Stonewall, attempt 75219 to criminalise women for resisting them

Plus "the discussion or criticism of gender reassignment".

The discussion???

That is actually spinechilling.

All those women in the Wi Spa who objected to a predatory male sex offender getting in the jacuzzi next to a child? They’d be the criminal ones in the GIRES utopia.

Girls who object out loud to sharing a toilet with boys who are throwing sanitary pads around and pissing in the waste disposal bins?

Criminals.

Parents who think their child needs mental health treatment more than cross-sex hormones?

Criminals.

Thank fuck it didn’t work. I had no idea this was happening or that the stakes were so high.

So, they want women who DISCUSS single sex spaces are to be afforded no legal protection?

Isn’t it lovely when someone makes your case for you.
GIRES
Thank you for illustrating the point so beautifully

I love that GIRES wrote a load of utter bollocks, and the Law Commission used that bollocks as an example of the problem here...

“We do not agree with GIRES that such discussion necessarily amounts to ‘vilification’ or ‘dehumanises’ trans people, still less that it encourages others to do so. Indeed, we think that characterising it as GIRES does demonstrates the risk that without explicit protection, such discourse – which has been recognised as protected speech – risks being perceived, reported, and potentially investigated as hate speech.”

👏 Thanks GIRES, that was beautiful.

Pmk, thank you

Yet another attempt to shoehorn gender identity ideology into law.

How can we fight misogyny when the most misogynistic thing of all is removing our right to name ourselves as a separate sex class to men.

The commission said its recommendations would not criminalise "offensive" comments, or the telling of sexist jokes."What we are referring to is threatening or abusive material which incites and glorifies violence, including sexual violence, against women and girls, and praises men who murder women

Like the thousands of rape and death threats sent to JKR and other women by TRA's? Or all the kill a terf posters at pride?

And where does Nancy draw the line at what we can say about trans ideology?
Why must we be legally compelled to pretend humans can change sex in case it hurts feelings? Absurd.

The Law Commission highlighted that the rulings in Miller and Forstater have now made it clear that the expression of “gender critical” views is protected under human rights laws.

Excellent

GIRES told the law commission

We think it would be harmful to afford legal protection to people who engage in…‘the discussion or criticism of gender reassignment; treatment for gender dysphoria; provision of and access to single-sex facilities and activities’

I bet they did.

That's the shark well and truly jumped, right there.

The Commission noted that:

“It is not hard to imagine that without such protection, activists would seek to test the limits of the extended offence.“

Cards have been marked.

This sounds more promising.
The Law Commission highlighted that the rulings in Miller and Forstater have now made it clear that the expression of “gender critical” views is protected under human rights laws. The issue, therefore, is not whether such expression should be protected, it is whether the stirring-up offences would require a provision to make clear it is protected.”

It concluded that it would.

Sex Matters reports a more positive take than I'd suspected from the reporting.

sex-matters.org/posts/the-legal-system/law-commission-recommends-protection-for-gender-critical-views-from-chilling-effect/

I don't want the safety to express GC perspectives to be contingent on the detail being passed.

This is what some of us (who think hate crime needs scrapping entirely) were saying. As soon a misogyny becomes a hate crime, it will be used against women, rather than for us.