Women will not be silenced

Speak Up for Women have just published this press release:

After just 24hours, GO Media have pulled down a billboard which displayed simply the dictionary definition of the word ‘woman’ along with the website address speakupforwomen.nz.

Despite a recent High Court judgement declaring that Speak Up For Women cannot rationally be described as a ‘hate group’, the same vexatious complainants who have been harassing the women’s group for years have managed to bully a media company into bowing to their demands.

“We’ve been here before and I won’t lie, it is exhausting. We have made it clear from day one that our issue is with law and the conflation of sex and gender. We have never wished harm on trans people and quite frankly, if these activists have proof that we have it is time they shared it, Speak Up For Women’s spokesperson Beth Johnson says.

“We are told that these activists speak for the most vulnerable group of people in the world, but the power they wield in local and central government indicates that they are simply a powerful lobby group. They certainly don’t speak for the trans people who have shown up to our events in support of our position.

“Told by their lawyers that they cannot shut down our event, three Wellington Councillors – including the Mayor Andy Foster – have decided to use their positions to have the location of our event lit up in trans flag colours. We would have no issue with this were it individuals exercising their own freedom of speech, but this is the power of the council trying to intimidate us again.

“We are just a growing group of women who want to discuss our legal rights. We are not seeking to harm anyone and in fact are simply advocating that the existing law should remain. We are bullied, silenced, and intimidated by people who are never challenged to supply proof of our ‘crimes’.“We will not shush. We will hold our event. We will continue to advance conversations about the law and how we can deal with the tensions between biological sex and gender identity in practice.”


  1. Wellington civic authorities are abusing their power and avoid taking responsibility for their repression. It is almost a month since I emailed councillor Iona Pannett the message below, yet to get any reply.

    A neighbour informs me that you are seeking to deny the group Speak Up For Women use of WCC space to hold a public meeting.
    The proposed discussion is to be about unintended consequences of up coming government legislation relating to sex identification on birth certificates.
    Various people have differing views about this, which makes the need for discussion and exchange of ideas a necessary precursor of any new law change.
    Anyone is entitled to their opinions on this issue, including city councillors. What they are not entitled to do is abuse the power of their position to shut down discussion.
    If you feel strongly about birth certificate legislation you should attend the meeting and attempt to persuade others to your point of view.
    Denying citizens use of public meeting facilities shows contempt for peoples’ right to information.
    If I’m correctly informed that you are seeking to subject SUFW to this heavy-handed censorship please reconsider your position.

    Yours sincerely

    Don Franks

    • Hi Don

      Good for you.

      Jack Byrne, Mani Mitchell, Georgina Beyer, Jeannie Oliphant, Fleur Fitzsimons and Ahi Wi-Hongi are (or were) the members on the committee to change/falsify official state documents without gate keeping.

      Fleur Fitzsimons is also a WCC member and together with Andy Foster has expressed themselves as another advocate for the silencing of women and showed their T- colours at this latest effort to cancel SUFW.

      Ahi Wi-Hongi is spoke person for Gender minority Aotearoa. They have received money form the Arcus Foundation (U$ based) who in turn get their funding from Big Pharma that are manufactures of sex hormones.

      • My problem with the government’s plan to issue new birth certificates to trans identified people is that apparently it will state that John Smith was always Janet Smith (or the other way found) thus conflating what is called gender identity with biological sex. Since it is not possible to magically change sex this new certificate surely has to be regarded as a fraudulent document?

        A birth certificate is an official document and though some details have changed over the years (female same sex couples can now both be registered as mothers for example) recording the sex of a child as observed at birth has not changed. I refer here to normal births, babies born with so called intersex conditions are an entirely different matter, and not one I am competent to comment on.

        So does the new certificate make a liar of the original birth certificate? In which case what is the status of the original birth certificate as an official document of the state?

        Or am I making a silly fuss about nothing? I have just emailed the Minister for Women again asking for clarity on the status of this proposed new certificate, but am not hopeful of a reply, since she has not responded so far to a direct question asking whether Sex Self ID will override women and girl’s rights to sex segregated spaces as guaranteed by the Human Rights Act (1993).

        Frankly I don’t see the difficulties with the current process as described on the government website. See link below.


        A person under the age of 18 needs to provide the following two statutory declaration from a parent or guardian to support a change in gender and a a statutory declaration from a registered counsellor or medical professional, which seems reasonable to me.

        I asked Jan Tinetti what was the policy advice the Ministry of Internal Affairs received, and from which departments, in order to draw up the Sex Self ID bill as currently proposed, but am not hopeful of a reply.

        The government is making very hard work for itself with this bill by ignoring legitimate concerns from women, whilst vilifying them for simply asking for a proper and due process on this legislation.

      • Well a birth certificate is a state issued, official, ID of course. e.g. It gives you the opportunity to a (new) passport.

        Uder the new sex self -ID bill proposal it will make name and sex change on your birth certificate very easy and wipes out all your past history too.

        e.g. as a consequence: if requesting vetting of a new staff member, teacher aid or volunteer, the department doing the vetting can’t see your time period before your sex change and/or name change.
        (maybe only at the NZ intelligence service?), unlike the UK’s GRC (gender recognition certificate).

        2 Girl guide leaders in the UK saw their Girlguiding membership terminated for questioning its transgender policy on safeguarding of minors. The new rules stated that vetting was not required for new recruits who ID as a trans. Also no longer was it required to inform parents who would be in attendance as guides at overnight trips.

        17 July 2021:
        The NZ Ministry of Women employs psychologist, Sharon Rippin, to transform the culture of our public service to comply with the wishes of trans-identified men. One of her first actions, communicated via an email from the Public Services Commission, to all government employees including the Fire Service, was the “suggestion” that everyone announce their pronouns. Of course, those who do not adopt the practice will be seen as transphobic trans-haters.

        My reading of this is that Jan Tinetta, ex teacher, sees no issue with the Gender identity ideology, the new transitioning away of gay and lesbian minors, so they appear straight (by far the largest group that get pressured, by peers and the internet, that they somehow do not fit in).

  2. As someone from Wellington I am horrified that the council would do this. We have around 270,000 women in the Wellington region. The redefinition of the term “women” has really serious consequences for safety for all of us.

    Asserting the right to safety is in no way similar to trashing the rights of the rainbow community.

    I thought we were smarter than this.

  3. Hetty, the consequences for safeguarding are indeed huge if the Sex Self ID legislation is passed without consideration for the points you have raised in your post.

    I received an email today from Jan Tinetti’s office with respect to the questions I put to her on the Sex Self ID bill, which helpfully outlined the how the bill will progress through Parliament.. I quote:

    “This email is to acknowledge receipt of your correspondence, which will be given to the Minister for her consideration.

    The Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill (the Bill) has its second reading in August, Minister Tinetti will invite a select committee to consider public submissions on the self-identification provisions in the Bill. While the select committee is considering this topic, I encourage you to share your views by making a submission. These submissions will form the basis of the report provided to Parliament, and will be considered as decisions are made on progressing the Bill.

    The period when you can submit to the Select Committee will be advertised at http://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/bills-and-laws/bills-proposed-laws.

    You can find further information on the proposal, and on other parts of the Bill, at http://www.dia.govt.nz/bdmreview or by searching for ‘Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill’ at http://www.parliament.nz.”
    End Quote.

    I will certainly be making a submission as I am sure will many others I hope that the Minister for Women will take account of the points raised. and that the House has an opportunity to debate the bill in a calm and rational manner come August.

Comments are closed.