The Weekly Peak #6
Therapy versus the law, globohomo goes hard, and the WHO is about to make life hell
“If it's a woke judge who reads my file, then I'm in trouble.”
What’s it like being a mental health professional in a country that has criminalised non-adherence to the tenets of gender identity ideology?
I spoke to a child psychiatrist who is under investigation in Belgium for the promotion of ‘conversion therapy’. The doctor, who we’ll call ‘Sarah’, helps kids out of their gender distress (for which she claims to have a 100% success rate) and, as a result, she has been reported to the police for trying to convert ‘trans people’ into ‘non-trans people’.
All over Europe, kids are turning up in therapists’ offices telling them that their bodies do not match their inner (true) ‘gender’. Many of these kids are autistic and they have trouble reconciling their inner feelings of womanliness or manliness with society’s formula for sexed social success. For these literal-minded, pattern-seeking kids, things do not compute. But only boys like frisbee tournaments! Why am I defective? wonders the rigid-thinking butch teenage girl. She concludes that her unhappiness will be relieved by being affirmed by a professional as being a man or, at the very least, ‘being trans’.
Sarah doesn’t believe this is the solution. “I believe my patients when they tell me they have gender dysphoria,” she told me. “I completely believe them. But I try to improve their mental health by many ways. And then the gender dysphoria disappears.” She tries to make her patients feel better about reality, not to lead them by the hand into un-reality (and surgery, and hormones, and social chaos…). But for this professional practice, she is being persecuted. Listen to the full conversation below.
Creepy degree of coordinated messaging from the globohomo machine this year
It’s been relentless. The sheer flood of coordinated messaging from ‘the international community’ on and around IDAHOBIT Day (International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Transphobia) this year was shocking. And the similarity of the messaging from official accounts was a clue to the global coordination involved.
That’s not conspiracy theorising. Globohomo is not just a 4Chan meme, it’s a real thing: ‘LGBTIQ+ acceptance’ has been foreign policy priority for European governments and their global allies since about 2004, when the international development agencies of Sweden, the Netherlands and France began to make the link between development (esp. AIDS) and gay acceptance. Now that the US has noped out of leading on this mission financially, European governments and Canada have taken on the mantle. And they are very, very committed to it.
IDAHOBIT Day is an ILGA World-run campaign, funded by national governments via foreign aid/development money. ILGA-World manage the messaging, the materials, the coordination, and the website (called 17may.org after the day homosexuality was depathologised). This year, the official comms message, the one that got repeated ad nauseum by every Western embassy, diplomat, senior official, foreign office, Perm Rep, envoy, etc. was basically this: LGBTIQ+ stuff IS democracy. More rainbows, more democracy. More dedicated LGBTIQ funding, more democracy. More LGBTIQ+ events, more democracy. More Days Of [INSERT GENDER] Visibility, more democracy.
More erasure of sex-based reality in favour of ‘gender identity’, more democracy? More targetting of TERFs, more democracy? More police investigations of non-affirming therapists, more democracy?
That there is a correlation between being gay-friendly and being democratic is clear. Thinking that painting everything in rainbow colours will vanquish the dark forces of authoritarianism is a bizarre deduction to make. And amidst all the noise, all the tweets, all the statements, all the speeches, all the glittering events with VIP guestlists as long as your arm, nobody seems to be doing anything that will benefit gay people. Rather, it’s all about pumping money and attention into people who do LGBTIQ+ activism as a profession. Those things may sometimes overlap, but they are not the same thing!
Why did the EU encourage LGBTIQ+ activists to petition for a law they couldn’t make?
There’s a bit of democracy theatre that the European Commission plays called a citizens’ initiative. It’s a website that allows you to collect signatures for your cause. The website is EU-branded, EU-hosted, and EU-supported. If you get a million people to sign your petition, EU lawmakers have to pay attention to you and give you a response.
So far, so good.
Naturally, in order to get your petition on there, you have to meet a bunch of criteria. One of those criteria is very basic: you can’t ask the Commission to make a law about something they have no jurisdiction over. But of course. But by that logic, the petition to “ban on conversion practices” should never have gotten off the ground. But it did. Why?
When EU officials stated last week that “this issue largely falls within (EU countries’) remit” and “the responsibility lies mostly at the level of the member states,” they were correct. So the question is: why did they let activists pretend for the past three years that they could do something about it? Legal advisers gave the activists their advice before the petition got off the ground, telling them they could legislate. I am awaiting a response from the EC, will update if I hear back.
I suspect the Commission was pushing their luck and they got caught.
Read: Are the days of ignoring LGBTIQ+ mission creep over?
Religious NGOs are frozen out of EU funding while queer class-warrior race-baiters rake in the cash
I was going through the public meetings declarations of various EU officials recently and I came across a rendezvous that took place between the CERV grant managers and a federation that represents Catholic families, called FAFCE. Reading between the lines of the meagre meeting minutes, there appeared to be tension over grant money.
FAFCE (the Federation of Catholic Family Associations in Europe), it turned out, had applied for seven different grants and was turned down for all of them. This seemed odd. I would have assumed that religious NGOs would automatically fall afoul of anti-discrimination rules. After all, not believing in trans souls, or being against gay marriage, abortion, or newfangled family formulations, could be viewed as discrimination, according to The Way Things Are Going. I was very curious about the thinking of the Catholics on this: why waste your time?
FAFCE, it turns out, are belatedly asking themselves the same question. I had a long chat with Teresa Gerns, advocacy director of the federation, who told me that FAFCE had applied for grants to participate in projects related to child safety online and countering loneliness. She said that none of the grant applications mentioned any hot-button topics like women, the family, religion, God, or any other FILTH like that. Yet all were found inadmissible, which is why they asked the Commission for a meeting.
She quoted from the evaluators’ feedback: they should have been more “family-neutral” whatever that means. Oh? It is clear from FAFCE’s website, of course, that they believe in man-woman marriage and all those other standard Catholic heresies, but Gerns assured me that their project applications contained nothing about that.
In a way, it makes sense that they were turned down: how could EU institutions claim to fight discrimination against LGBTIQ+ people while supporting the work of organisations that don’t think gay marriage is acceptable? But that might lead one to believe that the ideological/philosophical/moral ethos of grant applicants must not be considered contradictory to EU law or values. Is that true?
Let’s take a look at some projects that were approved, shall we?
IGLYO, the “queer youth” NGO that has received millions in EU funds, organised a workshop on BDSM by a member organisation that did BDSM events in secondary schools. Are we to assume that this is in line with the EU’s stated concern about protecting children from sexual exploitation? When IGLYO put out a video last week calling for “class war” and “white accountability” are we to assume that this in sync with the Treaties? And what about all the new projects to counter the “anti-gender movement” which involve finding ways to criminalise women who speak up against gender nonsense? Doesn’t it fly in the face of the EU’s equal treatment, freedom of expression etc.?
I’m an atheist. But I think that if you invite queer extremists to help you guide EU social policy, it’s only fair to let the other side have a say, too. It’s clear that in the EU, as it currently exists, the policy direction is pointed towards evermore progressive extremism. I might disagree with FAFCE’s position on abortion and same-sex couples, but queer theorists are mental, their demands are niche and extreme, and their “ethos” is a lot more alien to regular EU citizens than the Catholics’.
Your elites are into some weird sex shit, folks, and they are full of postmodern garbage ideas. If people can’t just be normal, the trad Caths should be a welcome counterbalance in the system. Or, hear me out, strip everyone of funding and just agree that we can all be fucking normal from now on. I’m begging everyone. Can you all just be normal.
The grey market of medical gender transition is BOOMING in Europe
I wrote for Genspect about the growing number of ‘providers’ of transgender surgeries and other trans-related services in Europe. Don’t be tricked into thinking that fights over the national gender clinics or guidelines in your country are about who is trans and who should transition. Those fights are important, but they are mostly about insurance coverage. The private market is a free-for-all. In reality, for-profit surgeons don’t care if a customer is “really trans” or not. A man can get a pair of tits for about €3,000 without even pretending to think he’s a woman. Why would a surgeon care?
The worst part, though, is that kids can get surgery with parental consent. I managed to book an appointment for my sad daughter in Spain. Read about it here: Europe’s Gender Surgery Market is Booming
The WHO trans healthcare guidelines are coming and they will be bad
One of the objectives of trans activism has been to get trans-ness depathologised. Meaning, to have it taken out of the official category of mental illness. There’s a problem, however: how can you ask the state to pay for your healthcare (breast implants or amputations, for example) for something that is not a disease or a mental illness? The solution that the drafters of the World Health Organisation’s almanac, the ICD, was to reclassify wrong-bodyism as “conditions related to sexual health”. But reclassifying something means you also need new guidelines to go along with it. How should this very-much-not-a-mental-illness be treated by doctors and shrinks? How do we justify the coverage of cures for people who definitely-do-not-need-to-be-cured-of -anything? What a conundrum.
The task of drawing up the new WHO guidelines got underway in 2023ish, and when the names of the people who would draft it went public, TERFs went bananas because all the people in the Guideline Development Group seemed to be ideologues. They are not just on the trans train, they’re driving it. They’re in the engine room shovelling buckets of black coal into its furnace.
Anyway, one of the external experts was a very pervy Canadian autogynephile called Florence Ashley. He quit the group after the uproar, and in the months that followed, various gender critical/evidence-based medicine and TERFy type groups made statements about the crazies who were still in it. Nothing has been announced publicly since then.
This systematic review from May 2025 seems to claim that the group has decided on 15 “outcomes of interest”, with the help of WHO technical experts. The outcomes are based on “patient importance” so I think we can safely predict where all this is going. Later last year, someone from ILGA-Europe reportedly said that clinics don’t have to wait for the guidelines to get busy transitioning their patients. Indeed, as I wrote for Genspect, trans ‘affirming’ care is a blossoming industry; the real value of the WHO guide, whenever it gets here, will be comms that will help feed lobbyists arguing for public reimbursement of medical transition.
The WHO has cachet, so you can imagine the headlines to come. This is the trans activists’ version of the Cass Report.
Most recent list of drafters in the WHO trans guideline group
Drag queens violently attacked by teens in Brussels
“You really saw anger in their eyes.”
This story is so sad. I despise drag but this is brutal. Three gay men had just come off the Pride stage in Brussels last Saturday when they were attacked by a small group of male teenagers. The teens then called more teens to come and join in the gay-bashing, eventually swelling to a group of about 25, according to eye witnesses.
Nobody will report this but, everybody suspects it: the youths were most likely of Muslim/Arabic/Maghrebian persuasion. What will also be ignored is the fact that all three of the victims were visibly some variation of Muslim/Arab/Maghrebian extraction themselves. Two of them advertise this in their stage names: Sherine Falasteen and Diva Beirut. The third man is Moroccan and goes by the stage name Anira Orlando. They had been on the main Pride stage yucking it up with traditional Palestinian dancers, and I suspect that this marriage of queer flamboyance with Palestinian resistance-spectacle might have been the trigger that set their attackers off.
In related news, the Flemish state broadcaster VRT announced the results of a big survey that revealed that young Flemish people are becoming uncharacteristically homophobic and transphobic, and a lot of them think it’s totally ok for men to beat their wives. Philosopher Maarten Boudry kicked over the wasp’s nest on live TV by revealing that someone had told him that the foreign origin of the survey respondents was to be kept from the public. He literally whipped the leaked document out of his pocket on TV. Drama ensued.
It was one of the first questions I had when I saw the figures. We all suspect who hates the gays the most. It’s the same lads who think women should have guardians to walk down the street. It’s not Bart, or Stijn, or Jurgen.
Perhaps an easy entry point for the elites to Name The Problem of Muslim-flavoured homophobia and misogyny would be to bundle it into the Manosphere label generally? They love to talk about that.
What is the alt-wallah, otherwise known as the Muslim Manosphere?
Belgian trans event scuppered at every turn, so we’re going leafleting
First Eventbbrite de-platformed the event. Then the organiser’s mailing account got suspended for adding (publicly-listed) politicians’ and journalists’ email addresses. Thankfully, the venue has not yet cancelled. But to get the word out about this film screening and debate about parents of trans kids, due to take place in Leuven next week, the organisers are forced to do things the old way: stand in the street. I’ll be joining the parents group, Cry for Recognition outside Belgian government buildings to hand out leaflets. You can still buy tickets here but Eventbrite refuse to list it in the agenda.
The event will feature a film already cancelled once in Quebec
In other news…
Against the Transfeminist Manifesto from Transgender Europe: petition
New European Health Union is planned. More nooks for trans ideology to creep into
What next for populism? book launch taking place today in Brussels
Sidhbh Gallagher, known as the Butcher of Louth, got glowing treatment by Irish media
Wait what? Legal gender recognition is not the cure-all we’ve been promised it is?
Send me your stories, I’m all (t)ears: roisinmichaux@gmail.com. I’m also on X/Twitter: https://x.com/RoisinMichaux
Do you think it matters that sex is being replaced by self-declaration of something called ‘gender identity’? I do, and I was fired for it. I made a bet that other people care about it too. So this newsletter is my new job. If you think my work is important, please take out a paid subscription.
When in years to come we explain that in 2026 there was a pop song about choking women and making their lungs explode, people will say: oh right, that was the era when doctors were cutting girl children to ribbons and prisons were placing male serial killers in locked cages with women, right, right, checks out.
Brigid La Sage says it well: “Things could easily get worse, not better. Our daughters and granddaughters could find themselves relegated to the subservient status of sex dolls, servants and surrogates that gender ideology associates with womanhood. Or a right wing backlash could land us back in "children, kitchen and church" territory,”