There seem to be two responses to this case from the TRA: the first is to deny it’s even real, thereby admitting its absurdity and how awful it is. The second is to trot out something along the lines of ‘nobody should police somebody else’s gender expression’. So opening the gates to the defence of fetishists who are non consensually involving others in their fetish. In any case, dress codes - I school, work, public places are the norm. I might feel more womanly doing my weekly shop in the supermarket topless but I doubt I’d get to do it a second time!

And we all know if this was a woman with large breasts and protruding nipples she’d be sexually harassed from the moment she stepped out the house. For the purposes of sexual harassment and policing dress, everybody is aware that this is not a woman. Also if this was a woman teacher, the boys would be making mooing sounds every time they saw her.

If you’ve end up writing laws where you can’t lawfully act somebody essentially sexually abusing minors (because that is what unwilling participation in a fetish is) then you’ve messed up. Schoolchildren can’t just walk out. If this man was a barista at Starbucks and I didn’t want to be part of his sex games, I could just go to another coffee shop. The pupils and fellow teachers are a captive audience who will be in trouble if they speak out and can’t just decide to avoid him.