Good Law Practice launch a EHCR/Supreme Court challenge over toilets

Just another TA who is crazy. Funny how they don’t give a shit that women are stressed when they see men in the loo or in our prisons or our DV shelters or our sports. Some women are even triggered when they see men in our private spaces because they are survivors of SA, rape and DV, but who gives a shit about how women feel.

This is the most insane group of people. They have no sense of reality or other people’s rights. All they care about is society (specifically women) validating their mental illness. Get these nuts out of our private spaces.

From the article: Little of this is complicated, yet the Scottish government and public bodies such as the Scottish Prison Service continue to behave as though the law were a mystery wrapped in a conundrum inside a quandary.

It's well put.

The last dot needs to be joined however, which is to note the misogyny. The absolute lack of value for women. The absolute unwillingness to meet women's legal protections and equalities.

They can whine about the needs of men endlessly: they are not capable of even mentioning care and concern like that for women and the many issues of the mixed sex provision they enforced. Never mind to treat women with equality.

This is the truly shameful part and it needs pointing out in capital letters everywhere. The still incredibly male dominated establishment of the UK has a very serious women problem. This mess would not have been able to take hold as it has if it was not for an establishment that has run to embrace anti-women policy and sentiment.

Also a comment in the Times Scotland section about this:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/9389b380-9703-47e0-a5db-00c8e9296a1d?shareToken=c7804081644be2e433f41c8d812e5410

The Church of Scotland flouting the law, saying
"The church has claimed that its trans-inclusive stance was based on the advice of “legal experts” such as the activist group Stonewall and the Good Law Project run by the barrister Jolyon Maugham, which is seeking to overturn the Supreme Court ruling."
https://www.thetimes.com/article/1d70a6ee-2ff1-4421-9f73-a7b57009c47c?shareToken=fee6e302747d422dce976601b36c9f60

X thread
Just bumping this thread to update on what appears to be some fairly opaque GoFundMe shenanigans between the GLP and Queen of UK Feminism Patsy Stevenson

And then they gave her a pay rise because obviously if people are genuinely assuming she is male she gets all the privilege too?

I saw this happen in real time in a meeting. A self-described butch lesbian had emailed a colleague to say she was anxious about the possibility of being challenged in an airport bathroom after all she’d heard about the SC ruling and the outbreak of this in the UK. (Travelling from overseas to UK. )

Within seconds other people were apologising for the assault (that hadn’t happened) and asking if she had reported it. After that we had denunciations of JKR, the British public, the UK legal system and the usual canards about the Stonewall origin story.

I was an observer with no microphone access nor access to the chat. Probably just as well. I’d probably have been denounced and shredded before mass reporting.

Yeah the butch lesbians bit, funny that. The thought's been going through my head a lot lately, as said by @OldCrone ; just not believing in this whole phenomenon of 'trans kids', as promoted by the likes of David Tennant. I don't know which is worse; that it sets unhappy youngsters on a path that can lead to butchering their own bodies before they have full awareness, or that it legitimises, and also create a pipe-line for a cohort of middle-aged men. So I would love to see more people coming out and saying publicly, "I don't believe in trans kids".

Women and their needs and feelings are only ever of the faintest interest to this movement when it is useful to the agenda of the men.

Well, specifically butch lesbians in their droves suddenly, coincidentally, being mistaken for men.

Nobody seems to gaf that lesbians now have had their rights to lesbian only groups clarified in law.

Not really sure what thread this should live on, but good to know that Zoe will be able to use the 'right' loos and reside in a women's prison if GLP are successful

Former PCSO tried to build a gun using 3D printer (telegraph.co.uk)

Frustratingly it only took 6% of people voting Green (not a named candidate) to get Maggie Chapman. I hope more people now realise Greens aren’t in it for the environment.

Next year are the Scottish elections. They have proportional representation which is how Maggie Chapman got her seat…. Reform may have a chance of more seats there than Westminster if people choose them as a protest vote.

Don’t forget the suffering of butch lesbians which has suddenly become a grave concern

Let's say there's a reasonable chance of a Reform government after the next election. From listening to people in Reform I'd say there are two schools of thought on the Equality Act, "let's review it to see if we can make it more sensible" and "let's scrap it altogether".

I'd prefer the former. These muppets are making it more likely we get the latter.

It is front and centre. They really don't believe equalities and inclusion and 'rights' and 'human rights' mean anything other than trans identified men. (And trans identified women a bit. Sometimes. If it's useful to the men to mention them)

They really don't see the point or need for anyone else's rights, they have no respect for anyone else's rights, they don't want equality, they want to be the single and only focus and feel quite entitled and justified in this.

This is what you get when you repeatedly pander for years. They've been indulged all down the line because it was 'kind'.

I see he's bigging up the groomers' journal aka Teen Vogue.

Baroness Falkner had to point out that there were actually 9 protected characteristics that needed to be accommodated several times in the shit show the other day.

A body set up to protect trans rights

That just proves that JM thinks that the only rights are trans rights, no-one else has any or should expect any.

The man has completely lost it.

I agree. I only use the term 'transsexual' for children, because the TRAs hate it being pointed out that their movement is sexualising children and damaging their sexual development.

I think it's particularly important to stress this when talking to 'respectable' TRAs such as MPs (like those on the WEC).

I also think it's useful to (sort of) use their terminology when talking to them, but stress something which they are keen to brush under the carpet.

So when writing to my MP, for example, I might say something about how I believe transsexualism is for adults, and ask them why they believe that children can be transsexual. Using the term 'trans' or 'transgender' won't have the same effect. 'Transsexual' conjures up a completely different picture from the other terms.

I don't see how you could ask this question of an MP without using the term 'trans' at all. My preference in such a situation is to use 'transsexual'. How would you phrase this question to your MP (or someone else if your MP is one of the sensible ones who doesn't believe that children can 'be trans')?

Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere or, indeed, if there is a another thread more suited:

Scottish schools to create single-sex toilets after gender row - BBC News

Any reference to children as ‘trans’ anything embeds the idea that trans is a legitimate physical state in need of some sort of treatment. They are not ‘trans’, ‘transgender’ or ‘transsexual’, they are children who have been groomed to believe something about themselves.

I was a bit puzzled by this post in the middle of the night when I replied to it. I couldn't see how you could have misunderstood a simple statement so completely.

Reading it again, without the context of my earlier post I think I can see why you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not using the term 'transsexual' as a synonym for 'trans' or 'transgender', but with a completely different meaning.

You need this context from my earlier post:
I'm sure if we started talking about "child transsexuals" rather than "trans kids" a lot more people would be asking questions about what's going on.

I am saying that the terms 'trans kids' or 'transgender kids', like 'child prostitutes', are inaccurate terms to describe what is going on. 'Transsexual children' is telling it like it is while 'trans(gender) children' is a euphemism.

These children are being given unnecessary medication to make them resemble the opposite sex, or at least arrest their sexual development. It also brings back into view the sexual element of the trans movement which the trans movement wants to hide, particularly in relation to children.

As I said in an earlier post, try talking to some TRAs about 'transsexual children' rather than 'trans/transgender children' and see what sort of response you get (please post here what they say).

Oops missed the link to his bluesky post