Trans books for toddlers are an outrage
But let's move away from the brazen attempts to brainwash little children for just a moment and settle down in the story corner for today's educational tale (with apologies to Eric Carle), The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner.
One day a tiny and very publicity-hungry campaigner, who wanted to be a big deal, hatched a plan to recruit pre-school allies. He had guessed, quite rightly, that toddlers were the only demographic likely to believe his guff that anyone can change sex if they just pop on a frock and get furious about pronouns.
On the first day, The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner gobbled up one publishing deal. On the second day he wrote two books explaining that girls who play with trains are probably boys and boys who like pink should be taken to a doctor and diagnosed as transgender.
On the third day, The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner bullied women writers who did not agree with his crackpot notions. On the fourth day he slapped a great big Stonewall Award sticker on a book about a sister becoming a brother.
On the fifth day, he ate a wheelbarrow of oranges and threatened to cancel anyone who said they were not the only fruit. Then on the sixth day, he disseminated a library of kids' books in which gender transitioning turned out to be the twinkly secret of a happy-ever-after.
On the seventh day, he devoured every last scrap of bonkers gender ideology he could find and disappeared off to digest it.
Some time later, The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner emerged looking like an extra from RuPaul's Drag Race and announced he was now a biological woman.
The Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigner banged on about his lived experience (of about a week). It was tempting to get very cross indeed. But then the Supreme Court decided that references to 'sex', 'man' and 'woman' in the Equality Act referred to biological sex and after that, nobody cared what he said, safe in the knowledge it was now illegal for him to manspread in the ladies' changing room or beat women to a pulp in the Olympics. The End.
If only it were. I thought we were done with all this nonsense – Martine Croxall we salute your eye roll at the witless term 'pregnant people' – and I for one have no desire to give Very Publicity-Hungry Campaigners any more of the attention they so desperately crave.
Fighting dirty
But new research into the publishing industry carried out by UK pressure group Sex Matters and its US equivalent, SEEN in Publishing, has revealed that a 'shiny, sparkly world of trans identities' is being promoted to young readers, with 'many aimed at toddlers'.
Now that really is fighting so dirty I have to speak up: how dare publishers literally mess with little children's minds in this way? Here in north London having two mums is commonplace, two dads is no biggie; small kids aren't that interested in their parents' sexual preferences, they are interested in being loved, nurtured and protected.
Growing up is hard enough work, which is why it's utterly immoral to draw toddlers, who haven't even mastered the potty, into the adult world of human identity politics. What next? Assisted dying and late-stage abortion?
At this age, most of our collective offspring still believe Paw Patrol is real and the moon follows them home, for pity's sake. Sowing the seeds of doubt about their biological sex is outrageous, indefensible and, let's be honest, exceedingly creepy.
Let our littlest citizens learn tolerance, fairness (yes even to women) kindness (ditto) and consideration. But they also deserve to know they have the right to ask questions and press for answers – anathema to the militant trans lobby who prefer to shut everyone down in case they bring up uncomfortable truths like biology.
This new audit of the publishing industry found that of 21 publishers surveyed, a fifth of their output on transgender-related products was targeted at children, leading the report to raise concerns that the message in the early-reader books was often that becoming transgender will 'resolve bodily hatred and create enduring joy in the form of 'trans euphoria''.
Crikey, if that were the case we'd all be at it. But it's not. Take a look at the shouty trans forums online and I've got to say that enduring joy doesn't feature nearly as often as spittle-flecked misogyny.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
26 minutes ago
- The Sun
‘Get them off my screen' rage Love Island fans as Megan and Conor's hideaway romp leaves devastated Emily in tears
FURIOUS Love Island fans want Conor and Megan off their screens after their steamy hideaway visit. Tonight Megan finally confirmed that she and Tommy are over, after spending recent days ramping up her connection with rugby lad Conor. 4 No sooner had she told a delighted Conor about the development, he suggested they spend the night in the hideaway. He gave little thought to his current partner Emily, who only returned from the sleepover earlier in the day. She decided to stay coupled with Conor and not swap him for dumped bombshell Will in the other villa. When Conor bluntly told her he was off to the hideaway, it all proved a bit much. Emily burst into tears and admitted she was more disappointed in pal Megan for not considering her feelings. Though Megan apologised sincerely for the oversight, it wasn't enough to make her change her mind and she and Conor excitedly headed to the hideaway. En route, Conor admitted it was "so awkward" saying goodbye to Emily. Once inside the private room, the pair cuddled up under the covers and shared passionate snogs. Conor even presented Megan with a bracelet to show he was serious about her. But viewers weren't impressed, with one ranting on X: "Watching #LoveIslandUK thinking who is more gross Megan or Conor? Both so grim." Watch the explosive moment furious Love Islander Alima DUMPS Remell after his sleepover snog is exposed Another fumed: "Megan is for the streets and Connor the alley cat." A third said: "Get Megan and Conor off my screen please." The following morning, they emerged from the hideaway into the sunny garden as Meg jokingly said they were on the "walk of shame". Tommy told Dejon and Harry that he felt a weight had been lifted off his shoulders. 4
Times
34 minutes ago
- Times
No 10 gags civil servants to stop them speaking out in public
Sir Keir Starmer has gagged senior health officials, military leaders and even the head of the civil service from speaking openly in public, in a move that has been described as a 'chilling' attack on free speech. In an edict issued across Whitehall, Downing Street has warned public sector officials not to talk at open events where their comments have not been vetted in advance. They have also been barred from taking part in any public question-and-answer sessions — even if they are part of an industry event. The rules also apply to media briefings on issues such as public health, carried out by senior figures such as the chief medical and scientific officers. While these can go ahead they must be cleared in advance by Downing Street and have a minister or special adviser in attendance. Those affected include public sector officials working for arms-length bodies such as the media regulator Ofcom and the education inspectorate Ofsted, which have operational independence from the government. The rules also apply to senior health leaders, diplomats and military officers. The edict has already led to cancellation or curtailment of a number of public events where senior government officials were due to speak. The Whitehall think tank the Institute for Government (IFG) was forced to cancel an event on Tuesday which was due to discuss Labour's new approach to public sector spending after Nick Donlevy, a senior civil servant at the Treasury, was made to pull out. Last week the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) told journalists attending a land warfare conference that they would not be able to report on a speech by Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, the chief of the air staff, who is expected to become head of the armed forces. • No 10 gags military chiefs at events where a minister is present The think tank said there had been a change in 'reporting rules relating to speakers from the British armed forces'. It said that the majority of speeches and panel appearances by British personnel 'will not be for reporting', whereas those by individuals from foreign militaries will be. Sources confirmed that the change had been forced on Rusi by the new Downing Street senior Whitehall figure said the move had been made to prevent high-profile officials from causing 'problems' for the government by using speeches to 'lobby ministers in public' or criticising spending plans or government policy. However, it has caused unease both inside and outside the government with one senior source describing it as 'unnecessary' and heavy-handed. 'It's the usual desire of No 10 to control absolutely everything without thinking through the consequences,' the source said. 'The idea that even the cabinet secretary cannot take part in a public question-and-answer event is both misguided and counterproductive.' Another added: 'This is mad on so many levels.' Alex Thomas, programme director at the IFG, said the rules would have a 'chilling effect' on public debate. 'This will lead to a more closed government and less effective policymaking,' he said. • Foreign Office staff told to resign if they don't like Gaza stance 'Openness is one of the seven principles of public life and it cannot be a good thing that officials that are responsible for the day-to-day running of critical public services will no longer be able to attend, speak, and answer questions at events.' 'Ministers will always be the main public spokespeople for government activity but this is an overreach and will damage the quality of government and public discourse.' Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, described the move as 'outrageous'. He said: 'This unprecedented ban on civil servants speaking in public will damage public debate, politics, policymaking and the civil service itself. What are they thinking?' Baroness Spielman of Durlston, the former head of Ofsted and now a Conservative peer, said the restriction was 'astonishing and unworkable'. She added that it would force bodies like Ofsted to cancel interactive stakeholder events without a minister present and slow down communication. 'Government grinds too slowly and this will jam the works completely,' she said. Sir John Kingman, a former permanent secretary at the Treasury, said that when he worked for government he would participate in an event involving questions most days. 'It was quite an important part of the job because many people understandably want to know what the government thinks and why, and want a chance to discuss it,' he said. A Downing Street source insisted the guidance was not heavy-handed and would be looked at on a 'case by case' basis. But No 10 said it reflected the principle that ministers were responsible for representing the government in public — rather than officials. A Cabinet Office spokesman said that the rules around media engagement were 'longstanding and established'. 'It has always been the case, and a constitutional principle, that ministers are ultimately accountable for decision-making to parliament and the public — so it is right they are routinely scrutinised by the media and MPs.'
Times
34 minutes ago
- Times
British students hoping to study in US warned about online posts
Students applying to US universities should be extremely cautious on social media, experts have warned, amid reports of visas being rejected while immigration officials comb through posts. British sixth-formers accepted by US universities are reporting disruption in applications for student visas, which were suspended and then reinstated by President Trump. One consultant advised British school-leavers to consider starting degrees at branch campuses of American universities if visas were not processed in time. Applicants must now make their social media profiles public and officials have been ordered to scour through content dating back five years, meaning British students' posts from the age of 12 could be scrutinised for possible threats or 'hostile attitudes'. Education and legal experts said it reinforced the need for teenagers to be extremely cautious about what they post on social media. • I'm a Brit at Harvard — what Trump's doing is scary and dehumanising The US State Department says foreign nationals applying for student and exchange visitor visas should make their social media profiles public so it can comprehensively vet and identify visa applicants who 'pose a threat to US national security'. A federal judge has temporarily delayed issuing a ruling on whether the Trump administration can block international students bound for Harvard University from entering the country. Peter Adediran, digital media rights Solicitor at PAIL Solicitors, said that some students would self-censor or even not have social media, as a result. The measures risked infringing upon the right to freedom of speech enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and might also conflict with the Human Rights Act, he said. 'Students, being aware that sharing or being monitored for politically sensitive content may complicate their visa applications, are either not going to have social media accounts or will sensitise about what they discuss and post, which is extensive surveillance and a repression of international students,' he said. 'Intrusions into students' private lives could potentially lead to discrimination against international students due to their political beliefs or affiliations. 'Students should be removing any posts that could be deemed politically sensitive. Alternatively, they could have social media accounts that reflect a politically neutral position.' • Harvard can continue accepting foreign students, judge rules Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said: 'Everyone should be constantly aware of the fact that anything you put on social media is there for ever, even if you delete it. It's depressing if something you think at the age of 16 can affect your life and career'. He added: 'Telling people to delete social media to get a place at university is completely contrary to what higher education is about: letting people speak freely. It's utterly perverse. If you can't make mistakes when you're young, when can you?' Robert, a British student at Yale is back in the UK for the summer working at a school and helping students with US applications for next year. He said the application process was already complex without the added visa problem. 'It's been tough for students and for universities who are getting updates about visa changes only at the same time as the media, then trying to figure out what the government is doing,' he added. 'We're in the dark, Yale students were concerned because of comments made by the US government about current visa holders so there's a feeling that everything is falling under investigation. 'For those applying this year, it's been bittersweet, getting a place is an amazing opportunity then, bam! You can't get a visa. It's nerve-racking.' David Feinburg runs an education consultancy in New York that gives advice to overseas students applying to US universities. He said some universities were advising students to start their degrees at branch campuses outside the US if their visas were not processed in time. Boston and North Eastern universities both have branches in the UK. 'My advice to students is to be very careful on social media,' he said. 'You always want to be careful anyway.' This was echoed by Iain Mansfield, a former Department for Education adviser and head of education at Policy Exchange think tank, who said: 'When you go on social media, whatever you put up is there to stay for a long time and can be seen by future employers. And now by those considering your visa. It's an important lesson for young people. 'This may be a bit of a lifeline for British universities which are an obvious alternative and are very highly regarded, without the extra hurdles for the US. Some British students who thought of going to the US will be staying local.'
