC-holding men were sex offenders, or that it's possible there are more than 151 transgender men sex offenders? Sorry if I'm being dim!

@AbsMcFabs Nine transwomen have a GRC in the system, and do not form part of the TW cohort from which 151 transgender sex offenders were incarcerated in England and Wales in March 2024.

Impossible! Because #ThisNeverHappens

@mar2vickers If that's TW *without* a GRC, then some of those women could potentially also be men?

@AbsMcFabs The cross-over point when transwomen started outnumbering women as a hard number was likely December 2023.

@WalkAlanWalk @WingsScotland There are now more encarcerated transwomen sex offenders than women sex offenders in the UK. Not per capita, actually more as a hard number. From a supposed population of 49,000 (ONS Census), as opposed to 30 million women, there are around 150 transwomen, to just under 100 women

You know the implied message is "stop complaining, women", not "stop being violent, men". Really smashing those patriarchal norms there

NC: Inevitable consequence of a trans identifying man using women's facilities is a cost to women, loss of single sex facility? PM: Impact rather than cost, but, gain of having workplace that there is a workplace inclusive of ppl not identifying as their sex.

Strong words on the assisted dying debate, by @kmckenna63 archive.ph/nLh6R

“We welcome this move from the SHRC. For too long, women’s rights have been bottom of the pile when drawing up policy: at best, our rights have been neglected; worse, however, they have often been violated. So, it is good to see a Scottish organisation state so clearly that women’s rights are also human rights. We hope this trend continues.” heraldscotland.com/news/25949150.…

Heartbroken by the Rochdale acquittal. That 13-year-old froze in pure panic during the attack — exactly the trauma response so many survivors know too well. It’s called tonic immobility: your body shuts down, you “leave” yourself, you can’t scream even when help is close. That doesn’t mean consent. This verdict isn’t justice. We’re sliding backwards on understanding rape, consent, and how fear actually works. The system failed her. Every survivor deserves better.  #RapeMyths #BelieveSurvivors #TonicImmobility @Wommando @WomensRightsNet @DrPamSpurr

The Scottish Human Rights Commission said the policy "does not sufficiently engage with the rights of female prisoners at all’ 👇

@Telegraph @ben_rumsby Your story is incorrect on 2 major facts. 1. Harriet is male yet you refer to him as her. 2. Harriet isn't banned. I AM BANNED. Harriet can play in the open and I can't play or spectate. I'm taking Ultimate Pool to court. That should be your story

We should be concerned if anyone who is expected to die within weeks (as is said in the story) is being told by anyone that a vote in parliament now could have practical consequences in time for them.

Doctor in court to face 45 sex assault charges 45!!!! bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…

“She found it difficult to reconcile the idea that the officers had simply made a mistake with the earlier finding that they had ignored explicit advice from a senior officer.” Well done to the Chief Constable for challenging the panel’s decision via a judicial review 👏 ▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️ Derbyshire's chief constable has challenged a decision on the disciplinary outcome for two Derbyshire police officers after a domestic abuse suspect was driven to the home of his victim after his release from custody. The case centres on officers PC Jack Large and PC James Barker, who were given final written warnings after a police misconduct hearing in March last year. Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary, Rachel Swann - who is set to leave her role in May - challenged the decision through judicial review, arguing the punishment was too lenient given the seriousness of the officers’ actions. It comes after a woman, referred to in the report as MB, reported being assaulted by her on-off partner, Jack Jeffries, to Nottinghamshire Police on March 8, 2023. Weeks later, on April 1, officers from Derbyshire Constabulary arrested Jeffries for allegedly assaulting his father, and Jeffries was taken to Ripley Police Station. While Jeffries remained in custody, PC Large made three phone calls to MB lasting 24 seconds, seven and a half minutes and 14 seconds. After Jeffries was interviewed, the officers sought advice from a supervising officer, Temporary Police Sergeant French (T/PS French). They suggested the matter could be dealt with by taking no further action, but T/PS French disagreed, advising them to contact Nottinghamshire Police about the earlier allegation involving MB - and also to arrange accommodation for Jeffries somewhere other than her address. Despite that advice, Jeffries was granted conditional bail shortly after 4.20am on April 2, and released into the care of the two officers. At around 5am they drove him to MB’s home and left him there. Just hours later, at 7.25am, MB phoned Nottinghamshire Police to report that Jeffries had assaulted her after arriving at her home that morning. Two Nottinghamshire officers attended the home and arrested Jeffries. On September 19, 2023, Jeffries was given a custodial sentence for the assault on April 2. The officers’ actions became the subject of disciplinary proceedings under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020. The misconduct panel chaired by Assistant Chief Constable James Abdy heard evidence over five days in March 2025. It concluded both officers had committed gross misconduct. The panel found they had breached professional standards relating to duties and responsibilities and discreditable conduct. It determined that driving Jeffries to MB’s address showed a serious failure to safeguard a vulnerable victim and represented a significant departure from instructions they had been given. However, the panel stopped short of dismissing the officers - and instead, imposed final written warnings lasting two years, concluding their actions were a “mistake, not malice or idleness”. This led to the Chief Constable ordering a judicial review against the panel's decision, during which five grounds were raised. *ARTICLE CONTINUED IN COMMENTS*

It is very strange to publish an article on the gender dynamics of mass shooters and not mention that the two "female" shooters used as flagship examples here were biologically male. Males commit more than 90% of violent crimes.

Wise words about jury trials from the ever brilliant Sarah Vine KC (no not that Sarah Vine). @CrossExaminePod is an unmissable legal pod from the equally brilliant Tom Cross KC (who acts for @SexMattersOrg in the Hampstead Ponds case & represented @EHRC in the @GoodLawProject JR)