Yesterday, For Women Scotland won a momentous victory at the UK's Supreme Court, where it was clarified that 'sex' within the Equality Act refers to biological sex. We discuss why men are so psychosexually unhinged about the outcome, as seen by the dismay and disbelief at a victory secured by middle-aged women, their subsequent crashing out online, and the fermenting of conspiracy theories relating the Gender Critical movement to the American evangelical rightwing because they cannot believe middle-aged women can win political vindications. How the court victory is retrospective justice for trans widows and every woman forced to call her perpetrator 'she' in court. And how all the man-crying about this win shows how transgenderism was almost entirely about reversing the gains of second-wave feminism. Plus, middle-aged women's unparraelled organising skills, JK Rowling as a benefactor for women’s rights, and how GC women will go down in history as political dissidents who won.

We discuss the new criminal and civil accusations levelled at former comedian Russell Brand, and social media influencer and pimp, Andrew Tate. Themes include: how globalisation means rapists can avoid state accountability, Brand’s artful dodger act turned Messiah-like guru, how camp is a performance designed to disarm, why women with financial independence are hated, and whether we think Tate and Brand will get away with their crimes.

State plans for online censorship are a form of DARVO. The same liberals who promoted transgenderism, and have not given two hoots about pornography, are now telling us they care about online misogyny. The BBC as the state's mouthpiece has harboured more child abusers than the average prison wing, but we are to believe these people want what's best for children and young people on the internet? The idea the MSM, police, and government will wield censorious powers in a benign and benevolent way is incredibly unlikely. We discuss the crisis in the MSM and Labour government as they increasingly lose their once prized monopoly over mainstream narratives and their attempt to re-establish the censorship they had before Elon bought Twitter.

What sort of online censorship would we want? Why is the focus of the impact of online misogyny mainly about boys? Plus, the matronising PMCs inability to accept the vibe shift post-Trump, Sussex university’s £580k fine for not allowing free and open discussion of transgenderism, Surrey Pride founder’s sex offences against children, progressives view of history leading to euthanasia, the emptiness of Starmerism, and Hannah calls for Kim Leadbetter to be tried at The Hague.