Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Behind the ruling: how ‘Sex Matters’ is shaping UK policy on trans rights

168 replies

BeeSouriante · 27/06/2025 00:39

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/news/home-affairs/behind-the-ruling-how-sex-matters-is-shaping-uk-policy-on-trans-rights/

Sadly this is the first article in the UK media that has recognised the connections between the gender critical ideology movement (GCIM) and religious right orgs (mostly Heritage and the ADF), despite it being recognised and acknowledged by orgs and media in Europe and the US.

"The organisation’s true agenda is, I believe, best described as ‘eliminationist’: seeking through legislative bans, data policies, and the curtailing of gender-affirming care to relegate trans people in life and law to their sex at birth and make transitioning so difficult, dangerous or pointless as to functionally eliminate trans people from public life and society"

Spending time on this forum, it's quite clear that many people in the GCIM are eliminationist in their aims (just a glance at the 'do you support transitioning' thread is very eye-opening in this respect).

Behind the ruling: how ‘Sex Matters’ is shaping UK policy on trans rights

The UK Supreme Court ruling redefined ‘sex’ – but for trans people, it’s the start of something far more sweeping and exclusionary

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/news/home-affairs/behind-the-ruling-how-sex-matters-is-shaping-uk-policy-on-trans-rights/

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Cornishpotato · 27/06/2025 01:19

As if nobody knows!

Original poster
BeeSouriante · 27/06/2025 01:18

MyAmpleSheep · 27/06/2025 00:41

Can someone please tie down very clearly what "elimination" or "eliminationist" is supposed to mean in this context? EDIT: OK, I see the definition there. Should have read more carefully. Next question. Why if trans people are to be recognized as a separate group, do they want to be the "same as" biological men/women as appropriate?

I don't get the we're invisible and you can't ever tell, but we're separate and have special rights. Maybe you could help square that circle?

Edited

"I don't get the we're invisible and you can't ever tell, but we're separate and have special rights. Maybe you could help square that circle?"

I'm not sure what this has to do with the price of eggs, but nobody is claiming that no trans person is visible..what you sometimes hear from 'gender critical' activists is "we can always tell" which is obviously untrue and quite silly. Half the trans friends I have are busily leading normal lives without anyone being able to 'tell'. Hell one of them was planning on telling some people at work that she's trans, though obviously that plan has been shelved given all the trans panic.

Everyone has 'special' rights - that's kinda why the EqA, the ECHR and the HRA exist.

edit: here to hear, I'm a silly

OP posts:
Cornishpotato · 27/06/2025 01:16

relegate trans people in life and law to their sex at birth

It's not relegation, this isn't football.

What does "functionally eliminate" mean?

The drama.

fromorbit · 27/06/2025 01:16

BeeSouriante · 27/06/2025 00:39

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/news/home-affairs/behind-the-ruling-how-sex-matters-is-shaping-uk-policy-on-trans-rights/

Sadly this is the first article in the UK media that has recognised the connections between the gender critical ideology movement (GCIM) and religious right orgs (mostly Heritage and the ADF), despite it being recognised and acknowledged by orgs and media in Europe and the US.

"The organisation’s true agenda is, I believe, best described as ‘eliminationist’: seeking through legislative bans, data policies, and the curtailing of gender-affirming care to relegate trans people in life and law to their sex at birth and make transitioning so difficult, dangerous or pointless as to functionally eliminate trans people from public life and society"

Spending time on this forum, it's quite clear that many people in the GCIM are eliminationist in their aims (just a glance at the 'do you support transitioning' thread is very eye-opening in this respect).

Thanks for posting on mumsnet raising revenue for the forum and increasing its popularity. Its great that you want pro-women voices to be heard. Lots of people want silence places like this.

Bylines

We encourage our authors, all of whom are volunteers, to write about the things that energise them. New writers are welcome and we invite contributions from those with specific areas of expertise. We also welcome contributions from those with differing views and perspectives in order to encourage debate.

Pretty anyone can write for them. Doesn't mean much.

NB - TAs have been saying the gender crits are funded by the religious right for years. Despite that what have you done about it? You have all written lots of articles saying JKR is awful and telling women to be quiet. Maybe spend some more time on your more dangerous enemies the ones tricking those daft women into speaking out. If you stop those guys the women will just give up surely.

Step one would be taking on the Vatican.
Step two evangelicals and Pentecostals and other fundamentalist Protestants.
Step three - get to work on the Muslims.

Get back to Mumsnet after you have defeated all that lot.

moggly · 27/06/2025 01:16

Oh it's the "suckling on a penis" guy again.

BiologicalRobot · 27/06/2025 01:14

And appearing at an event on a panel with people from another organisation with completely separate aims is not controversial and doesn’t make the organisations ‘aligned’

I should hope not otherwise tv programmes with Conservatives, Labour, LibDems politicians at election time would be utterly pointless if every politicial group was secretly aligned with each other. Far right and far left mushed together with a sprinkle of centre. But stupid people are going to carry on being stupid I suppose.

murasaki · 27/06/2025 01:12

SternJoyousBee · 27/06/2025 01:08

Does OP really want to play the guilt by association game?

Yes, it's not a smart one to start.....

SternJoyousBee · 27/06/2025 01:08

Does OP really want to play the guilt by association game?

Helleofabore · 27/06/2025 01:02

“Sadly this is the first article in the UK media that has recognised the connections between the gender critical ideology movement (GCIM) and religious right orgs (mostly Heritage and the ADF), despite it being recognised and acknowledged by orgs and media in Europe and the US.”

There is nothing new in this article.

And appearing at an event on a panel with people from another organisation with completely separate aims is not controversial and doesn’t make the organisations ‘aligned’ except in the mind of a tribal political thinker who wants to give a bad faith interpretation and to spread misinformation.

The article says a director of Sex Matters sat on a panel with another group. Shock and fucking horror! Now the simple and limited thinking writer has attempted to state that sitting on a panel discussion makes the two groups aligned.

It is enlightening though to see this writer’s way of thinking. I suspect that there is not much understanding of how campaign groups work and limited and tribal thinking.

viques · 27/06/2025 00:55

Well that’s one opinion. Surprised the author didn’t hint at the establishment of re education camps for trans folk, funded by you know who.

SternJoyousBee · 27/06/2025 00:51

Utter hyperbolic bullshit.

I’m an atheist. You’re the one that believes in gendered souls.

Codlingmoths · 27/06/2025 00:50

I’m on the religious far right I see 😂 oh how everyone who’s ever met me would laugh at you saying that.

Babyboomtastic · 27/06/2025 00:49

Gosh OP, you guys get really upset when we aren't subordinate to you. The toxic masculinity drips through.

Helleofabore · 27/06/2025 00:49

Here is an archive link

archive.is/aEiT9

ThatsNotMyTeen · 27/06/2025 00:43

Oh give over 🙄

Helleofabore · 27/06/2025 00:43

gosh. Another thread that will have little engagement from this OP. Will it also appear on Reddit too?

moto748e · 27/06/2025 00:43

I woudn't hold your breath.

MyAmpleSheep · 27/06/2025 00:41

Can someone please tie down very clearly what "elimination" or "eliminationist" is supposed to mean in this context? EDIT: OK, I see the definition there. Should have read more carefully. Next question. Why if trans people are to be recognized as a separate group, do they want to be the "same as" biological men/women as appropriate?

I don't get the we're invisible and you can't ever tell, but we're separate and have special rights. Maybe you could help square that circle?