Houses of Parliament refuses to ban trans women from female lavatories

We've done several and we have reviewed several. Women don't care and the majority will not be actively supportive of creating female only spaces that exclude trans people.

So, you based your strategy and your focus from looking at groups that are known to be more trans supportive and you then make broad population claims?

Upton didn't transition until 2022. What he didn't want is for his face and name to be all over the papers so literally anyone in the world could find them and know they are a trans person. People at work knew. It wasn't a secret in that sense.

Not a criticism of the OP, especially as the reference is rightly to 'trans women' rather than 'trans people', but I wonder if we need to stop using the language that's used throughout the media on this issue? Ie 'banning'.
Should we be centering women rather than centering trans identified males? So instead of talking about 'banning trans women' we say something like 'refuses to provide single sex toilets for women'.
It makes it clearer what the issue is, especially perhaps for lurkers who may not be quite clear that a trans woman is male.

So did you or didn't you do a professionally outsourced survey?

AND I am going to link up some poor methodological research from 2016 to prove my point. While claiming that my organisation dismissed female people's concerns because of research findings like I posted. While claiming my organisation is up to date and caring about female people's needs.

We decdie what to do based on literature reviews of research you know like proper academics? So we don't do A survey. We look what research there is and may conduct more. Sometimes we see what the people present think as not everyone feels exactly the same way.

At the anonymity hearing, Dr Upton said that they would be “outed” as trans if publicly identified with the case,

Upton applied to be anonymous in the Sandie Peggie hearing as he didn't want to be outed as trans. Not sure why he wanted to do that if he was openly trans

No we didn't focus on younger women, the data showed that overall, younger women are more likely to support Trans RRights.we look for trends. Young white women were most likely to be supportive and active politically in support of trans people.

"i conducted a 'survey' using a methodology I'm not going to tell you and isn't possibly biased in anyway. I'm going to ignore surveys done by yougov and other professional pollsters which might contradict my superior powers of talking bollocks on the internet".

Where is that research published please?

And you focused on younger women? Why on earth did you do that? Because older women don't count?

We used a range of research,surveying women in a range of ways. On the whole they didn't care, especially younger women. They won't be having anything to do with this kind of campaign.

Is he? His GMC record says female and he tells people he's female and he certainly doesn't inform his patients that he's trans

Kemi works in parliament.

Your comment doesn't answer the significant methodological issues with the paper, and neither does it explain why you posted it as being convincing of:

You see most of our research showed that the women of the general public do not fear mixed sex toilets and don't mind transwomen using them. So that's why we concluded that the whole toilet thing really wasn't going to change any minds.

If this is the quality of your 'research' that you and your organisation make policy and strategy decisions on, I think that it shows you use poor quality research.

Upton is biologically female. Upton said so under oath in court.

So you can't be arsed to check anything.

Well that speaks volumes.

Upton is openly trans.

I wonder if any MP or other worker in the HOC will challenge this.

I fear no one will. What do you think?

Are you saying that everyone knew Upton was trans? How could they tell?

Which is why so many places have listened to it and said "yeah we won't be doing that".

Ok. Whose going back to look at that?

No because everyone knew the doctor is trans. Thats why it is irrelevant

That situation is totally irrelevant to what I'm saying. If you cant see why, its exactly what I mean by talking about things you don't actually understand.

That situation is almost perfectly relevant, and it’s you that apparently has no understanding of the law and that case in particular.

I refer to previous my post at 17:58.