1/6 @AlessandraAster @drljultra @sexnotgi Is Sex Binary and Immutable: Closure Report 1. Summary Of the 41 Vice Chancellors/Presidents of leading universities in the UK, USA, Canada and Australia we emailed in 24-28 Jun 2024 requesting them to state their position as an academic institution on whether or not it is possible to change sex - 26 universities could not state whether or not human sex is binary and immutable - 15 universities, based on their Transgender policies, supported the belief that it is possible to change sex, but could not provide a position to that effect and with the scientific evidence to support it. A position that sex is binary and immutable would have given confidence to the public, academics and politicians to push back against the widespread TWAW indoctrination without being persecuted for stating that a 'trans' woman is not a woman (an adult female human), but a man. It would not be 'transphobic' or discriminatory to state that biological truth. We continue to be subject to TWAW gaslighting: two men won gold medals in women’s boxing at the recent Olympic Games in Paris. 41 leading international universities are so ideologically captured by the ‘Trans’ lobbies and their TWAW indoctrination that they refused to provide academic clarity on the binary and immutable nature of human sex to steer the sex versus gender/gender identity debate in a direction informed on science and not belief. It is ironic that the UK's Sussex University (where Professor Kathleen Stock was persecuted for her 'Gender Critical' views) could state in December 2021 that it was not the University's position that a male observed at birth can become a biological female, yet these 41 couldn't. Do they not know the answer? 2. Why did we ask universities the question? We asked universities to provide their position because a university, such as Sussex University, would risk reputational damage by stating a position that it knew not to be true. Imagine the University of Oxford or the University of Exeter, both of which refused to host our project, were to state: "It is the University's position that the earth is flat, not spherical"? Or to refuse to provide such a statement? 3. Why this question is so important As it is not possible to change sex: - men cannot become women and claim their language, occupy their spaces and participate in their sports - attempts to change young Eve confused about her sexual identity (male or female) and/or sexual orientation to Adam by means of hormones and surgery are unethical, like the experiments performed by Dr Josef Mengele on prisoners at Auschwitz - there is no such thing as ‘Trans’ only people who claim a sex/gender other than their sex observed at birth and recorded, and that is a mental health issue like a 16kg 16 year old girl who claims she is obese. 4. Alumni Encouragement As we were receiving only a few responses, and those that responded gave excuses for not answering the question or directed us to the university’s Transgender or EDI (Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) policies, we revised our approach. We analysed the Transgender policies for 15 universities: - 9 in the UK Russell Group - 2 in each of the USA, Australia and Canada and identified statements in their policies that confirmed that they took an institutional position that it it possible to change sex/gender. We asked alumni to write to the VC of their alma mater requesting the VC to: - Provide evidence that a male observed at birth can become a female - or, like Sussex University in the UK, state that it is not the University's position that a male observed at birth can become a female.  The University could add a statement along the lines that the University recognizes that some people claim a Gender Identity that does not match their birth sex and, in the interests of diversity and inclusion, the University makes accommodations for such beliefs? Only three alumni did, for the universities of or Exeter, Queen Mary London and Monash Australia. The universities have not replied. We used the following platforms to ask alumni to write to their universities: - Substack - X/Twitter - LinkedIn 5. Lessons learned We recognised that without support from a university or a Big Name such as JK Rowling (an alumnus of the University of Exeter, like Martin) it would be difficult, but we did not expect all 41 universities to refuse to provide a position statement. Our estimate for the project with the University of Oxford (and later the University of Exeter) assumed that 23 of of the 41 universities would provide their position on the binary and immutable nature of human sex without alumni encouragement. 6. Concluding statements Are not universities supposed to advance knowledge? Why would any prospective undergraduate or post graduate student attend one of these 41 universities? A UK undergraduate typically leaves with a debt of nearly £45K: for what? To learn that the earth is flat and only 6,000 years old according to the chronology of the Bible? Why would any funder invest in research at such a university? Why would any alumnus donate funds for a building in their name or the setting up of a scholarship or a foundation? They could do both of the above with the UK's University of Sussex who were not afraid to state that it was not the University’s position that a male observed at birth can become a biological female. Why not remove the University of Oxford, for example, from the UK’s Russell Group and replace it with Sussex University?

They are all guilty of contravening the 2nd Nolan Principle of Public Life: integrity. If a public entity has no integrity and becomes a glove puppet of Stonewall and the other 'trans' lobbies how can anyone trust it?

Trans identifying men are more than happy to share their gametes on the toilet seats and floors of women's toilets and restrooms 🍆

"Conditioning" is a more accurate term for "social transition". Grok offers a helpful explanation. “Conditioning” is a more precise behavioural term than “indoctrination” for describing what happens in early, full social transition of pre-pubertal children. Classical and operant conditioning shape behaviour and self-concept through repeated reinforcement. When parents, schools and peers consistently affirm a cross-sex name, pronouns, clothing and social role from a very young age, and when the child’s environment removes or punishes references to their biological sex, this constitutes systematic reinforcement of one identity and extinction of the other. Children in the early years lack the executive function, abstract reasoning and future-oriented cognition required to evaluate this process critically; those capacities continue developing through adolescence and typically reach adult levels only around 18–20. The Cass Review recorded that early social transition can alter the developmental trajectory of gender identity, making persistence more likely and increasing the probability of later medicalisation. Historical desistance rates were high when children were not socially transitioned and were allowed to pass through puberty.[](<bbc.co.uk/news/health-687706…>) Cass’s description of the small number of children reaching the PATHWAYS trial threshold—those socially transitioned since early childhood who, after 18 months of therapy, still have “absolutely no sense or concept of living in their biological gender”—is consistent with a conditioning process that has removed the biological sex from the child’s available conceptual framework. This is not neutral social accommodation; it is an active psychosocial intervention whose effects on identity formation remain poorly evidenced and potentially trajectory-altering, which is why Cass recommended caution and early professional input rather than immediate full transition for pre-pubertal children.[](<storage.courtlistener.com/re…>) The legal position under the Equality Act 2010, as clarified by the Supreme Court in *For Women Scotland*, further limits the practical outcome: biological sex remains the operative category for single-sex provisions. A child conditioned into a cross-sex social identity therefore faces a mismatch between the reinforced self-concept and the legal and biological reality they will encounter. Whether one prefers the language of conditioning, social learning or reinforcement, the underlying empirical observation from Cass and developmental data is the same: very young children cannot meaningfully consent to, or fully understand the consequences of, a process that shapes their identity before their cognitive architecture is mature enough to evaluate it.