Gender Identity Ideology
LATEST NEWS
April 2026
The political forces acting through gender ideology against women and lesbians are ramping up in the highest echelons of power. I wonder (with tongue firmly in cheek) if it might have anything to do with the looming verdict due in the Giggle v TIckle appeal to the High Court? There’s a lot at stake in a judicial decision on the question (unfamiliar to many lesbians): ‘what is a woman’? Although the UK example shows that a lot of people can still drag their (high) heels to obey laws that have been clarified but that they don’t like.
Gender Clinic News reports that a letter from Reem Alsalem, the UN Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls, its Causes and Consequences was sent to Australia on 19 February, 2026 through diplomatic channels and she noted on 20 April that she had received no reply. The letter expresses concerns about Dr Jillian Spencer’s suspension and termination from her position at Queensland Children’s Hospital after she had stated her concerns publicly about the harmful effects of gender medicine and its practices.
CoAL understands the diplomatic channels involved our Governor-General, Sam Mostyn. We note with concern that she has accepted the role of Patron to Equality, the organisation that advocates for trans interests and against lesbians and gays and women (eg, Equality joined with the Australian Human Rights Commission to support the case of trans identified Tickle against Sall Grover and her efforts to initiate an online app for females called Giggle for Girls (see Tickle v Giggle and the appeal Giggle v Tickle). Note also that Reem Alsalem expressed “grave concern” over the decision by the Federal Court of Australia in the Tickle v Giggle case (note also her application to the court to appear for the Giggle case had been rejected).
Ms Alsalem referred the Australian government to the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child , all ratified by Australia. She outlined how Australia had flouted these UN Covenants and Conventions with respect to Dr Spencer in the following ways:
- freedom of opinion and expression;
- exercise of political power and public administration, including policy formulation and implementation at all levels, as well as key aspects of civil society;
- the right to just and favorable conditions of work, without discrimination;
- the right to freedom indispensable for scientific research;
- obligations of Australian parties to follow a policy of eliminating discrimination against women, including in employment;
- obligation of all health services to be consistent with the human rights
of women, including the rights to autonomy, privacy, confidentiality, informed consent and choice; - right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration;
- every child has an intrinsic right to life and to full development;
- the right of every individual to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health;
- obligation of States Parties to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of healthcare and to ensure equal access to health services;
- the right of everyone, individually and in association with others, to promote and strive for the protection and realization of human rights and to be protected from retaliation for such activity;
- the labour rights of health workers are respected and that health workers are supported in upholding their legal and ethical responsibilities, including with respect to advancing human rights, and that their role as human rights defenders be protected.
- the unhindered access by women to justice and their ability and empowerment to claim their rights as legal entitlements.
I f this long list of Australia’s breaking with international conventions for human rights, appals you, why not communicate your concerns to our Prime Minister?
March-April, 2026
The RACGP cancelled a planned GP education webinar to be given by the international expert, Professor Riittakerttu Kaltiala, scheduled for 10 March 2026. Prof Kaltiala has changed her opinion on gender affirmation (widely practised in Australia) and now advocates for a cautious approach with gender confused youth (gaining wider acceptance globally as the weak evidence base is becoming more clear).
CoAL emailed our concerns to the RACGP (see a copy here).
A breakaway group of psychiatrists, the National Association of Practising Psychiatrists (NAPP), instead broadcst Professor Kaltiala’s webinar on 14 April, 2026. A recording was available for a limited time to registrants.
'Gender Medicine' in Australia
CoAL is concerned that gender ideology has become firmly embedded in Australian legislation and medical practice. Our concerns are for lesbians and other gender confused young people who are being subjected to a new form of ‘gay conversion’ that is anti lesbian and anti woman. It causes them to enter into a medicalised life of pain and possible death from the iatrogenic (illness caused by medical examination or treatment) effects of dangerous chemical and surgical experiments on their bodies and minds.
Despite our concerns being widely shared across the nation, a general media blackout is being imposed (notable exceptions are The Australian and Gender Critical News, an online Substack newsletter written by a journalist who used to work on The Australian). Most Australian media have caved in to repressive media reporting standards strongly influencd by well-funded transgender activist organisations. ‘Gender medicine’ is practised in publicly-funded (yes, that means from the taxes of working Australians) hospital-based clinics in all states in an experimental way–without a reliable evidence base, without reporting of outcomes according to medico-scientific standards, without transparency and with minimum safeguarding of minors. It is also rapidly devolving to private practices in GP, psychiatric and endocrinology clinics. Minimal information is publicly available about ‘gender medicine’ practices, unless authorities are pressed by Freedom of Information (FoI) applications sought from state authorities by individual interested parties.
A recent judgement by Justice Strum in the Family Court was refreshingly child-focused and resistant to gender identity ideology, when he ruled that ‘”At this stage in the child’s life, all options should be left open, without any unacceptable risk of harm to the child”. His judgment has been reported globally as a marked exception to Australia’s closed shop of ‘affirmation’ at all cost, including damage to their future health, reproductive function and expression of sexuality,
If you wish to protest, a list of publicly funded ‘gender clinics’ in Australi can be found in Amos (2024).
References:
ACON Exposed. How ACON influences your workplace (and the Australian media).
Amos, A. (2024), ‘Rapidly expanding gender-affirming care based on consensus instead of evidence justifies rigorous governance and transparency’, Australasian Psychiatry, 32(4), https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241249579.
Dudley, Ellie (2025), ‘Judge lashes child gender-medicine experts,’ The Australian, 9 April.
Dudley, Ellie (2025),’Hospital silent on gender care policy after judge,’ The Australian, 10 April.
Bernard Lane, GenderCritical News.Media
UK Supreme Court Ruling Clarifies that
‘Sex’ means ‘Biological Sex’
CoAL congratulates lesbians and all other women in the UK for a successful outcome to their appeal against the effect of the UK Gender Recognition Act 2004 and the High Court’s judgment (16.4.25) that the terms “man”, “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological sex.
Watch the judgment by the UK Supreme Court handed down on Wednesday 16 April, 2025.
The lesbian, gay and women’s organisations who supported the judgment were jubilant. Many media reports miunderstood and/or misiterpreted the judgment. Many worried about the hurt feelings of ‘trans people, with scant regard to the significance of restoration of sex-based rights to lesbians and other women.
Trans activists, whipped up into rage and smiling gleefully with hatred, expressed their affronted sense of entitlement at the proTrans rally on the weekend after the UK High Court Judgment. The statue of Dame Millicent Fawcett, British, suffragist leader and social campaigner, was vandalised with obscene graffiti. Located in London’s Parliament Square, it was the first monument to a woman and also its first sculpture by a woman.
“In this appeal, the Appellant challenges the lawfulness of statutory guidance issued by the Respondent, which has the effect that a GRC recognising that a person’s gender is female brings them within the EA 2010 definition of a “woman”.
The Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 is an Act of the Scottish Parliament (“ASP 2018”). It sets targets for increasing the proportion of women on public boards. The original ASP 2018 definition of a “woman” included people: (i) with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment; (ii) living as a woman; and (iii) proposing to undergo / undergoing / who have undergone a gender reassignment process. In a 2022 legal challenge brought by the Appellant (“FWS1”), the Inner House found that this statutory definition was unlawful, as it dealt with matters that fall outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.
Following FWS, the Respondent issued new statutory guidance. This is the guidance currently under challenge. It states that, under the ASP 2018, the definition of “woman” was the same as under the EA 2010. It also stated that a person with a GRC recognising that their gender is female is considered a woman under the ASP 2018.
The Appellant challenged the lawfulness of the Respondent’s statutory guidance in the Outer House. On 13 December 2022, the Outer House dismissed the Appellant’s petition.
The Appellant appealed. On 1 November 2023, the Inner House upheld the decision of the Outer House and dismissed the Appellant’s appeal.
The Appellant now appeals to the Supreme Court.
The issue is: Is a person with a full gender recognition certificate (“GRC”) which recognises that their gender is female, a “woman” for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 (“EA 2010”)?”.
Commentary by UK experts Helen Joyce and Michael Foran
Commentary by The Lesbian Project in the UK
Read commentary by Julie Bindel and Kathleen Stock’s The Lesbian Project at this link.
Further reading on the UK High Court judgment:
Scottish Lesbians
LGB Alliance UK
For Women Scotland
Sex Mattters
BBC
CoAL is actively engaged with other like-minded orgnisations in regaining our sex-based rights in Australia, too, as soon as possible.
Images below show the angry reaction to women’s rights being re-affirmed in the UK
One of the effects of patriarchy is that some women can enjoy attacking other women to feel empowered by doing handmaidens’ work
WHO Guidelines on the Health of Trans and Gender Diverse People
Below is a copy of a submission sent from an Australian coalition, in which CoAL is a signatory, to the Guideline Development Group (GDG) for WHO Guidelines on the Health of Trans and Gender. We are strongly protesting that:
(1) WHO has given poor attention to the diversity, balance, and expertise necessary for a GDG considering such a contentious topic and
(2) WHO has not followed its own standard procedures in establishing and selecting members for a GDG.
In short, the announced GDG is heavily biased towards individuals and groups who work in and advocate for so-called ‘gender affirming care’ and promote gender identity ideology.
Furthermore, the WHO has pursued this path despite two previous letters of protest that we submitted earlier this year.
Signatories to the submission are:
AAWAA (Affiliation of Australian Women’s Action Alliances)
AF4WR (Australian Feminists for Women’s Rights)
CoAL (Coalition of Activist Lesbians)
WRNA (Women’s Rights Network Australia)
See AF4WR ‘Sex-and-gender-identity. Checking the Facts of Common Assertions’ (link to document on AF4WR website).
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.