Girl with suspected autism punished by UK 'Serious Case Panel' for asking trans soccer opponent with beard, 'Are you a man?'



A girl with suspected autism was punished by a so-called National Serious Case Panel in the United Kingdom for asking a bearded transgender soccer opponent, "Are you a man?" the Telegraph reported.

The 17-year-old cried when the panel found her guilty of “discrimination” for her remarks during a match against a trans-inclusive team, the Telegraph added.

'The FA has declared open season on women and girls in football with its disastrous policy, which means that no one can question a male player participating in a women’s game.'

The outlet — citing a previous report in Telegraph Sport — said it was the "latest case to cause outrage over the Football Association’s policy of allowing those born male to play in the women’s game."

The girl's county Football Association charged her with saying, “Are you a man?” as well as, “That’s a man," and “Don’t come here again,” or similar comments, the Telegraph said.

She was banned for six matches, four of which were suspended, after a three-hour hearing last week during which she denied expressing transphobia at the "friendly" game in July, the outlet noted.

The girl also wept during a 30-minute grilling conducted via video conference, the Telegraph said, adding that she had been facing a ban of up to 12 games.

An individual on the call said the hearing was “farcical” and added that panel members repeatedly “misgendered” the alleged victim as “he," the outlet reported, adding that the girl also was said to have been repeatedly asked, “How many LGBQT+ players do you have in your team?”

More from the Telegraph:

Her parents were outraged both by the hearing and the outcome, with her mother telling Telegraph Sport: “We’ve always taught our daughter to ask questions, and if she doesn’t feel comfortable or she doesn’t feel safe then she should go to somebody in charge and ask the question. In safeguarding training at places of work, you’re always told that you should question everything but she’s been told and effectively sanctioned by the FA for doing so. She asked, ‘Are you a man?’, and she admitted to that. The FA is essentially saying that no woman, when faced with what appears to be a male on the pitch, is entitled to ask a question.”

The girl’s plight had previously been cited by former FA chairman Lord Triesman, who wrote to the governing body’s current chair and chief executive last month to complain about its trans policy. The FA has continued to permit players born male to compete in female-only events, despite being urged in May by then-Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer to adopt the “unambiguous position” of a ban.

The outlet noted that Fiona McAnena — director of campaigns at Sex Matters — told Telegraph Sport: “The FA has declared open season on women and girls in football with its disastrous policy, which means that no one can question a male player participating in a women’s game. Anyone who does could find themselves suspended just for asking. Disciplining women and girls for saying what they see plainly in front of them makes a mockery of the game. The FA’s new strategy for women’s and girls’ football is worthless as long as this transgender inclusion policy is in place. How can the FA talk about a commitment to true equality in community football while undermining the rights and safety of the very players it claims to be supporting?”

The girl was brought up on charges after the opposing team lodged a complaint through Kick It Out, which is English football’s anti-discrimination watchdog, the Telegraph said, adding that the trans player and the opposing team’s captain testified that the girl was persistently transphobic.

The outlet noted it has concealed the accused girl's identity due to her age and because she's "on the assessment pathway for autism."

'I raised a concern about the risk of serious injury as a 17-year-old girl playing against a biological male who was much larger than me and a very physical player, which was possibly a safety issue as I did not want to get dangerously injured right before the start of the new season.'

The girl admitted in a written statement submitted in her defense that she asked, “Are you a man?” to a player she described as having “a beard," the Telegraph reported. She also admitted asking the referee for guidance about the player’s eligibility to participate in women’s football “given my concern for my safety after already suffering a number of overly physical challenges," the outlet added.

However, the girl repeatedly denied her words constituted transphobia, the outlet said, adding that it is understood that the game's referee heard nothing he deemed discriminatory.

More from the Telegraph:

The girl said in her written statement she had become “confused” about the participation of the trans player during the match in question as the latter “wore jewelry and sunglasses” and was not in opposition kit.

She added: “The moment the player clarified they were transgender (which I previously hadn’t considered), I respected their answer fully, dropped the situation and immediately shifted my focus back to the game before seeking guidance from the referee. At no point was my question meant to be hurtful or malicious as I only intended to seek clarity in an unfamiliar situation. Knowing now that the player was transgender, I understand that there were better ways to approach this question.”

The girl also said the opposing team's captain accosted her during a water break, telling her that she shouldn't have an issue with playing against a transgender opponent, the outlet added.

“I raised a concern about the risk of serious injury as a 17-year-old girl playing against a biological male who was much larger than me and a very physical player, which was possibly a safety issue as I did not want to get dangerously injured right before the start of the new season," the girl said, according to the Telegraph. "Despite this, I made it clear that if the player met the eligibility criteria of the FA I would respect the rules and accept the risk involved in continuing to play the match. My safeguarding officer and the referee were both present for this conversation.”

The girl added that she was “truly disheartened that these allegations have been made against me," the outlet reported, adding that she also said "I have always supported and respected the diversity within my team, including members who are in the LGBTQIA+ community.”

The Telegraph added that the girl’s mother said none of her daughter’s teammates had been approached to make statements ahead of an upcoming hearing but that they were “100 percent behind her."

According to the outlet, the Football Association decided against publishing written reasons for the case.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Colorado Supreme Court Narrowly Dismisses Jack Phillips Persecution, For Now

We who live in troubled times can learn a lot from Jack Phillips.

UK police actually arrest 55-year-old woman over 'inaccurate social media post'



Police in the United Kingdom said they arrested a 55-year-old woman this week in connection with an "inaccurate social media post."

Cheshire police officers made the arrest Thursday over a post "containing inaccurate information about the identity of the attacker in the Southport murders," the Cheshire Constabulary said.

'It’s a stark reminder of the dangers of posting information on social media platforms without checking the accuracy,' Chief Superintendent Alison Ross said. 'It also acts as a warning that we are all accountable for our actions, whether that be online or in person.'

Officials said the woman, who lives near Chester, was arrested "on suspicion of publishing written material to stir up racial hatred (S19 of the Public Order Act 1986) and false communications (S179 Online Safety Act 2023)." Chester is about a mile east of England's border with Wales and about 40 minutes south of Liverpool.

Authorities said she was being held in police custody "where she is assisting officers with their enquiries."

A 17-year-old male was accused of killing three and injuring numerous other victims in a July 29 mass stabbing at a Taylor Swift-themed children's dance class in Southport.

Officials initially said there was no evidence that terrorism was a motive in the Southport knife attack, which angered many who accused the government of covering up evidence. Police identified suspect Axel Rudakubana and charged him with three counts of murder and 10 counts of attempted murder. Officials identified him as being from Cardiff but also noted that his parents are Rwandan.

Unrest and violence erupted the day after the stabbings and have spread across the United Kingdom. Prime Minister Keir Starmer denounced the violence and blamed "far-right thuggery."

However, now-suspended U.K. Labour Party Councillor Ricky Jones reportedly was arrested this week on suspicion of encouraging murder of anti-immigration protesters after an outdoor speech in London in front of a rabid, far-left crowd during which he hollered, "They are disgusting, nasty fascists, and we need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all!" A video of the speech shows him sliding his finger across his neck as he spoke; he then led a “free, free Palestine!" chant.

Radio host Glenn Beck, co-founder of Blaze Media, earlier this week opined that "two-tier justice" — in which police more or less ignore Muslim immigrant crime but come down hard on non-Muslims — has been laid bare in the U.K. in the wake of the deadly knife attack.

Regardless, a Cheshire police official issued a stark warning in reference to the 55-year-old woman arrested over the "inaccurate social media post."

"It’s a stark reminder of the dangers of posting information on social media platforms without checking the accuracy," Chief Superintendent Alison Ross said. "It also acts as a warning that we are all accountable for our actions, whether that be online or in person.”

Ross added that "we have all seen the violent disorder that has taken place across the U.K. over the past week, much of which has been fueled by malicious and inaccurate communications online."

What's more, Fox News noted that Stephen Parkinson — director of public prosecutions of England and Wales — warned against "publishing or distributing material which is insulting or abusive which is intended to or likely to start racial hatred. So, if you retweet that, then you’re republishing that, and then potentially you're committing [incitement to racial hatred]."

He added, "We do have dedicated police officers who are scouring social media. Their job is to look for this material, and then follow up with identification, arrests, and so forth," the cable news network said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Why The Court’s Murthy Ruling Is Probably The Worst Free Speech Decision In History

SCOTUS put Americans affected by censorship in an unenviable position, reversing the burden of proof and denying any effective remedy.

Brave kid sent home for wearing 'only two genders' shirt to school loses First Amendment lawsuit appeal



A panel of Democrat-appointed judges has sided with a Massachusetts school that censored a middle-school student for wearing a T-shirt that asserted a basic biological fact regarding gender.

In the 2022-2023 school year, Liam Morrison was a seventh-grade student attending Nichols Middle School in Middleborough, Massachusetts, about 40 miles south of Boston. During his time at the school, Liam has worn several T-shirts with different political messages, including "Don't tread on me" and "First Amendment Rights," without any issue.

'Students who identify differently ... have a right to attend school without being confronted by messages attacking their identities.'

However, in March 2023, he wore a T-shirt that read, "There are only two genders," which apparently triggered several school officials who claimed the shirt targeted a "protected class" of students. After Liam refused to remove the shirt, school officials called his father to pick him up from school, as Blaze News previously reported.

"Who is this protected class? Are their feelings more important than my rights?" Liam asked the school board around that time.

Several weeks later, he wore the T-shirt to school again, though this time he covered up the portion of the message that said "only two" with a message that read "censored" instead. He was once again ordered to remove the shirt, and he complied.

But Liam and his parents didn't take the school's decision lying down. They soon partnered with Massachusetts Family Institute and Alliance Defending Freedom, which then filed a federal lawsuit on Liam's behalf, arguing that Middleborough Public Schools officials had violated his First Amendment rights.

A district court then sided with the school, ruling that "students who identify differently ... have a right to attend school without being confronted by messages attacking their identities." It also determined that the censored version of the T-shirt might still cause a disruption or otherwise threaten the safety of other students, Law&Crime reported.

Liam, his parents, and his legal team then took the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston. On Sunday, a three-judge panel ruled to uphold the lower court's ruling.

"We think it was reasonable for Middleborough to forecast that a message displayed throughout the school day denying the existence of the gender identities of transgender and gender non-conforming students would have a serious negative impact on those students’ ability to concentrate on their classroom work," Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron wrote in the decision.

Barron further claimed that such "transgender and gender non-conforming students" often experience "suicidal ideation" when their gender identities are called into question. Liam's shirt could therefore have a negative "effect ... on those students’ ability to learn," he said.

Liam previously stated that no one complained or had an adverse reaction to his shirt at school. In fact, he claimed that some of his fellow students expressed support for his shirt and wanted one just like it.

All three judges on the circuit court panel were appointed by Democrat presidents. Barron and fellow panelist Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson were both appointed by former President Barack Obama, and Judge Lara Montecalvo was appointed by President Joe Biden.

'This case isn’t about T-shirts; it’s about a public school telling a middle-schooler that he isn’t allowed to express a view that differs from their own.'

Despite the setback with the First Circuit panel, the MFI and ADF insisted that Liam's fight for freedom is far from over. "The 1st Circuit erred in its decision denying [Liam] his right to free speech, and we are reviewing all legal options including appealing this decision," said ADF senior counsel David Cortman.

Sam Whiting, an MFI staff attorney, claimed that Liam's legal team would be willing to take the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary. Whiting also noted that there was "no evidence" that Liam's shirt "caused a disruption."

"The court held that the possibility that some students might suffer psychological distress from his shirt was enough to justify censoring him," Whiting said, bewildered.

"This case isn’t about T-shirts; it’s about a public school telling a middle-schooler that he isn’t allowed to express a view that differs from their own," Cortman added. "The school actively promotes its view about gender through posters and ‘Pride’ events, and it encourages students to wear clothing with messages on the same topic—so long as that clothing expresses the school’s preferred views on the subject."

"Our legal system is built on the truth that the government cannot silence any speaker just because it disapproves of what they say."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

European Epicenter Deploys Riot Police To Stop Conservatives From Talking

It’s unthinkable that an emergency legal challenge had to be mounted to gather in peace in the political heart of Europe.

‘Gender Identity’ Law Spells The End Of Religious Liberty In Minnesota

'Already, at least one faith-based school is facing an employment complaint at the department of human rights because of the removal of the exemption.'

Justice Jackson’s Comment About Free Speech ‘Hamstringing’ The Government Wasn’t Her Worst

Murthy v. Missouri perfectly illustrates the dangers of censorship, but Justice Jackson still thinks the government’s 'perspective' of 'threatening circumstances' should matter.
'It's not happening': High school backs down after student refuses to remove American flag from his truck

'It's not happening': High school backs down after student refuses to remove American flag from his truck



School officials in Southeastern Indiana apologized to parents after a student was asked not to fly an American flag from the back of his truck on school grounds.

Cameron Blasek was asked by school staff at East Central High School to remove the flag from his truck. The school district later explained that the concern was due to the idea that should one flag be flown, all other flag types would be allowed.

This was not explained to Blasek when he was approached by a vice principal and counselor.

"'Hey, Cameron, you got to remove the flag from the back of your truck.' I said, 'It's not happening,'" Blasek told local outlet the 765. "I told them it would be there all day today and first thing in the morning tomorrow, too. Then they said if you don't take it down, you are getting written up for insubordination. Then they said we could go to the office and talk about it more if I would like."

Later in the same day, Blasek was called to the office to discuss the situation again. He showed school officials that he was following both laws related to the flag and the school's code of conduct.

"I read through the Central 2023/2024 handbook, and the word 'flag' wasn't even mentioned in the parking lot or driving section. The only section it's mentioned in is the flag twirling section," the teenager told WCPO 9.

After the boy told his parents, his father appeared to make a lengthy post on Facebook regarding the incident.

"In my opinion, if you are offended by the American flag, then leave the United States of America! If this was any other flag, would something have been said?" the father asked. "I don't know, but we can not be offended by Freedom of Speech, and why does someone in the position that a high school principal is in think it is okay [to] take away our freedom of speech? We stand by our son."

The father also claimed that the school intended to change its rules regarding flags the following school year.

"[My son] was also told it will be in the student handbook next year that students cannot fly the American flag."

— (@)

The day following Blasek's meeting with his educators, nearly two dozen other students showed up with flags attached to their cars. Blasek was called to the principal's office nonetheless.

"[Principal] Black told me the school has a right to request that I remove the flag," Blasek said. "I pretty much told him, well, you are just asking me to, but I don't have to."

The principal reportedly told the child it was okay to fly the flag for the remainder of the year, seemingly confirming what the boy's father had claimed about upcoming rule changes.

A subsequent letter was sent to parents by the principal that expressed that the school encourages "expressions of patriotism and pride in our nation among our students and staff."

"After careful consideration and in recognition of the importance of the U.S. flag as a symbol of unity and national identity, I am pleased to inform you that we are allowing the display of the U.S. Flag by students in the East Central parking lot. I understand the significance of this symbol and the pride it instills in our students, teachers, and the entire school community. I share this pride," Principal Tom Black wrote.

Superintendent Andrew Jackson justified the school's actions by stating that the administration "was under the misunderstanding that if we allow students to display the U.S. flag in the parking lot, then we must allow them to display all other flags as well."

"They were concerned that we would be required to allow flags that are controversial or even offensive," Jackson added.

Blasek cited national pride as the reason that he flies the flag proudly.

"Men and women fought and lost their lives for me and others to have the right to fly that flag in our front yard and our trucks. I respect and appreciate those heroes for that. I also believe it's one of my rights as an American to fly that flag, as it says in my First Amendment right," Blasek concluded.

The teen added that he is contemplating joining the military following high school.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!