The CPS has completely caved to gender ideology

It would appear that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has finally caved completely to gender ideology. New CPS guidelines for prosecutors spell out that it could be a criminal offence for spouses to refuse to fund their partner’s gender surgery.

In the new guidance, the CPS has listed certain behaviours, such as ‘withholding money for transitioning’ that might be classed as coercive control. To put it in context, coercive control is a serious offence punishable by up to five years in prison.

I was one of the feminists that fought to get this aspect of domestic abuse recognised in law. For many years, female victims were told that certain behaviours amounting to coercive control – such as constant bullying, the monitoring of movement, withholding sleep, and constant humiliation and degradation – were not criminal offences. But now, thanks to the CPS, women who are psychologically tortured by transitioning men could become criminals, and the men the victims.

Let’s be honest, those who are now vulnerable to prosecution would be women who want no part in their male partners’ sex change. I cannot imagine a scenario where a female in a heterosexual relationship would report and successfully prosecute her male partner because she wanted to become a trans man and he refused to validate her. This is yet another example of how men – albeit ones believing they are women – have become the ‘oppressed class’ in relation to women. It is as Alice through the looking glass and Orwellian as we could ever imagine.

One of the examples of potential criminal behaviour within this context is a partner refusing to use the preferred name or pronoun of the transitioning partner. Another is ‘body shaming’ by which they mean not accepting that they are the opposite sex. And then there is ‘dead naming’ or even threatening to share pre-transition images or names.

During the holy month of Pride, the head of the CPS Max Hill KC was seen virtue signalling about how the CPS will bend over backwards to protect trans people against us nasty Terfs. In other words, he will protect men (posing as women) against actual women.

In the meantime, there is currently a 1 per cent conviction rate for reported rapes, which as we know is a minority of those which actually occur. 

But let’s not worry about little things like violence against women and girls, when we have the feelings of transwomen to consider. And we must not worry about the fact that our prisons are overflowing with women that pose no danger to the public and shove a few more in there. Perhaps in five years’ time there will be a special wing for women that got upset to see their ex-husbands prancing around in female underwear – maybe with the added bonus of being in proximity to a few transwomen prisoners doing the same.

Surely the CPS has better priorities than threatening women with criminal convictions if they refuse to bow to transgender ideology?

Max showed his true colours last year by hiring, on a very large salary, Sophie Cook, a transwoman as a ‘Speak out Champion. Her job appears to be to pedal the notion that trans-identifying individuals suffer more hate crime than anyone else in the ever-growing, LGBTQ+ ‘community’.

Cook’s appointment was a warning of things to come and shows just how far the CPS has been captured. Cook said in 2021: ‘Apart from menstruate and give birth (just to keep the Terfs happy (are they ever happy?) nothing. I may not be able to do everything well, but I could potentially do anything just as long as there isn’t a required grade.’

In my attempt to work through the bad grammar I think I’ve ascertained that what Cook might mean is something along the lines of ‘anything a woman can do, I can do better, except to give birth’. Cook has also stated that they consider the LGB Alliance to be a hate group.

But is Cook a friend to women? I’m not convinced. On Newsnight in 2018 Cook supported the replacement of the word ‘woman’ with the word ‘womxn’ by saying ‘I do wonder why people are so offended by it…’

I worry about female employees at the CPS. Will they be required to bow to this misogynistic ideology and effectively lose their sex-based rights in the workplace under this regime? No doubt they could be required to use pronouns in email sign offs. If any CPS employee objects to Cook‘s appointment, will their job be under threat? Will we be soon looking at another slew of crowdfunders to take cases of bullying in the workplace and unfair dismissal to employment tribunals? All I will say is, if this happens, we will be waiting.