At first I cheered, then I got angry at the years of bullying and misinformation women have been subjected to

I was surprised when I went back to Facebook, I think the self righteous man nearly died of shock I'd replied so comprehensively, all the others went quiet, and a very few women quietly liked my post. For Facebook that's a triumph.

I agree, it's not possible to have a sensible discussion. I sent a WhatsApp to a friend about the ruling and said what a relief it was and I could tell by her reaction that she wasn't that impressed. She said she was able to see both sides of the story. There's no discussing it with some people. I don't understand how I can see the enormous dangers of not standing up for women's rights in this instance and how it literally doesn't bother a lot of people at all (strangely, mostly women in my experience) and they think 1. you are making a big deal about nothing or 2. you are a complete fascist nazi akin to Hitler, completely devoid of compassion and they want to step slowly away from you in case it's contagious.

I feel the same, at first pleased, then pissed off that it's taken so long to get this, and that we've had to go through all these years of nonsense.

I feel the same. I've always kept my Facebook free of this and kept it for puppies and kittens. But something snapped this morning when I was reading one of the holier than thou 'I stand with my trans friends' post from some pillock I used to work with.

I have had the same, with a friend, who I wouldn't have called an idiot. I have sent her a private email though to say that I don't agree - that in fact the Supreme Court has clarified the issue and protected the rights of Trans people.

What trans people have lost is those rights that they were stealing from women ( or indeed disabled people if using disabled loos.)

I await the fall out. I feel sad, but it's still not possible to have a sensible discussion.

"All those cowards who threw Graham Linehan under a bus should be ashamed. I'm so grateful to him and Helen Joyce and JK Rowling and Jordan Peterson and everyone else who has not been afraid to speak the truth"

Absolutely this.

@Mollyollydolly I barely use SM any more, but I follow an Aurora Borealis group on FB. Top of my feed last night was Billy Bragg and his 'I'm a Trans Ally' crap. I don't like the bloke, I don't follow the bloke, yet there it was at the top of my feed. I've blocked him now, but I just thought How Dare You. How Fucking Dare You. You haven't got a fucking clue how this has been impacting women and girls.

ETA He just doesn't give a shit about women and girls.

I feel the same. I've always kept my Facebook free of this and kept it for puppies and kittens. But something snapped this morning when I was reading one of the holier than thou 'I stand with my trans friends' post from some pillock I used to work with. I gave it him with both barrels, not dared to go back and look at the fall out. I'm so angry that an amazing win for amazing women is STILL all about the blokes. I can understand why women become 'political' lesbians men piss me right off. And I know, not all men, but so many liberal leftie ones are just the bloody worst.

Well put. You shouldn't have to bite your tongue of course, but I can totally picture this scenario, especially in certain work sectors.

And the bloody monitors who prowl around, never posting, and report anything they don't like. We had a post zapped on the Bluestocking thread the other day - you know, mostly easy-listening, and sometimes hilarious, and sometimes informative or supportive chit-chat amongst a bunch of GC women (anyone female is welcome to rock up to the bar). Someone posted something which I read as innocuous and ZAP, someone with nothing better to do than listen in on the Wims less we type out our wrongthink had reported it, and it vanished in a puff of pixels.

<waves to the monitors> We're going nowhere. We'll keep on expressing our wrong-thinky opinions.

That's what I came onto mumsnet today to see. Where are the apologies?? I'm so incensed by what's gone on these past few years. I recently (about 6 months ago) had a conversation with a friend about the whole trans thing when we were sitting in a cafe and we had to actually whisper our thoughts about it! We acknowledged how crazy it was that we couldn't discuss the impact on women's rights without being considered 'anti-trans'.
So many brave people have spoken out and stood up for women and even lost their livelihoods and reputations in the process. Where are the apologies for all these people and why is it not in all the newspapers on the front page! A little mention yesterday is all the ruling got. All those cowards who threw Graham Linehan under a bus should be ashamed. I'm so grateful to him and Helen Joyce and JK Rowling and Jordan Peterson and everyone else who has not been afraid to speak the truth. And I'm glad I never stood down and agreed with a false rhetoric even though I've lost friends in the process.

The posters on here who tried to stop any change or discussion were bad.

So many worked against women on this.

Yup.

There was a guy on Jeremy Vine's radio 2 show the other day who rang to express his concern about 'where he goes now when he's desperate to pee' Apparently he was concerned that if he wasn't wearing his skirt and wig on a particular day, he wouldn't be allowed in the women's toilets any more.

He argued that we now need a legal definition of the words 'Lady' and 'Female' cos obviously they are 'different' to the word Woman, and not in any way classified as similar nouns within the dictionary

Tiresome, gaslighting and desperate. As per.

Could you ask what rights transwomen have lost by this ruling? For transmen some rights have been confirmed.

As far as I can see the only "rights" that transwomen lost were ones that they were stealing anyway.

Good point. Let's reclaim the English language, word by word.

I'm definitely going to wait and see what happens and then take it up with my employer anonymously (very captured and I can't afford to 'out' myself). I'm minded to send the EDI team the guidance that Sex Matters produced for employers about the hostile environment.

The other thing that I'm noticing and hope that this will change as part of the fall out from the case, all official communications are referring to 'trans women'. For clarity, they really need to revert to 'transwomen' (without the space) - especially in company policies and so on.

Thanks for the link @TwoLoonsAndASprout it’s hard to keep up with all the threads right now!

And why am I not surprised. Surely the employer should be communicating factually with staff, not emotionally creating a false narrative and whipping up fear through these “we all love you” type messages, especially when they ought to know that many people will only have seen headlines and such, and not really understand the judgment.

I wonder if this will make any difference to the behaviour of the police and the TRAs at LWS events?
Currently the TRAs are allowed and enabled to threaten, drown out and intimidate women in ways that in any other circumstance/location or by any other group would surely lead to arrest for public order offences.

Very nicely put.

Also kudos for getting to paragraph 223. I need a clear few days ahead of me before I dive in, I think!

I have now progressed to paragraph 223.
It seems to me that the judgement is very clear in what circumstances single sex provision is necessary in terms of the EA 2010 to avoid discrimination direct and indirect. It does not seem to me that ‘single gender’ wards would meet this, unless the BBC person is using gender to mean sex, which continues to confuse matters. The judgement deals with the conflation of gender and sex early on and is clear that the EA means biological sex.
(I know posters on here know this)

It’s fine to still be there for the LGBTQIA community. I have no objection to this (although this community has people with diverse views, they are not homogeneous but that is another issue). However, I do object to the quite frankly abusive suggestion that the law and women’s objections should be disregarded so that one small section of that community can enter women’s single-sex spaces. And I know there are some women who say they do not mind this, but even if only one woman did not consent, that should be enough. The people who want to ride roughshod over this need to take a hard look at what they are saying.

I heard this too and could not believe my bloody ears. We’ve only just had the judgement and the BBC are asking if the NHS if they’re going to have ‘single gender wards’. Like ‘how are you going to get around this to help the poor disadvantaged trans people?’ No consideration for the dignity of vulnerable women.

We get an unequivocal judgement like this and people still want to tear down our protections. It’s hard to be jubilant when the rhetoric around it coming from supposedly reputable agencies is so bloody depressing. And frankly, baffling. We are talking about pandering to delusional thinking over human reality.

What puzzles me is folk coming on the news saying the new ruling is unclear. How is it unclear. They mean I suppose it isn't the ruling they want or thought they would get.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5317262-what-my-nhs-trust-have-said-about-the-supreme-court-verdict

It seems not: apparently NHS trusts have been writing to their employees saying (effectively - I am paraphrasing) we know this will be a very difficult time for our LGBTQIA+++ community, but know we still love you and are behind you and if you need support please reach out to HR/LGBTQIA+++ support team.

Nothing about oops, sorry women for getting the law wrong all this time.

I am also wondering how HR and DEI departments will react, especially those that in effect have sanctioned self ID thus rendering facilities that should be single sex into do whatever you like gender speak, and no stuffs given for women.And have been stonewalled or similar.

Maybe, just maybe, when they see clear as day that they have been on the wrong side of the law, they could as a minimum acknowledge that they too interpreted the law wrong, were poorly advised, didn’t listen to concerns or even consult, and apologise to ALL employees. They could also state clearly similar words that the judge used, so confirming that trans people are protected under the gender realignment clause, as well as being protected under the sex category. And in simple terms what that means in the context of a trans employee.

Dennis Kavanagh (Barrister on twitter & director of The Gay Man's Network) posted this which I think sums up things perfectly:
https://x.com/Jebadoo2/status/1912861014560768042?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Cut & paste for those not on twitter:
1/ Victory is a difficult thing to trust, and any gender war veteran will be well versed in false dawns, each tribunal often prompts the refrain "surely this will be the last one? surely they'll get it now". But the Supreme Court is different. This is the beginning of the end.
2/ Gender falls in 3 stages. The flight of the cowards. The howl of the zealots. The prosecution of the monsters. The cowards have flown. The zealots have howled. We're firmly in stage 3 in the UK and the reckoning for the mutilators Douglas Murray spoke about now beckons.
3/ Political Transvestitism is now in a state of complete collapse. It sought to reconfigure society by stealth and it sought nothing less that the existential elimination of the concept of "woman" and "homosexual" in law. It still seeks the chemical castration of children
4/ This is the next frontier and the one that merits our attention. The Government intend to conduct a live experiment on a cohort of mainly autistic, mainly likely to grow up gay children because lunatics have been given the keys to the hospital. This must be challenged.
5/ This is no time to walk away or give in to the perfectly understandable impulse to retire from this exhausting, stressful war of ideas. In 15 years time or so there could be a generation of sterile, mutilated children who were regarded as collateral damage to bad ideas
6/ The Supreme Court didn't so much end the gender wars and it reasserted the much missed enlightenment. Facts matter more than feelings. Evidence matters. Basic rights matter and puberty is a human right. Children cannot form pressure groups or exercise political influence
7/ So it's on us. Yesterday For Women Scotland and the interveners saved the gay right to associations. They saved the definition of homosexual. These are significant rights, but we must now turn to the gay right to grow up free from medical correction.

I like this although I think it's a bit optimistic: For while this noisy orgy of self-pity might doll itself up as a cry for civil rights, in truth it’s the death rattle of trans activism’s neo-misogyny.

Isn't the anger at something that is just rational and factual actually the final proof that trans women aren't women? Imagine if we all got this angry at every little bit of misogny we experienced everyday?!