Trevor Philips in the Times

This is an article from last year that covers a number of issues including gender, and references a training course that he mentions in a recent Telegraph (or Spectator?) podcast on the SC ruling that’s been linked to on here recently.

https://archive.is/7o8zJ

Original (paywalled)

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/right-to-offend-is-essential-to-being-british-nw360lj9g

Completely agree. With regard to race relations/political correctness he was such a key figure and voice. He showed great courage in admitting years down the line that in some areas the movement had gone too far and to the detriment of the white working class. I admired him for his humility to hold his hands up. Politicians please read.

I think he has said things before. I take notice when he says things. He's not said much, but I do think he's spoken in favour of single sex provision but I can't remember what.

I don’t recall him saying much of this before the SC ruling (I’m happy to be corrected if he did make statements).

If he felt so strongly, why’d he wait so long? Why didn’t he push back against ‘Stonewall Law?’

It's worth stressing that Philips has previously talked about racism and how drives to be more inclusive have actively been classist and particularly adversely affected white working class boys. His comment was that this was particularly true of the media and has been a contributing factor in a lack of understanding of the Brexit vote and a rising mistrust in the media and various public institutions. It's an observation that is also reflected in the grooming gangs debate (another subject that just won't die and is fuelling Reform).

Philips intervention is a significant one from this respect too. Hes labour. He's respected. (I've heard comment that Starmer needs Blair to do a speech before he can commit to a position - Phillips is probably the next best thing).

He is likely to be listened to by many moderates within Labour.

Don't underestimate this article.

Archive of Massie’s Bag Ladies article above

archive.ph/DH72K

Same.

Women have uncovered the originators of the deception, including Stephen Whittle, who has practically admitted it.

Deliberating force teaming with gay rights, strategic litigation, aiming for things like prisons, because 'everything else will fall into place', feverishly implementing no debate, because otherwise people 'won't accept it.'

And all on behalf of men pissing up statues in London and sending women death threats.

The Times, Telegraph and Mail have all been at the vanguard of reporting about this. If any of them ever read these threads look up Dentons. Because as yet, the cat isn't even out of the bag.

I agree. I used to like her until I read about her PIE support. How anyone who supported them could ever work in politics again is beyond me.

They didn't even try and hide the fact they were/are paedophiles. How on earth can any decent person support that FFS !!!!

Sadly you are 100% right. How she has maintained her senior positions I don’t know - obviously there’s political capital in throwing women and children under the bus. She’s a nasty piece of work.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I recall that Harriet Harman also supported PIE back in the day so she definitely has form for working against women and children.

They haven't finished yet. The Telegraph reports WhatsApp messages between leading Labour politicians threatening to amend the provisions about trans people with Parliamentary legislation.

I did laugh as the Latin did make me stop half way through a balanced and excellent article to parse it and correct it in my head.

I think his White Queen analogy was superb.

But there was no need to be.
I agree that that was the thinking at the time of the GRA about people getting GRCs, even though that statute removed the medical and surgical requirements. But the EA PC doesn't just cover people with GRCs, it's for people who think they have a transgender identity.
How do you prove that someone is thinking about taking steps to change their gender? And what are the steps? Earrings? Doc Martens? Mastectomy? It's very nebulous. I think the problem of the woolliness of the concept of GR as a PC should have been clear even at the time.

Edited for clarity

Another good article. And worth pointing out I think, that same sex marriage wasn’t legal until 2013. Had the marriage act come before the EA, I wonder what the protection for gender reassignment would have looked like?

Great article! I find it so disappointing the Guardian cannot get these articles commissioned. The Times have been so far ahead

And Melanie Fields. Liars, both.

An excellent article thank you for sharing. This is the key paragraph for me:
For the first time in the world, the 2010 act made gender reassignment ground for discrimination in a similar fashion to race and sex. Had anyone believed that “trans women are women” there would have been no need for such a provision.

So apparently Harriet Harman has been claiming that the EA always intended that ‘TWAW’ but this makes it clear that she’s a liar. A liar actively working against the interests of women. Again. I have thoughts about women like her.

Yes, this.

We know now that the definitions in the GRA (& therefore the GR protections in the EqA) were loose and capable of exploitation. Whether it will ever be possible, against the tide of public opinion, to tighten them up I think is unlikely. But in any case, I think it is good to be able to protect people from discrimination on the grounds of being trans. Just as it is good to protect against sex discrimination, and to know that those protections have not been eroded by casual redefinition of basic vocabulary.

Gender reassignment would have been considered verifiable at the time. No one imagined Pippa Bunce. They were thinking of people who were under the care of doctors and having treatment.

A very good article thanks for the share token!

@Igneococcus thank you for sharing.
I wonder how many people will feel they have been deceived by activists and allies as he does. It might spur them to speak out once they have thought about it for a wee while.

Archive of this excellent and compelling piece by someone at the heart of it.

archive.ph/vyqjy

I was struck by this too.