Biological male beats women in cycling world championship, calls them “losers”
Rachel McKinnon, a biological male transgender female cyclist who won the women’s world championship claimed that female competitors who complain about her win are “losers.”
This is the second year in a row McKinnon has won the race, scoring another championship win in 2018.
McKinnon was challenged by former champion Victoria Hood who argued that because McKinnon was born as a biological male she has an unfair advantage in the competition.
“It is not complicated, the science is there and it says that it is unfair. The male body, which has been through male puberty, still retains its advantage, that doesn’t go away. I have sympathy with them. They have a right to do sport but not a right to go into any category they want,” said Hood who also manages the female British team.
McKinnon, however, argues that she has a right to be allowed to compete and that she is medically considered to be a female.
“All my medical records say, female. My doctor treats me as a female person, my racing license says female, but people who oppose my existence still want to think of me as male . . . So, if we want to say, that I believe you’re a woman for all of society, except for this massive central part that is
McKinnon slammed critics on Twitter arguing that those who complain about her success and the participation of born-male competitors are “losers.”
“I have yet to meet a real champion who has a problem with trans women. Real champions want stronger competition. If you win because bigotry got your competition banned … you’re a loser,” said McKinnon.
A bestselling trans author’s tweet thread about abuse goes viral, then came the allegations of her own abuse
On Nov. 10, a celebrated trans author wrote a viral tweet thread that received over 100,000 likes. The thread complained about the discrepancy between successful, beautiful women, and their often abusive and unkempt male partners.
As it turns out, she may have been projecting.
The author, who writes under the pen name “Meredith Russo,” is formerly known as Meredith Stroud and Travis Lee Stroud. Her 2016 novel If I Was Your Girl received multiple awards and near-endless commendations from literary elites. On the back of the book’s success, Stroud, 32, was invited to publish an article in The New York Times on the struggles of being a transwoman. Stroud’s subsequent book, Birthday, received awards from Refinery29, Bustle and Nylon.
However, some Twitter users brought attention to a blog post from 2016 where the author’s arrest record and past relationship history were detailed, prompting the author to use block lists to squelch criticism.
“Domestic violence is insidious and slow, like the proverbial boiling frog,” Stroud’s ex-wife, Juniper Russo, said. “It’s hard to say when it all started.”
Juniper Russo alleges she was subjected to a campaign of sexual and emotional abuse at the hands of her former partner, abuse she says was so severe that the marriage culminated in a divorce in early 2015.
“We met on OKCupid in 2011 and got married in 2013,” Russo said, claiming the physical abuse started shortly after the wedding. “We had a lot of shared interests at the time, and I was naive enough to think that shared interests are the foundation of a healthy relationship.”
Russo shared disturbing details of some of the alleged abuses she suffered during her marriage to Meredith Stroud.
“When my son was born in 2014, I had severe pre-eclampsia and injuries from giving birth. I had to have major reconstructive surgery. I was extremely weak and in severe pain,” Russo said.
“Meredith was extremely abusive to me during this time, calling me a ‘feeding station, not a parent’ because breastfeeding my son was one of the only things I could do, and because I was asking [Meredith] to help with things like diapers,” Russo also alleges.
During this same time, Juniper says Stroud would tell her to commit suicide. “[Meredith] kept mocking me when I was in pain, and told me I was so useless as a parent I should just kill myself.”
Russo says she was first forced to call the police in late 2014, “[Meredith] was having an outburst. I got scared and called 911. [Meredith] took the phone from me, and was heard trying to prevent me from calling for help.”
As a result, Stroud was booked on charges of interfering with an emergency call.
Like many victims of domestic violence, Russo says she still loved and sympathized with her abuser.
“I ended up bailing [Meredith] out, and paying for the legal defense,” she said.
Russo said she often intervened to prevent Stroud from being charged with domestic abuse, noting that the police wanted to charge Stroud in Nov. 2014.
“I was always trying to protect [Meredith] because I knew men’s jail was not kind to transwomen,” Russo said. “She was always threatening suicide if she were to get arrested.” Russo continues, “Even when things were terrible, I was worried for her safety and didn’t want her to kill herself or be beaten to death in prison.”
Russo turned over 53 pages of legal documents to support her allegations.
The divorce record, which features a restraining order against Stroud, includes messages shared between the two in which Stroud admits to abusing Russo. These messages were accepted as evidence by the divorce courts.
In one series of messages from Facebook, Stroud is calmly attempting to diffuse Russo’s desire to proceed with the divorce, offering to go on medication and check into a psychiatric facility for psychosis maintenance.
In this same conversation, Russo expresses fear of Stroud eventually killing her.
In another, dramatically different text conversation, Stroud says she hopes Russo gets “run over by a f*cking truck” and demands Russo reduce child support payments.
At the time, Stroud was recorded by the court as having an income of $8,300 gross per month, having acquired a substantial six-figure advance from Flatiron Books, the publisher of Stroud’s debut novel, If I Was Your Girl. The court would later order Stroud to pay $1,068 per month.
But Russo says Stroud has not paid child support in years, and currently owes over $20,000 in back payments. In July of 2019, Russo attempted to start a GoFundMe to raise the money needed to legally compel Stroud to pay what was owed. Other than the child support arrangements, Russo did not request alimony or any other financial compensation from the seperation.
After the divorce, Russo says Stroud denigrated her in public, telling fans and followers on social media that Russo was “a TERF who had abused and left” Stroud due to her transition from male to female.
“Many trans people are the victims of violence and discrimination, so [Meredith’s] target audience found that totally relatable and credible. They had no reason to doubt her,” Russo said, noting that both she and her current wife are members of the LGBT community. Russo identifies as non-binary, while her current wife is a transwoman.
“I’ve been harassed quite a bit by Meredith’s social network. I lost a lot of friends and have been largely ostracized from our local LGBT community.” Russo says, “I’ll often be online and someone I don’t know will suddenly jump into a thread to announce I’m the TERF who ruined Meredith Russo’s life.”
Stroud continues to publicly call Russo an abuser, and claims she’s attempting to “destroy” [Stroud’s] career and finances.
The Post Millennial has reached out to Stroud as well as Flatiron-MacMillan Publishing and Stroud’s publishing agent Sarah Barley for comment. While the publishing house and agent did not respond by the time of publication, Stroud denied all allegations while calling The Post Millennial a slew of denigrating names.
When asked about her own admissions of abuse in the court document, Stroud again asserted “Either way, my response to the allegations is that I have not ever sexually or physically abused any of my sexual or romantic partners.”
Stroud claimed, at first, that she was “barred” from speaking about her relationship to her ex-wife by law. When questioned about why she had persistently made social media posts about that very subject, Stroud declined to answer before blocking the account used to contact her.
“Meredith thrives on lies and conflict, and she’s a writer, so she knows how to come up with a good story.” Russo says, “I knew when I left her that I’d become the subject of one of these stories.”
Included in the divorce and restraining order filings was an article Stroud wrote with the intention of submitting it to an LGBT magazine. The article, written as an introspective reflection on the couple’s relationship, states in detail the abuse Stroud subjected Russo to.
And despite Stroud’s public attempts to downplay the arrest, Stroud’s written account supports Russo’s claims that it was she who is responsible for jail bailout and the charges being dropped.
The document also backs Russo’s assertion that she continued to support and care for her spouse even after the repeated physical and sexual assaults, a far cry from Stroud’s claims on social media that Russo had been the abuser, and callously made Stroud homeless.
Due to Stroud’s continued public assertions that Russo is to blame, as well as the harassment from Stroud’s fans she’s received in the past as a result, Russo says she continues to fear retaliation.
Russo notes that some of the posts Stroud has made include threats of violence. From a now-deleted alternative Twitter account, Stroud posted how she wanted Russo’s friends to be “brutally killed” in the style of a violent horror movie.
“My main hope, in discussing all of this, is that the defamation against myself and my family will stop.” Russo comments, “I’ve worked so hard to rebuild my life in the five years since I left Meredith, and I’m emotionally exhausted by the fact that I’m still being defamed on a daily basis as a ‘TERF’ and abuser, and that it’s affected my family so profoundly.”
Despite everything, Juniper Russo says she does not wish ill upon her former spouse, and supports Stroud’s work in the literary world.
“I still have to believe that there’s some good inside of [Meredith] and that she’s leaving some kind of positive mark on the world. If her books have saved one single teenager from suicide, I’d consider that to outweigh the pain and trauma I’ve had to endure at her hands.” Russo continues on to note that deeply flawed people can sometimes make good art.
“It’s important to be aware that someone who creates inspiring work is not necessarily a good person, and I think it’s dangerous for anyone to look up to Meredith as a role model, or to take anything she says at face value.”
Russo concluded. “Her work, including how she presents herself and speaks of those around her, is fictional. I’d caution anyone against mistaking any of it for reality.”
No matter how many times women are hounded out of work, social groups, or organizations for saying that women are adult human females, I end up surprised each and every time. This latest shocker comes from the UK, where so much of this madness has fully taken hold. British birth coach Lynsey McCarthy Calvert was pushed out of the charity Doula UK, of which she was spokesperson, because she dared to say that “women birth all the people.”
The issue for McCarthy was that Cancer Research UK changed its advertising encouraging women to get routine pap smears, a basic gynecological exam, to advocating for the test for “everyone aged 25-64 with a cervix.”
In reaction to this, McCarthy took to Facebook, stating “I am not a ‘cervix owner’ I am not a ‘menstruator’ I am not a ‘feeling.’ I am not defined by wearing a dress and lipstick. I am a woman: an adult human female… Women birth all the people, make up half the population, but less than a third of the seats in the House of Commons are occupied by us.”
As we’ve seen so many times before, a few people got onto her feed, and made a lot of noise. They complained to McCarthy “…not only women birth children,” and took their grievance offline and into the real world where they disrupted her professional life. The complaints were that McCarthy was trans exclusive in her statements, that she was offensive.
Activists who are somehow delusional enough to believe that a woman who says she is a man and then conceives a child is a man giving birth as opposed to a woman, who imagines she is a man, having a child, sent letters detailing their offendedness.
The Board of Doula UK determined that the activists were correct and that the woman who has facilitated the birth of children on numerous occasions was incorrect. Doula UK has gone on to say that,despite McCarthy’s contention to the contrary, they had not “acquiesced” to activists or forced McCarthy out. McCarthy resigned, but it was either that or accept lies and defamation.
The only problem with ousting a woman from a pregnancy help charity for saying that “women birth all the people” is that, in fact, women do birth all the people. All the people who have ever been born on this earth since the beginning of time were gestated inside a woman’s body, and birthed from that body. Apparently it’s offensive to say so. Even if it is, it’s still true.
We’ve been at the point where it’s considered offensive to trans activists and trans people to say that only women are capable of having children via their bodies, even though they are. It’s offensive to say that women are the only ones who menstruate, even though they are. And it’s offensive to say that men can’t magically, surgically, and chemically turn into women, that women can’t turn into men, even though they can’t.
The entire thing where a few people’s hurt feelings are more important than actual facts and the right of women to speak the truth about their own bodies and the nature of reproduction continues to be baffling. More baffling is that women who know the truth, that biological sex is immutable, that gender is a lie, are afraid to speak out, afraid to challenge those men who would have us deny our bodies in favour of their made-up truth.
Women who speak out on this are silenced, and like so many other circumstances in which women are forced to believe a man’s interpretation of reality over her own, talking back only gets her hit. Whether personal or professional defamation, there is a big risk for women who refuse to be cowed into proclaiming lies as truth. It seems absurd, and trans activists deny that, but still, it keeps happening. These stories keep popping up.
It should not be shocking to anyone anymore that women who believe that women and men are distinct entities defined by their biological realities are considered bigots, phobic, or prejudiced. The more we are pushed to believe lies, the easier they are to believe, but that doesn’t make them any truer. McCarthy took a vocal stand about the fact that women are the ones who have female reproductive systems, that men do not need cervical cancer screenings because they are not, in fact, people who have a cervix.
Furthering the disconnect women have with their bodies by referring to them only as the summation of their biological parts will not help them overcome the embarrassment of seeking medical care for female only conditions. Ignoring the reality that women’s bodies are the only bodies that are capable of birthing children is cruel because women alone will still be the ones to do it.
Trans activists say that their goal is not to erase women or to deny their existence, yet with their continuing to be offended by the reality of women and their bodies, that’s exactly what they’re doing. If women can’t even maintain a medical definition, how will they access care, have considerate providers who understand the differences between male and female anatomy, or keep their children safe if we are not even able to name their bodies as their own? It doesn’t matter if it’s a kindness to ignore the fact that women birth all the people, it’s still a lie, and a dangerous one.
The drag queen readers from “Fay and Fluffy’s Storytime” have ended their relationship with the Toronto Library. This comes after the Toronto Library permitted feminist Megan Murphy to speak, despite accusations of transphobia.
Kaleb Robertson, who is the “Fluffy” of the duo, stated on Instagram that they could not “continue a relationship with a space that will host someone who is actively fighting to take away my legal rights as a human.”
Fay and Fluffy are apart of a drag queen act that reads books to children. Alongside their acts at the Toronto Public Library, they have also read at the AGO, ROM, and across classrooms in Ontario.
In a statement to the media, the duo stated that “Trans people existing and having rights to employment, housing, and safety is not a discussion.”
Megan Murphy is the founder of the Feminist Current website created controversy when she stated that “Feminists built and funded transition houses for women escaping male violence … and now we’re being told that having spaces for women to protect them from male violence is bigoted.”
Due to this, when Megan Murphy came to speak at the library, a small crowd came to protest her visit, attempting to break police barriers and shouting obscenities in the process. Despite the crowds relatively small numbers, politicians across the city came to denounce the library’s decision.
Fay and Fluffy are only the most recent public figures to cut ties with the Library. More are expected to follow.
Rachel McKinnon, a biological male, won the women’s 200-meter sprint at the Masters Track Cycling World Championships for the second year in a row last weekend. While many LGBT advocates are celebrating this as a triumph, I, a lesbian healthcare professional, find myself deeply worried.
When I watch the course the contemporary transgender movement has taken, I see a movement that can’t possibly endure. And, since that movement has hitched itself aggressively to the cause of homosexuals such as myself, I fear what the backlash will mean for our hard-won liberties.
I’ve only had the right to marry for the last four years in the U.S. I remember that struggle vividly, and I don’t take for granted the freedoms won. Living in the rural American South, I’m reminded regularly of how many people remain wary or disapproving of certain legal rights for gays and lesbians. I’m also aware of how much my friends and I rely on our marriage and parental rights, and on the non-discrimination policies that allow us to be protected from violence and harassment.
Homosexuals won recognition of our civil rights because we were able to exercise our rights without requiring much participation from those outside our communities. The average person’s life changed very little when gays began to marry and live our lives more openly. We asked for inaction in the form of others not seeking to punish us for our personal lives.
These goals contrast sharply with those set by the radical gender movement. Rather than asking for basic protections, the same rights that are common to all people, the movement demands all society make extreme changes to language, personal habits, parenting, medicine, scientific practices, and more. Nothing short of total compliance through words, deeds, and policies is considered adequate. They aren’t asking people for tolerance, but for obedience.
And the consequences for disobedience are severe.
Many outspoken gender-critical women like me have been ostracized from our communities, fired from our jobs, threatened with violence, and even physically attacked. I write under a pseudonym due to my own fear for myself and my family, and my need to stay employed to support them.
I’ve never personally believed in gender ideology, this idea that “man” and “woman” are internal feelings separate from chromosomal and reproductive sex. But I supported trans people anyway because I was able to support them personally and advocate for their respectful inclusion in society without needing to submit to their doctrine. I used their pronouns to be polite, and because I could do so without implying I thought they were literally that biological sex.
But things have changed, and the message sent now is that a transgender woman is literally a biologically female who was mistakenly “assigned” the male sex at birth. As a healthcare professional, I know this to be scientifically false. But for many within the gender movement, saying “she” now equals unreserved agreement with that ubiquitous mantra, “Trans women are women.” By this logic, biological women aren’t entitled to any spaces, opportunities, or protections distinct from males who identify as women. And that is something I do not agree with and cannot affirm.
So I don’t do the pronouns anymore. For me, the demands of the movement became unsustainable, and I had to withdraw my support.
If these demands are driving away people like me, how can the transgender community hope to maintain any sort of broader public acceptance? I’m a hardcore lesbian feminist, and I used to lead teachings for healthcare workers on providing respectful care to transgender and gender-nonconforming patients. If I feel bullied by the demands being made, I can’t imagine how enraged people are who were never comfortable with this population to begin with.
The gender movement in its current form is unstable because it requires brute social and political force to maintain. It’s estimated that approximately half a percent of the U.S. population identifies as transgender. A group that deeply in the minority cannot succeed in securing their rights in the long term if that success is upheld by a public saying and doing things they don’t agree with.
The power this movement holds today is an opportunity, much like that experienced by the suffragettes in 1920 and homosexuals in 2015. It’s a chance to create reform to benefit transgender people, but those reforms will be little more than a historical blip if they can’t be maintained once power shifts. And it always shifts.
By escalating demands to a level that even progressives are finding invasive, leaders of the movement are wasting their opportunity and gambling with the hard-won rights of others. People who care about the future of not only transgender rights but also the rights of homosexuals and women need to stop and reflect on what goals are reasonable and sustainable. The protections we ask for must allow for belief systems other than our own.
Today’s radical gender movement is a movement without perspective or empathy. It disdains compromise and ignores any interests it doesn’t share. While most people, given time, will learn to tolerate policies and belief systems they don’t agree with, no group will work against its own interests indefinitely. And this is why, if nothing changes soon, the gender movement will fail.