Judge James Tayler


From the murky depths of the legal profession there heaves into view someone you’ve never heard of, and neither had I. I have pleasure in cunting the judge at an employment hearing who has determined that it is illegal to ask the real sex of a transgender thing:


The case was viewed as a test of whether gender critical views – that there are only two biological sexes and it is not possible to change between them – could be protected philosophical beliefs under the 2010 Equality Act.

Employment Judge James Tayler rejected that view in his landmark judgement, which said Miss Forstater’s views are ‘incompatible with human dignity and fundamental rights of others’.

Er, when did freedom of speech become incompatible with fundamental rights?

Answer: yesterday.

‘Men cannot become women’ is no longer a permissible point of view. Soon it will be a hate crime, and ultimately a war crime.

When does this shit stop oozing from the rectum of society?

Nominated by Komodo

52 thoughts on “Judge James Tayler

  1. I’m sorry but I come from a generation that only recognises male or female. Those who bat for the other side are poofters or lezzas depending on which fence they jump over. No cunt will change my view.

    • I am a poof because I fancy men. This has nothing to do with these gender bending weirdo cunts.

  2. This judge has used a whole bunch of florid language using typical buzzwords like ‘inclusion’ to describe one very simple thing, ‘A person cannot change their sex, but to say so hurts their feelings, so nobody’s allowed to say it’.

    It’s the not just the outlawing of free speech – it’s the actual outlawing of truth to massage deluded people’s egotistic fantasies.

  3. Goebbels could take lessons from these mad cunts.
    Jolly good show and now fuck off back to your ivory tower.

  4. This is another example of how the human race is the lowest form of life on the planet. In most animal species, there are genetic males and females and reproduction is performed by some sort of combining of sperm and eggs. Individuals incapable of this most basic biological function dies out. As Jordan Peterson says, “the data is in.”

    Only our decadent, spoiled western view of life would support this cuntery.

  5. Illegal to ask if people are transgender?…..Well, that’s my opening gambit to the people smuggler who imports my Thai “housemaids” fucked then.

    • If I were to take a load of bullocks to the Mart, claim that they were actually heifers and report anyone who told me that I was wrong to the Police, I fear that the nice people at The Ministry might become involved…along with several other Govt. (and mental health) agencies.

  6. In the old days when not practicing sex before marriage was more common you’d have guys marrying gender-benders all over the place, finding out your wife’s got a dick on your honeymoon. Talk about the ultimate disappointment, you couldn’t even get divorced then! I’d fucking kill the cunt.

  7. Judge james Taylors a cunt!
    And i find his music insipid.
    Youve got a friend..fuck you hippy.

    • The only thing he was ever involved in worth a damn was Two-Lane Blacktop – that was a great movie.

    • “Woh Mexico, never been there, but I’d sure like to go” come on MNC lighten up, classic lyrics.

      • Was the only joke i could think of before went work this morning Earl!
        Dont mind his music really! Like ‘fire & rain’

      • Someone should nominate going back to work after Xmas for a cunting, site open Monday, I’m dreading it.

  8. If I was to tell other cunts that I am a chicken and must be called a chicken and classed as a chicken then they would have me locked up in a straight jacket.
    But now I can class myself as any gender I choose despite not being so and I am protected by law despite having the same mental illness that makes me think that Iam a chicken?

    Only this time round I have the ability to send other sane people to prison due to this CUNT of a judge because they have pointed out the obvious FACT that I was either born a man or a woman and that very fact conflicts with my dilusion of reality?
    Fucking Insanity!

    By same rationale, if I can choose my gender then surely I can choose my age?
    So when it suits I can be over 65 years old to get OAP discount, then be 25 years old to get booked on a 18-30’s holiday. Then I can be 15 years old to get a young persons rail card discount.

    Also helpful when I want to kick the shit out of a moron of a judge. When police arrive I can tell them that I’m 9 years old and therefore not legally responsible for my actions………
    Let’s see how that plays out.

  9. Snowflake cunts , just remember , trying to force this shit into statute, was the catalyst for making Jordan Peterson very very rich, the thought of which I am sure you all love.

    Maybe I could be the UK’s version Professor Cunt of the Litter opining on gender studies from my battle bunker in London.

  10. One can only hope that this lunatic landmark ruling is either overturned by appeal or another similar case comes up and reverses the ruling.

    Judge James Taylor clearly wasn’t paying attention at his biology lessons at school.

    This ruling clearly does oblige the employer to make allowances for trannies such as maternity rights. Where will this fucking lunacy end?

    • Yep nailed on. Trannies can adopt (fucking bad idea anyway).

      Thing is, this has real world pecuniary benefit in decent firms, so they’ll all be after it.

      Bit like this male sprinters all securing college athletic scholarships in the US by competing against high school girls 😂

  11. This is disappointing and depressing. It’s beginning to be a punishment to have common sense.

  12. Fuck I’m hanmered, and reading this cunting I’m not sure whether I’ve been at the Absinthe or not.
    Cannot question the actual sex of a person in an interview? The plod are going to have a cunt of a time going forward, as are the judiciary when sending these gender bending cunts to prison.

    “18 months in womens prison. Take her down”
    *deep growly voice* “Thanks judge, I’ll shave this beard off toot sweet!”

    Cunts and/or pricks to a man and/or woman.

  13. The judge was destined to be a CUNT from birth as his parents can’t even spell “Taylor” correctly, thereby making him confused about multiple variants of “Tayler” when there is only one acceptable non binary option. There are only two genders, the only scientific deviation is those few who are born hermaphrodite; self-identification is nonsensical bollocks (or lack of bollocks) that is your only choice. Tayler is CUNT of a judge and all who support him can also self identify as deluded CUNTS.

  14. Daddy who is an authority on grammar tells me it should be “hoves into view”. He said that I should stop reading stuff on here because it’s affecting my English, and making me say “cunt, Hoo-ee it boils my piss, Parking Stanley” and suchlike.

    He doesn’t understand how much I heave when I think about all these plebby judges, wankerish politicians and inconsequential celebrities who should never have got past the vitelline membrane….

    Daddy’s not as clever as he sounds, because he doesn’t know anything about sexual reproduction and I had to explain what a vitelline membrane was. The posh lying bastard broke his promise (of extra brandy sauce if he won the election) and we had Bird’s custard on Boxing Day. The fucking silver tonguing twat.

    Soft cunts

      • No, no. Daddy’s a grammar pedant, and the MP for Chew Magna.

        He often gets it embarrassingly wrong, his hypercorrective ban of the Oxford comma being a rather good example, as he went there. The stupid, pompous prat. I hate him at the moment.

        He’s right about “heave” though. That is just wrong, as your link kind-of points out. There’s nothing archaic about Hove, although it is a bit of a toilet.

        “Hove into view” is, on the other hand, a set-phrase. Heave/heaved/etc is quite simply not correct in that set-phrase. Hever Castle’s nice though, and it’s not far from Hove.

        Daddy’s still a cunt and so is this silly twastard of a judge.

      • “Hove into view” is the past tense. As exhaustively explained everywhere. How’s the organ? Lots of latency and occasional crashes? Heh.

      • Nope. “Hove into view” is the set-phrase. It is also the past imperfect(ive) tense.

        Like “woe is me” (and a good Job too, though “unto” is a trifle stilted these days) it is a set phrase. You certainly can say “woe was me”, “woe had been me” or “woe will have been me” (… etc) if you like.

        Although they’re all grammatically correct, they are NOT the set-phrase, and are therefore sort-of wrong. (Even Humpty Dumpty would surely agree, and for once he’d actually be correct.)

        1001 other examples are exhaustingly available elsewhere for your delectation, many on this page.

      • It may be the set phrase, sweetheart, but it’s not the present tense, and it doesn’t convey an implication of vomiting. Which, in context, I felt appropriate. Now kindly stop humping my leg.

  15. It’s getting to the stage now where there’s such a gaping schism in society I feel it’s time to split the country geographically , people with common sense, a reasonable amount of moral fibre and a certain degree of affection for the country on one side. And cunts on the other . We’ll still be England and they can be Cungland. They can have their pathetically weak laws , as many genders as they like , they can have commie nutters as their leaders who destroy the economy and disband the armed forces, they can live in ghettos like rodents with as many lawless immigrants as they like and as much crime as they like until finally… chaos. And we can have our old country back.

  16. Surely there is a requirement to tell the truth and only the truth in a courtroom. If Judge Tayler is offended by the truth then he is in the wrong job and should resign ASAP.

    Don’t these cunts understand the results of recent elections – the British public has absolutely no time or patience at all for libtard fuckwits.

  17. All the cunts who transition have to get injected with ‘hormone therapy’ to stop the facial hair growth and make them all emotional so they can cry a lot a get upset over fuck all.
    BUT they are not real women, having a cock and balls removed doesn’t reverse the internal biology, I really don’t understand why they can’t just say they are Trans Women and stop trying to pretend they are anything else

    what is wrong with saying I was born male but I have transitioned to a trans female, I now live my life as a trans woman. Suck it up you cunts and if you still have a cock and balls you are a bloke in a fucking dress!!

    • Because trans equates to Faux, fake, fraudulent, iffy. Like a Ferrari replica built on a reliant chassis.

  18. ‘This means if a dog’s born in a stable, it’s a fucking horse. I’ve never heard such fucking nonsense’.

    Sir Bernard Manning

  19. Anyone can identify as whatever they want. If a fella wants to self identify as a tree that’s fine.

    He’s still a bloke to me, I’m not indulging other people’s denial of reality. If I decided to cut the cunt up with a chainsaw would I be on trial for murder or would I be in court for cutting a tree down without a permit?

  20. “When does this shit stop oozing from the rectum of society?”

    When Cunty Chops accepts the offer of position as Home Secretary and applies a brightly polished size 10 jack boot up it, not before.

  21. “Right! Women and children first!”

    “Ok, now the men folk!”

    “And you cunts who refused to say, or moaned about being asked, you can all fuck off and drown!”

    Captain Smith, The Titanic, 15th April 1912

  22. The Human Rights Act and oversight by the European Court on the European Convention of Human Rights have enabled the Judiciary to embrace an almost fluid interpretation of the law and associated regulation whereby anybody with a perceived sleight or restriction to their rights (what they think their rights should be) can argue their case.
    The problem arises that these so called rights nowadays extend without limits in an imagined perfect world and must cater for everyone’s point of view (however surreal or impractical).
    To cut to the gist these vexatious claims for recognition of a viewpoint or right can be readily accommodated by fluid, liberal and biased (surely not) interpretation of so called Human Rights. However the case in question has had the opposite effect in that it has denied this women of making a salient point, as her right to do so is classed as secondary to the right of the other party to promote their own view, clearly one view is more worthy than another a truly perverse logic when it come to ‘Freedom of Speech’
    It is obvious the so called reactionary or right of field view call it what you like has lost out to the so called liberal,inclusive left of field view in this case and in these times it was never going to be otherwise, further confirming the inherent Liberal/left bias attached to so called ”human rights”.
    If anyone is interested there is a recent paper to download/read (30 pages) Protecting the Constitution by Prof Richard Ekins on the Policy Exchange.org website, a concise illuminating read which touches on the subject in question

Comments are closed.