Prof Jenny Gamble

💫Dr. Karleen Gribble, BRurSc, PhD is an Adjunct Professor in the School of #Nursing and #Midwifery at Western Sydney University. Her research focuses on #breastfeeding and communications in #WomenHealth You can listen to @DrKarleenG here-> buzzsprout.com/1422796/episod… #Australia

In case you missed this interview last weekend: she is so extraordinary theguardian.com/world/2026/feb…

I see Nicola Sturgeon is once again complaining that I posted a picture of myself wearing a T-shirt with her name on it and the legend 'Destroyer of Women's Rights.' Apparently this didn't 'elevate the debate.' Is there a clinical term for an individual who has extreme thinness of skin when it comes to their own perceived hurts, coupled with a rhino-hide when it comes to the fear and suffering of others? I'm thinking in particular of the two women Isla Bryson raped, who had to watch their First Minister squirm and smirk on TV as she tried to avoid admitting he was a man; of the five survivors of male violence who were ready to give evidence to Sturgeon's committee on gender self-ID, but were told to put their concerns in writing while seventeen trans-identified people appeared in person; of the mother of a young girl with a learning disability who campaigned against self-ID because she wanted her daughter to be guaranteed same sex intimate care, should she need it (the mother was presumably one of those female opponents Sturgeon calls 'shrill' and 'hysterical' in her memoir); of the ten-year-old girl sexually assaulted in a public bathroom by a 6'5" paedophile who served his jail sentence in a women's prison because he called himself 'Katie'; of Sandie Peggie, forced to discuss her own menstrual history in public to justify not wanting to undress in view of a 6ft straight cross-dresser in the nurses' changing room; of Marion Millar, dragged into court because she tweeted a picture of suffragette ribbons; of the Scottish rape crisis centres reliant on government funding who were pressured to admit trans-identified males into their services if they wanted funding to continue. When Sturgeon refers to an 'elevated debate', she means a discussion that takes place within a tiny, smug bubble from which regular women suffering real life consequences of her policies are firmly excluded. These faceless ants are loftily dismissed as bigots, or, to be more precise: 'transphobic, misogynistic, homophobic, maybe racist as well.' Nicola, you hated the T-shirt picture because you couldn't ignore it, as you'd ignored so many other women trying to make you understand their concerns. Appeals to your empathy, your intelligence and your compassion all failed. Apparently the only way to get through to you is through your vanity.

Yes.

Bethany's full comment in the media today: "I never imagined that a frontline NHS nurse from the original Washington, a town in the north‑east of England, would one day find herself flying to Washington D.C. to speak on an international stage. Yet this week, that is exactly where I am headed, alongside Andrea Williams of the Christian Legal Centre who has supported our case from the beginning, following the landmark legal ruling that vindicated eight ordinary nurses who simply asked not to have to undress in front of a male colleague. Our story has travelled far beyond Darlington Memorial Hospital. It has become a warning, not just to Britain, but now to America, of what happens when ideology overtakes common sense, safeguarding, and basic human dignity. For more than two-and-a-half years my colleagues and I asked our NHS Trust (County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust) for something that should never have been up for debate: the right for women to have a female‑only changing room. Instead, we were told to “broaden our mindset,” get “educated,” and accept a biological male in our private space, or else. Some of my colleagues, including survivors of abuse, were re-traumatised. All of us were ignored, intimidated and put at further risk. When the employment tribunal ruled earlier this month that what happened to us was unlawful harassment, that our dignity had been violated, it should never have felt like a groundbreaking victory. But it did. And that fact alone is alarming to say the least. As I prepare to address the She Leads conference in Washington, I go not as a campaigner, but as an ordinary nurse who was pushed into extraordinary circumstances along with my courageous colleagues who I could not do this without. If this can happen in the UK, a country once known for its robust safeguarding, its clear understanding of biological reality and as the home of freedom of speech, then no nation is immune. My message to America is simple: do not wait until your institutions are captured before you start fighting back. Women should never have to go to court to defend biological reality or their right to single‑sex spaces. That is why our story matters internationally. This is not a British problem. It is a Western problem. It is a cultural problem. It is a truth problem. And it demands a response. express.co.uk/news/uk/216518…

@TerfyMcTerfy @roseveniceallan @MForstater It looks more like a whistle. Or a cigar!

@roseveniceallan @MForstater Fantastic picture 🥰 Tbh I would be the woman at the back with a cigarette, all cosy and warm in her scarf and jumper. Open air swimming isn’t really my thing 😘

One hundred years ago in 1925 women finally won the fight to have their own, single sex swimming pond on Hampstead Heath. Please can we have it back now?

Isn't it interesting that desexed language was brought in to healthcare without any research on the consequences? petition.parliament.uk/petitions/7486…

Bethany said: "For more than a year, my colleagues and I have been fighting for something so simple, so basic, that it should never have required a court case: the right for women to have safe, single‑sex spaces at work. Today, a tribunal has confirmed what we knew from the start, that what happened to us was unlawful, and that the NHS Trust failed in its duty to protect our dignity and our safety. This case was never about ideology for us. It was about truth, biology, fairness, and the basic protections the Equality Act was designed to uphold. We never asked for special treatment. We asked only to be able to undress for work without a man being present. Instead, we were told to “broaden our mindset,” to “be inclusive,” and to accept that a biological male could use the women’s changing rooms simply because he said he was a woman. When we raised safeguarding concerns, concerns no reasonable person could dismiss, we were the ones pushed aside, belittled, and forced into a makeshift “temporary” space that was unsafe and dehumanising. The tribunal’s ruling affirms that women’s rights cannot be overwritten by internal policies or political pressure. It affirms that our concerns were legitimate, and that the trust’s treatment of us was discriminatory and unlawful. But this judgment must also serve as a warning. Across the NHS, there are countless women who feel they cannot speak, who fear being labelled or punished simply for wanting the privacy and safety they are entitled to. The Government has still not published the lawful guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission. NHS leadership continues to prioritise ideological policies over the real needs of frontline staff. Our victory today is a step forward, not just for us, but for every woman in the NHS. We hope it gives others the courage to speak, and we urge those in authority to finally listen. Women deserve better. And we will keep standing up until they get it." Comment from President of the Darlington Nursing Union, Bethany Hutchison, in today's Daily Express, following their landmark legal win supported by the Christian Legal Centre👇 express.co.uk/news/uk/215869…

@wyllie_cameron @ForWomenScot @holyroodmandy @LWDScotland "Female is real, and it's sex, and femininity is unreal, and it's gender. For that to become the given identity of women is a profoundly disabling notion." — Germaine Greer

The most read story had the most obvious information: men are not women. 🩷 @ForWomenScot

@alisonleary1 @SusannaRustin Me too, please. Send me the link 🙏

💥Today, 29th December, is 50th anniversary of the sex discrimination and equal pay acts coming into force, along with equal opportunities commission to help enforce. Before then, employers & others *legally* blocked women from all kinds of roles, responsibilities, promotions 1/

It may come as a shock to those on TERF Island or in the US, but probably not to anyone in Canada/New Zealand/Ireland/Japan, that opposition to gender ideology gets little to no media coverage in Australia. While the slang has always been “down under”, we are increasingly living in an upside down world. If your main source of news is via ABC, The Guardian, Sydney Morning Herald or free to air nightly news, you likely have no idea that there is a court case called Tickle v Giggle about a man who claims to be a woman suing a woman for not knowing it or accepting it, the outcome of which will establish what a woman is in law. You definitely have absolutely no idea that a woman was ordered to pay $95,000 in damages for identifying two men who claim to be women in women’s sports teams. It would come as a major shock that a woman is being dragged through a state tribunal by a man who claims to be a woman who “breastfed” his child because she said it’s wrong for men who claim to be women to breastfeed. And if you don’t know about the three legal cases, you sure as shit don’t know about the thousands of Australian women who are supporting us, who are also standing up to gender ideology, many who have been punished for doing so. Outside of The Australia newspaper, Sky News and the occasional article in Daily Mail, Australian media is silent. And we don’t have a robust podcast alternative to Australian legacy media. To be fair, it’s not like MSM is all over the other side. It’s pretty much equally as silent (with the exception of the ABC who has never met a they/them they won’t platform). Trans activists in media aren’t celebrating the men who are taking women to court. Evidentially, they want it as hidden as possible, and they don’t want anyone to know that they’re not actually oppressed. 2026 has to be the year this sick dynamic ends.

I spoke to radio 4 Today this morning about the fact that I am taking legal action against the University of Bristol for failing to uphold my rights as a visiting speaker 🧵

@KirralieS @jk_rowling @FinalTelegraph Yes - it does act as a deterrent and this enrages and awakens, which perversely means more will speak up. You are a role model.

@jk_rowling @FinalTelegraph In Australia they have awarded $95,000 in damages against me and ordered me to post a confession. It also acts as a deterrent to Australians speaking truthfully and freely about males in female sport.

And yet here I am, having the time of my life. ✍️❤️‍🔥🌴

I have written to the Judicial Office for Scotland in relation to errors in the interpretation of evidence in the Sandie Peggie case. To: Judicial Office for Scotland judicialcomplaints@scotcourts.gov.uk Dear Sir/Madam, I write in relation to the Judgment in the case of Peggie vs Fife Health Board and Upton. While some of these points have already been discussed in the public domain, the judgment suggests a preference for a ‘skilled witness’ regarding research evidence. As a professor of sociology at UCL with many years of experience in the field of social statistics, I trust that I meet the criteria to be considered as a skilled witness. Paragraph 1047 suggests some confusion on the part of Judge Kemp regarding the following publication: Dhejne, C., Lichtenstein, P., Boman, M., Johansson, A.L., Långström, N. and Landén, M., 2011. Long-term follow-up of transsexual persons undergoing sex reassignment surgery: cohort study in Sweden. PloS one, 6(2), p.e16885. The judgment notes: ‘The following was stated “Transsexual individuals were at increased risk of being convicted for any crime or violent crime after sex reassignment (Table 2); this, however was only significant in the group who underwent sex reassignment before 1989.” ‘ However, this is sentence is irrelevant to the point at hand. The judge appears to have either misinterpreted the evidence or missed the point. The paper states ‘regarding any crime, male-to-females had a significantly increased risk for crime compared to female controls (aHR 6.6;95% CI 4.1–10.8) but not compared to males’. In other words, the paper finds that ‘male-to-females’ retained a male pattern of criminal convictions. The judge’s misinterpretation of Dhjene et al, combined with his dismissal of Ministry of Justice data on the grounds that clicking on hyperlinks would have been required to gain access to the relevant documents, underpinned his conclusion in paragraph 1049 ‘In our view, having read all of the documents, there is very far from sufficient reliable evidence to establish as a fact that a trans woman who is legally and biologically male is a greater risk to any person assigned female at birth within a changing room environment at a workplace than another woman assigned female at birth’. This conclusion is based in error. In addition, it misunderstands the burden of proof. It is well-established that males are far more likely to commit violent and sexual crime than females. In order to argue that this does not apply to a subset of males, one would need strong positive evidence of this point. I would add some further evidence. The most recent data from His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS, 2025) further supports the view that males who identify as transwomen retain a male pattern of offending. Only around 4% of the prison population in England and Wales is female. The transgender prison population in 2025 (0.4% of prisoners) included over four times as many biological males (276) as females (63). If transwomen were counted as women, they would constitute 7.3% of women prisoners. I hope this is helpful. Yours faithfully, Professor Alice Sullivan, UCL

@WeAreWithWoman @RCObsGyn If they really wanted women to get the care they want and produces better outcomes for mothers and babies, they would be advocating for continuity of midwifery care. sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists @RCObsGyn show their usual tin ear & lack of care with public comms. See the typos & poor wording in this new graphic about their standards - prob done by AI & no one checked it. And🙄 to ‘individuals’ & ‘women & birthing people’😡

@WeAreWithWoman @RCObsGyn 🗑️language, including use of “patient” and lumping the person who gestates, births, breastfeeds, and nurtures babies in with “parents”. They can’t seem to prioritise women.

@salltweets @joannaccherry Time, money, psychological burden - they punish us with the process

@joannaccherry I have a theory: The judges know this. But the process is the punishment. So, for stepping out of line as a non compliant woman they punished her with having to do an appeal she will inevitably win. It remains an example to all women: step out of line & we will waste your time.

The Supreme Court was crystal clear on the definition of a woman across the Equality Act. The Sandie Peggie tribunal judgment has muddied the waters. Imho it’s got the law wrong, made some perverse findings in fact & used biased language. It’s not binding but needs appealed.

@Maebe_A_Girl @helenstaniland Offence was intended. You are intentionally being rude. Also - she has said nothing transphobic.

@helenstaniland No offense intended because there’s nothing wrong with being trans, but you do have some masculine features and thinning hair, which might lead some to believe you’re on the trans spectrum. This is why transphobia harms all women including c!sgender women.

No woman will ever do this.