I'd rather be called a 'racist' or a 'fascist' than fail murdered women such as Rhiannon Whyte.

The silence of feminists on illegal migrant men and their violence against women is a dereliction of duty.

(Deng Chol Majek - murderer.)

Rhiannon Whyte was stabbed 23 times with a screwdriver, 19 of those wounds were to her head and she lived for 3 days before her eventual death at the hands of illegal Sudanese migrant Deng Chol Majek.

Majek had stalked Rhiannon at her bar job in the hours before he brutally murdered her, at the hotel where he was housed after arriving illegally on a small boat a couple of months previously. He had been relentlessly watching her and a group of female workers in the hotel arousing the suspicion of others who had reported him to security.

Deng Chol Majek should not have been able to murder Rhiannon or anyone else here in the UK. He should not have been able to arrive in the UK in the first place. Once he did he should not have been allowed to stay. He should not have been housed in a Serco-operated, state-funded hotel in the Bescot community and he should certainly not have had the freedom to wander to the nearby train station and brutally murder a British woman, who now leaves behind a young son and a grieving family. The job of our government is to prevent the growing list of horrific crimes against women committed by men who should never have had the opportunity to commit them.

Majek is a murderer and a liar. He lied about his age and was unwilling to give details about his past in Sudan, his medical history or his mental health. He is one of the very worst of men.

He has been sentenced to a minimum of 29 years in jail and presumably there will now be a lengthy and costly process to deport him if the government is shamed into doing so by the public. The cost of housing a high risk category A prisoner ranges from £40,465 - £90,866 per annum. If he is not deported he will cost the state a minimum of £1,173,485 over the course of his sentence. The emotional cost to be borne by Rhiannon’s family is devastating to consider. They will never recover from the pain he inflicted upon Rhiannon. The evil Majek etched his cruel violence upon their memory of her forever.

As a feminist woman I have always believed that one of the aims, and a firm commitment, of feminist women was to act to stop men from harming women physically and sexually and that we should do anything in our power to prevent such patriarchal violence. The radical feminist position on male violence against women has long been that, in order to tackle the problem of men’s violence, we have to be able to name the problem. The problem, the obvious root cause, is men. Any radical feminist refusing to name this, and vocally object to it, would be laughable.

The statistics on male violence against women were acknowledged without question until a different problem became obvious in the vast numbers of illegal migrants arriving to Britain on small boats. The accompanying risk of crimes of violence against women which would some of these men would inevitably commit when they arrived could not be ignored. In some quarters of government, the press and large feminist organisations it has been studiously avoided, ignored or even deflected.

Feminist women are well-versed in statistics of male violence against women and many of us can easily cite how many women are likely to be a victim of domestic abuse and rape within their lifetime, or how regularly women are killed by male intimate partners. It is therefore astonishing that there is a determined and deliberate silence about the risk of such violence posed by illegal migrant men from many leading feminist individuals and groups. Not only this, but instead of speaking out about it and sounding the alarm, they instead attempt to try to silence women who are willing to object and try to do something to stop it.

Whenever violence committed by this demographic of men (arriving illegally from a variety of countries where male violence against women is prolific and/or normalised) are discussed, a cabal of established online feminists and their organising groups rear up to denounce such discussion as “fascist”, “racist” or “far-right”. They attack the women, some of them also feminists, attempting to discuss how to protect women from these men and smear them as beneath contempt inevitably tying them to male far-right figures rather than listening to their legitimate fears and valid examples.

Some women have thankfully begun to reject these smear tactics which have in the past been incredibly effective both at ostracising women from feminism and distancing them from other groups of women they previously saw as allies. Women have either learned through fear of being called “far-right” to be silent or they decided on rebellion against these authoritarian feminist figureheads.

When I spoke on Talk TV in May 2025 about the disproportionate levels of sexual violence against women committed by migrant men, a woman named Jeni Harvey who, whilst not widely known, is part of the inner sanctum of “leading feminist thinkers” commented,

“Femonationalism throws women under the bus. It gives cover to racism and calls for deportations that will be extended to women who deserve protection and safety. Women who are our sisters, friends and allies. Women who deserve better than this filth from so called feminists.

This gaslighting rhetoric is quite effective. If a woman with a reasonably large social media platform like myself can be denounced as “filth” then any woman can and many would be afraid of this sort of attack, considering themselves feminists and therefore eager to comply with the key tenets of feminism. I was quite late to find my courage to speak out for exactly this reason. I knew what would happen because I had seen it happen to others.

In June 2024 the women’s rights advocate Aja the Empress had been driven from X by the same hard-left cabal for attending a march on “two-tier policing” . This resulted in an uproar and a wave of support for her was expressed. Nevertheless women watched this unfold and understood that expressing views on the threat posed to women by migrant men would be likely to bring hostile influential “feminist” women to their door.

The ‘GC Against The Far Right’ letter of 2024 quickly became laughingly referred to as “we the undersigned” because it was so clearly an ill-disguised attack on anyone wanting to discuss issues such as the crimes of migrant men or the failures to bring Muslim men to account for their mass rapes of young girls in the UK.

The letter said,

“We, the undersigned, are deeply disturbed that populist messages particularly targeting Muslims have gained traction among significant numbers of social media accounts associated with the gender critical movement, and that one major account in particular has actively fanned the flames of racist violence with increasingly inflammatory video messages.”

I swiftly took my name off the letter (my signature having been dishonestly obtained) because it had quickly become clear it wasn’t a statement against fascism, it was a statement against specific women. It took careful aim at women who were pointing out a problem with violence committed by migrant men who should not be in the UK and also at women discussing the inaction of government on the grooming gang scandal. The organisers’ intention was to demonise women who were objecting to a very real threat to their own safety and the safety of young girls. Many of the signatories were prominent feminists and included the journalist Julie Bindel, the author Beatrix Campbell and the organiser of the feminist conference ‘FiLiA’, Lisa-Marie Taylor. These are leading feminist names. Other women look up to them. Some women would be afraid to cross them and many still are.

In August 2025 a second attempt at a similar mass silencing campaign on the same issues was attempted. Under the banner ‘Not In Our Name’ a letter was sent to the Prime Minister signed by “more than 100 women’s rights groups” which called for “urgent action against the weaponisation of violence against women and girls by far-right groups and mainstream politicians to further a racist, anti-migrant agenda”.

Spearheaded by leading feminist organisations End Violence Against Women Coalition, Southall Black Sisters, Women for Refugee Women and Hibiscus, it was also signed “in solidarity” by 98 other groups unspecified.

Andrea Simon of EVAW said,

“The far-right has long exploited the cause of ending violence against women and girls to promote a racist, white supremacist agenda. These attacks against migrant and racialised communities are appalling and do nothing to improve women and girls’ autonomy, rights and freedoms. What’s more, they ignore the reality that most violence against women and girls is perpetrated by someone known to them.”

This is the sort of rhetoric women face for pointing to actual examples of violent crime committed by illegal migrants against women and girls of the UK. The goalposts are shifted to suggest that those objecting are harming “communities” and victimising women and girls in those communities, rather than wanting to minimise the safety risk of individual men to all women and who should not be in the UK at all. Women with legitimate concerns are designated “far-right” and their concerns dismissed as “lies”.

This infuriating letter accused women of exploiting other women, rather than acknowledging that they simply don’t want any women harmed by men, including those who will inevitably be harmed by illegal migrant men arriving into the UK in vast numbers,

“the issue is being hijacked by people seeking to use women and girls’ pain and trauma – and the threat of it – for political gain”.

It is not “hijacking” an issue to raise it. Discussing what happened to Rhiannon Whyte is essential to address the ongoing failures of government immigration policy which, without question, led to her death. Any “feminist” objecting to women trying to keep other women safe is nothing of the sort.

It is impossible to find the full list of signatories to ‘Not in Our Name’ and I wonder if any of them will now openly admit that they were wrong, since they clearly did not have pride in signing. Nor should they as more women and girls suffer horrendous violence at the hands of illegal migrants and in the case of Rhiannon Whyte, lose their life.

Just this week another self-appointed “leading feminist” voice Jane Clare Jones took aim once again at women she feels veered from the feminist political remit she thinks women like herself control,

“We’ve won the lgal battle [sic]. We haven’t won the cultural battle. And from where a lot of them are now. I don’t think they can win, and I don’t think they deserve to win, because they became a hate movement.”

Women addressing the crimes of men like Deng Chol Majek are not a “hate movement” and this jaw-dropping statement by Jones suggests that women who voice objection to crimes such as his do not “deserve” to be free of male violence or succeed in eradicating.

Whenever leading feminist groups and individuals such as these do stoop to discuss illegal migrant men committing violence against women they caveat their comment with a version of “it’s not just these men though and it’s racist to say so”.

No woman I’ve observed discussing migrant crime is saying those crimes are committed solely by these men, they are well aware of similar crimes also committed by native British men as many of them have been victims. The women I see being called “far-right” who are in fact nothing of the sort are saying that these crimes, and their resulting female victims, are avoidable because they are committed by men who shouldn’t be here at all.

The derided phrase “not all men” has been reinvented by some of these feminists in the form of “not all migrant men” to excuse looking away from some of the migrant men committing crime. That is frankly ridiculous and they are AWOL from their feminist duty. Their failure to tackle an issue which should be a priority for feminists can only be driven by fear of being honest about some male perpetrators and I don’t know who these women are afraid of if it is not each other.

They should have been leaders in pointing out that men, who arrive illegally from countries with notoriously appalling state- or culturally-sanctioned attitudes towards women and girls, will pose an incredible safety risk if accommodated undocumented and unmonitored in local communities amongst women and girls.

They should have done this with confidence and without fear but instead they created the fear which prevented other women from speaking out to protect other women. This is the very furthest thing from feminism. If these women say that they are disappointed in the “racism” of some women then those women are in return disappointed by their cowardice in tackling a very real threat to the safety of women and girls.

I salute the women who remain undeterred in the light of smears, accusations and intimidation as they fight for the safety of women and girls.

Andrea Dworkin said,

“I have to ask you to resist, not to comply, to destroy the power men have over women, to refuse to accept it, to abhor it and to do whatever is necessary despite its cost to you to change it”

Some of the women who should lead the resistance have become the resistance to the resistance. The rest of us will not comply.