Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

Kirralie Smith, a staunch defender of free speech and biological truth, faces massive fines and forced re-education for questioning men in women’s sports. Her battle highlights how laws and ideology are increasingly weaponised to silence dissent, redefine reality, and undermine parental rights.

Next week, free speech die-hard Kirralie Smith will learn about her fate for asserting biological facts.

The Australian battling against the LGBTrans takeover of female-only spaces — and the very definition of what it means to be a woman — faces the “music” for “misgendering”.

Smith indicated that her punishment is likely to involve massive legal costs and LGBTQ+ re-education training (read: Marxian-Woke struggle sessions).

Forget free speech in Australia, you can even be found guilty of vilification for truth speech!

I simply took information posted in the public domain by a football club and Football NSW and reposted it.

I asked basic questions like “why are males in female competitions?” and… pic.twitter.com/3H0CZPTetX

— Kirralie Smith (@KirralieS) November 10, 2025

Updating supporters on X, the Binary director dug in, saying the loss of three legal battles over the past month had not weakened her resolve.

“These battles are not just my battles,” she exclaimed.

“They’re battles for free speech, for truth and for reality itself.”

The High Cost of Truth

Although the penalties could be close to half a million dollars, Smith rightly stated that the war being waged against her wasn’t “just about money”.

The obvious end goal of activists is to stop free speech and stop people from speaking the truth, she added.

That’s an accurate take.

Since the 2017 redefinition of marriage, biology has been designated as bigotry, and arbitrary legislation has helped activists manipulate the scales of justice.

Pounding out victim narrative after victim narrative, speech has been reframed as “violence”. Likewise, restating objective reality has been reframed as “harmful”, intolerant and/or offensive.

For a blatant example of this, see the parental rights case I recently wrote about here.

This is why I think Smith is right to imply that redefining reality has involved a coordinated attack on meaning.

She is correct to state that the term “woman” is being violently dislocated from biology, and in its place sits a mass of confusion, otherwise known as “love is love” ideology.

For example, through an abuse of language, society is being forced to “go along to get along” with the fantasy that males who cosplay as female, are women.

By extension, the subjective use of pronouns has led to an abuse of meaning. This has allowed for the rise of lawfare.

Consequently, forced speech is replacing freedom of speech.

A Warning to All

Smith is justified in asserting that we could all be next.

“If I can be found guilty of vilification for speaking the truth,” she stated, “so could you.”

“So could journalists. So could politicians. So could anyone who refuses to bow down on the altar of any radical ideology,” Smith noted.

Binary’s legal losses “set a dangerous precedent,” She further explained.

“I simply reposted a public image of a male on a women’s soccer team and asked, ‘Why are men playing in women’s sports?’”

“Binary used the very public image in a campaign to policymakers,” Smith continued.

Rather than “engage in dialogue about the issue, the people involved employed lawyers to silence her instead.”

“The message [from trans activists] was clear,” Smith argued, “speak up and we’ll make an example of you.”

Kirralie’s new video is part of a fresh Binary campaign to raise broader awareness about the consequences of laws built on “feelings are facts” radical relativism.

In an email connected to the campaign, Smith said, “Laws that defy nature cannot change nature.”

“No human can change sex. It is absurd and dangerous to write laws that deny this reality.”

To paraphrase one of Smith’s points, this is an ideology that knows no limits.

As St Augustine stated in City of God, the delusions of demons are usually packaged inside a fashionable disguise.

The old gods have donned a new face.

As such, women are being harmed, and children are being exploited because tried and true safeguards are being ruled out as “unsafe, and phobic.”

Protecting Children and Parental Rights

Included in Binary’s battle to save free speech is the fight to preserve parental rights.

“Around the world,” Smith said, “children are being exploited and groomed by adults who insist children are ‘mature minors’.”

Worse, the groomers want laws based on what they say is “the need for children to work out their sexual orientation and sexual identities while they are still children!”

To achieve this – and Smith is well-versed enough with the facts to argue it — activists need government overreach.

They need arbitrary and easily abused legislation like “coercion and control” laws to isolate kids from their parents and push their agenda, without parental opposition.

This is what Smith means when she states that “Children are being groomed online and in schools to remove them from ‘transphobic’ parents who love their children.”

“We must resist,” she stated.

“We must say no. We must do all we can to ensure they do not succeed.”

“Whatever punishment is handed down next week,” Smith concluded.

“It still won’t change the fact that men cannot be women, or that these men do not belong in women’s sport.”

Smith’s broader battle is against the post-modern paradigm.

It deserves to be slammed for the slimy, snake-like progeny this philosophy has procreated.

Laws built solely to serve the self-interests of relativists are bad laws.

This is because:

1. “You do you” fails the coherence test.
2. “I support you no matter what” fails the consistency test.
3. “Feelings are facts” fails the evidence test.
4. “Do whatever you want, as long as it does not harm” fails the ontological test.

The obsession with relativism creates a playground for manipulators, all kinds of malcontents with self-centred agendas.

This attracts bad actors who see subjectivism as a gold mine for personal profit, and who view people as nothing more than prey.

As C.S. Lewis argued, subjectivism is poison.

___

Image courtesy of Adobe.