Dog and piggy playing ball

Peggie v NHS Fife is exposing what women have been warning about for years. Self-ID isn’t about kindness or inclusion—it’s about forcing women to accept males in their spaces, even when they feel deeply uncomfortable. We now have a man admitting, under oath, that he knew his female colleague didn’t want to undress in front of him—but he stayed anyway. And SHE was the one expected to leave? This isn’t about rights. It’s about control. It’s about telling women they no longer have the right to say no. The public is finally seeing what’s at stake.

Day 9 Peggie v NHS Fife & Dr Upton – Afternoon Session Science Denied, Due Process Ignored – NHS Fife’s Trainwreck Continues If Esther Davidson thought she could navigate Naomi Cunningham’s cross-examination with vague answers and corporate doublespeak, today proved otherwise. The afternoon session exposed not only NHS Fife’s blind adherence to gender ideology, but also the complete failure of the so-called investigation into Sandie Peggie’s treatment. Under pressure, Davidson tied herself in knots trying to avoid defining what a woman is, while simultaneously admitting that NHS Fife’s handling of Peggie’s case was riddled with bias, incompetence, and a blatant lack of due process. The most embarrassing moments came when Cunningham forced Davidson to confront the simple question of what makes someone a woman. The exchange was excruciating. Does growing long hair make someone a woman? No. Does wearing makeup? No. Does dressing in women’s clothes? No. But when Cunningham asked, "So what does?", Davidson panicked and pivoted to the standard ideological script, insisting that if a man identifies as a woman, then he is one. The shift was immediate and obvious. Up until that moment, she had been answering questions logically, but now, when faced with the core contradiction of NHS Fife’s position, she abandoned reality entirely. Cunningham didn’t let her off the hook. If “identifying” was all it took, then what objective criteria exist to define a woman? Davidson floundered. She mumbled about respecting beliefs and not being an expert, but could not explain the policy she was defending. At one point, Judge Alexander Kemp intervened, trying to soften the blow by stating that Davidson wasn’t a biology expert. But that wasn’t the issue—Cunningham wasn’t asking for a scientific thesis, she was asking a senior NHS official to say out loud that women are female. And she couldn’t do it. With NHS Fife’s core argument now in tatters, Cunningham turned to the practical consequences of ignoring sex. Davidson initially claimed that biological sex had no relevance in medicine, but under questioning, she was forced to admit this was false. Blood tests, heart attack markers, medication dosages, and even basic diagnoses all rely on knowing whether a patient is male or female. Bizarrely, she insisted that pregnancy was the only medical issue where sex mattered, prompting the judge to intervene again to clarify that she was speaking from ignorance rather than fact. The irony was staggering—an NHS official, pushing policies that erase biological sex, openly admitting she didn’t understand the medical implications of doing so. But the biggest collapse came when Cunningham turned to the utter failure of the investigation (IX) process. If NHS Fife was hoping to maintain the illusion that Peggie had been treated fairly, Davidson destroyed it herself. She admitted that NHS Fife condemned Peggie before she was even identified as being involved. On December 30th, Dr. Beth Upton’s supervisor, Kate Searle, had already “condemned” Peggie’s actions—despite the fact that, at that stage, Upton’s version of events had been the only one heard, and Peggie hadn’t even been spoken to. Under cross-examination, Davidson had to acknowledge that this was premature and entirely one-sided. The process only became more absurd when Cunningham revealed that Davidson had no experience in conducting an investigation, no training, and had only been in her role for three weeks. Yet she was suddenly responsible for leading the inquiry that would decide whether Peggie lost her job. When asked why it fell to her, she couldn’t provide a real answer, other than stating she was the clinical nurse manager. This was not a serious, structured process—it was a rushed, pre-determined exercise in justifying Peggie’s removal. Perhaps the most damning moment came when Cunningham exposed the so-called patient safety allegations—the “missing patient” and “resus” incidents, which had been repeatedly cited as serious concerns. Under questioning, Davidson admitted that no patient had actually been harmed, that these incidents hadn’t been flagged as urgent at the time, and that they were only suddenly treated as major problems after Peggie had objected to Upton in the changing room. If these were genuine safety concerns, why hadn’t they been investigated immediately? Why were they only brought up when NHS Fife needed a reason to suspend Peggie? The answer was obvious: they were looking for something—anything—to justify their actions after the fact. Cunningham then delivered the final blow. If Peggie had truly refused to work with Upton out of prejudice, as was claimed, then it would have been career-ending. She walked Davidson step by step through the consequences—if Peggie had walked out of resus because she couldn’t work with Upton, she would have been struck off and fired. Davidson agreed. But then came the problem—no one had actually investigated whether it was true before she was suspended. NHS Fife simply took Upton’s word for it and punished Peggie accordingly. By the end of the day, Davidson’s credibility was in tatters. She had admitted that she could not define what a woman is, could not justify NHS Fife’s policy, could not explain the medical consequences of ignoring sex, and could not defend the way Peggie had been treated. The tribunal room had become a graveyard for NHS Fife’s credibility, with Cunningham standing over the wreckage, methodically ensuring that every contradiction was exposed and every weak justification dismantled. Tomorrow, Cunningham will finish what she started. If today was anything to go by, Davidson will not last much longer under scrutiny, and the tribunal’s patience with NHS Fife’s evasions is already wearing thin.

Can women collectively sue as a class action over headlines like these? That is a MAN. A MAN. The damage this does to our psyche is unforgivable. “What did we ever do to you?” This. These headlines are what you did.

No. This is not a woman. @dailyecho Complain to ben.fishwick@dailyecho.co.uk and then to @IpsoNews