Do you think the majority are for or against the ruling?

I was interested to see a post on a shared hobby fb group - a TIM posted a photo of himself at a protest about the ruling. He commented that he’s in fear of his future (he’s about 6ft 2 and 18 stone so not sure who he’s scared of). There’s 100s of members in the group and he got 7 likes. I’m taking that as a sign that the rest of them were thinking WTF is he on about.

Cruella Braverman, and her reasoning involves ideas and arguments that wouldn't be outrageous within her party or reform. The win, or rather the clarification, isn't the end. Next comes competition between the coalition behind it wrt interpreting what else should be affected by it. It's never really just been about the specific question in isolation

Who is calling to scrap the equality act?

In the wake of the ruling, calls to scrap the equality act. If you support this ruling, is this the outcome you're looking for?

If it's not, and it happens anyway which is very plausible, price worth paying?

Sorry, yes, of course I meant GC not GQ! I was exceptionally tired yesterday ...

Good point. Dh would have always spoken up but now I’m more confident he won’t get arrested.

The good men who always stayed out will be fine, it will be the creeps that have to hear 'no' and learn the boundaries that should never have been lost. Possibly 'no' for the first time in their spoilt lives.
I hope the good men are prepared to stop other men if they see them headed towards the women's facilities (my partner certainly would speak up).

My work colleagues mentioned it recently. Normal decent men horrified to realise what’s been going on.

The jig is up. Stonewall law is over.

Lots of men will now have a crash course in how it feels to have people say no to them.

I think most people agree with the ruling, and it signals a sea change, but it'll take a while for that to filter through to the majority. TRAs spent over a decade bullying anyone who spoke out into silence. It's going to take a while for the average person to realise they can speak against the TQ cult without being cancelled now.

A year from now, I think we'll be looking at a very different climate. Just look at what happened with Twitter / X / whatever it's called. They were the first platform to stop instantly banning posters who didn't respect preferred pronouns. Now that attitude has spread to most other social media sites. People can like or hate or be indifferent to KJK, but one of the things she has always been dead right on is the power of language. The ability to use "he" when discussing transwomen, or simply say "men" exploded years of artifice. Everything became ten times clearer, and ten times simpler. It was easier to call out injustice, and easier to draw lines in the sand, when women no longer had to play silly semantic word games every time.

Over the next year, I think we'll see a lot more sunlight on detransitioners and on the feminist fight. People who weren't aware of the issue will become aware, and some of the anger gender critical people have felt for years will finally start to trickle out to the mainstream. Hopefully, we'll start seeing some of the worst offending organisations have their feet held to the fire, the way the Tavistock did.

We'll know it's over when people like JK Rowling start being allowed back into the mainstream as beloved figures, and even young people aren't ashamed to call themselves fans. A lot of millennial women have had children and gone full TERF already, but I think Gen Z and Gen Alpha are also getting bored of gender ideology. It's hovering on the precipice of cringe for them. It won't take much to tip it over. Trans just isn't cool anymore. It gained ground during the oppression olympics era of woke, but I think the zeitgeist will shift and being the biggest victim will lose cultural cachet soon.

Once gender ideology becomes the target of mainstream comedy, with the jokes being built around the understanding that everyone thinks this shit is ridiculous, then the last of the virtue-signallers will go quiet and mumbly about it, and the die-hards will be the only ones left.

This thing has been creaking for a while, and it's starting to fall over. I think the final collapse will happen quicker than anyone imagines.

What is GQ? Did you mean to write GC, or is GQ something?

Thank you for this question OP, I think it is genuinely interesting.

I have no idea, it is so hard to judge. I don't spend any time on X or Reddit and I'm no longer faithful to any news source in "print" or on TV, but I do see reels on FB and Instagram and of course I'm here on Mumsnet.

I'm quite hardline GQ and of course I want to believe that the majority is like me, GQ but not a raving right-wing loon like Laurence Fox, but I have no idea. Literally none, it's so hard to tell.

In my real life I'm friends for 30+ years with a well-known GQ campaigner, the fundamentals of our friendship carry on. We were friends when it was straightforward feminist marches that we went on!

But I barely discuss the issue with other people except my gay friends, both male and female, and they all share my GQ views and can't see the T+ link with them and their lives.

I have a very small number of FB friends (80ish) and 4 of them have children who claim to be transgender - all in their early 20s. It's quite baffling. And also means I keep my mouth shut a lot of the time for fear of alienating people I love.

This is pseudo kindness though - sometimes you have to be cruel, to be kind. As with not confirming that anorexics are fat and can continue starving themselves.

I agree. Once we start thinking about whether something is really kind or just surface collusion, then being genuinely kind/firm/honest actually becomes the more difficult option.

This is pseudo kindness though - sometimes you have to be cruel, to be kind. As with not confirming that anorexics are fat and can continue starving themselves.

Cruel here is really the wrong word - being firm and not putting up with deluded nonsense.

But now that the tide is definitely turning, how many men currently saying they are women will quietly drop the idea and just get on with life?

Not true for left wing women, who generally become more left wing. Becoming more conservative seems to apply to men but has, like so many other things, been presented as a default. I don't think pp's views are conservative at all.

One thing I've been thinking about today is how many of us grew up with George in the Famous Five and Jo in Malory Towers, and how both of these 'non conforming' girls have been recast as non-binary (along with famous women like Joan of Arc), and how easily people across generations accepted that without really questioning WHY they were perpetuating the idea that 'non conforming' girls were the ones who weren't really girls. Imo it's a good example of both the stereotypes a small c conservative society still holds on to, and how the 'queer left' reinforces it, as the ones who are doing the transing. A manifestation of the famous left-right pincer movement that traps women and girls.

When you ask the 'difficult' questions I think most people are for the ruling. They don't want men in women's sports, prisons, hospitals etc.

BUT

People do still want to think of themselves as 'kind'. And for some reason that I can't fathom, 'kind' in the context has become 'allowing transwomen in to women's spaces'.

So what they actually want is not to be asked the hard questions, to be able to say 'I think we should be kind and inclusive' and not face up to what this means.

Which I find utterly infuriating.

They do say you become more conservative as you get older, now I know why. It's called wisdom.

PS: I'm not talking about political parties.

Absolute for in my experience with a feeling of deep, unmitigated annoyance and frustration that (a) this ruling was needed and (b) it took so long and (c) the repellent attacks and abuse of women.

Furthermore there is an overwhelming feeling of contempt and disdain for all those MPs, Public Bodies and Businesses who played along with this dangerous ideology and hand waved away the impact on women and girls.

If there are attempts to push back or indeed alter legislation to reverse this decision there will be widespread opposition.

Is it genuinely a generation thing or is it more due to experience.

I was very flexible & inclusive & care free in my 20's but having experienced Sexual assault, rape (in a healthcare setting) and DV & now a mother of a DD im now alot more wary & cautious and am a strong advocate for single sex provision for women.

It's a more a case of young people not being aware of the risk or their own vulnerability than that they are kinder or more flexible.

The two separate nurses' cases will now be slam dunks on terms of confirming those women should never have been put in that position in the first place. There will be the additional issues to clear up around it but the core one is sorted. The interesting one will be Sarah Summers, which will benefit from clarity that a women's service cannot be mixed sex, but will also press that having lots of accessible options to match gender identities but nothing for women needing single sex provision is discrimination against women. That should have a firm impact on LA funding bids and commissioning.

More people will become interested as the court cases are still progressing and there are cost implications.
The Scotland case for single sex loos in schools has won. In the Times:
"A judge has ordered that Scottish schools must provide single-sex lavatories for pupils after parents won a legal fight against a council which insisted on installing only gender-neutral facilities."

Lies always unravel!

We don’t need to be scared any more. Now is the time to be counted before the lunacy takes over again.

Well, there certainly were quite a few against the ruling, but actually there were a fair few pro it.

I was particularly infuriated by one poster, who was (repeatedly) posting this section from para 217 ' A trans woman with a GRC who presents fully as a woman may feel she is more likely to prompt objections from other users if she enters the men’s changing room or other facilities than if she uses the women’s changing room or facilities. But in facing that dilemma she is in the same position as a trans woman without a GRC. Although such trans women may in practice choose to use female-only facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the privacy and dignity of the other women users,....'

He? was posting it as if, firstly, this was part of the ratio of the judgement rather than part of the explanation (i.e. he was posting it as if this is what the judges were saying someone should do, rather than (as they actually were saying) people did do it. And secondly, he missed off the very important few words at the end of the paragraph
.....

'.......the Scottish Ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is legally entitled to do so. '

I.e. everyone on both sides of the argument did not think that (the use of female facilities by a legal male) was the correct legal posistion!

I'd say the majority are for it,but are too scared to say so,for obvious reasons.

Yes, its based on total misunderstanding and ignorance. People have been encouraged to swallow the ideology whole, without ananlysis or question.
A total lack of critical thinking and coherence...as the Supreme Court judges discovered.

Gahh!! Thanks @Peregrina - total typo (or wishful thinking) on my part.

Now I think of it, do any men do those things in men’s toilets? Or is it just the women’s they like to inflict themselves on?