Lords plot to derail Labour’s trans guidance on single-sex spaces

THIS

It's pleasing to see Labour women standing up for women's rights and safeguarding children. It did seem that the parliamentary trans bullies had silenced far too many politicians at one stage.

Joani Reid and also Tracy Gilbert, Labour Edinburgh North and Leith, are consistently outspoken and supportive of women’s rights. Many thanks to them
🙏

I see Wendy Alexander on that list. Former Scottish Labour leader and sister of Douglas, current Scottish Secretary of State.

She was married to the former Brian Ashcroft, now known as Elizabeth Ashcroft.
He was an Economics professor at Strathclyde University. They appear to have divorced as he ‘transitioned’ but are apparently still very chummy, possibly still living together.

He seems to have deleted his X account. Unsurprising as there was plenty of awful ‘trans rights’ stuff - discrediting the Cass report for example.

And Wendy herself appears to be finding her feet as a trans activist publicly and who knows what behind the scenes.

Influential people, using their connections to attempt to remove basic safeguarding and rights from women and girls. For the sake of individuals in their personal circle. Appalling.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78n9nyvppeo
Nice piece of subtle propaganda by Baroness Alexander here.

Labour MP for East Kilbride. So will probably have been following all the Scottish media coverage of the Sanddie Peggie case and be rather better informed than the average MP.

I know the thread title is just repeating the article's wording, but is not "Labour's guidance". (I suspect it would be rather different if it were.)

Thanks for sharing, good for her, considering Lords are made, I'm wondering if they can be unmade. Time for a campaign to reduce the number of Lords that we have no need nor desire for. 🤬

Why do they think that Mary Ann Stephenson is going to be more willing to take a position contrary to the law than Baroness Faulkner is?

Anyway, whatever they're plotting, it's good that it has been leaked. I'd imagine there are plenty in the House of Lords who will have not time for this.

I’m not sure who Joani Reid is, but she’s telling the activist Lords to back off. Nice to see some Labour MPs standing up for women.

x.com/joanireid/status/1979484219689644151?s=46&t=ZX_bLozRqm8etdGICMcAvA

Even in those circumstances, I think that ship has sailed.

Assuming this happens, there will be other deals to do that don't involve the government tying themselves to incoherent unpopular legislation that is likely to lead to them to their own Isla Bryson moment.

The irony is that the SC decision is the inevitable conclusion of all Ruth Hunt and Michael Cashman's campaigning. The more they tried to push something that just didn't make sense, the more people pushed back.

Ah Cashman - who said the quiet bit out loud about fighting back against safeguarding children?

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4954762-pushing-back-against-safeguarding

Interestingly his twitter post appears to have been deleted - but as usual women kept the receipts. Has he been allowed back into the labour party following his abuse of Rosie Duffield?

Their reality is that women are a sort of compliant background feature.

So women not meekly falling in with what the real people (ie men) consider correct for society offends them in deep ways because it is a subconscious threat to their own status.

This is why they rage so very hard. Subconsciously for many men a woman politely saying no is the same as her publicly ridiculing him. It cannot be borne.

This is also why they have no qualms about undermining wmen in back room deals rather than open public debate. In their eyes we are not real people behaving fairly because in their eyes questioning them at all is proof we are beyond the pale. So we do not deserve the dignity of being treated as opponents, we are simply dirt to be removed.

From what I remember, before the SC ruling, there was a general acceptance that if FWS lost, their next step was to campaign to change the law.

However, the penny doesn't seem to have dropped for the other side.

It continually amazes me how people get so caught up in a cause that they lose sight of proportion and reality (generous interpretation) or do they just hate women so much they don’t care?

The tide has turned though - Cashman and Hunt will find themselves viewed as the fringe idiots they are.

This is my concern, a coalition of anti women parties.

I don't think Reform have as much chance as the media portrays over the longer term. Currently they are riding high due to migration but when the GE comes around that could be neutralised.

On a positive note trans is fading as a trend with teens so hopefully that continues.

Cashman has lain rather low since his foul comments about Rosie Duffield, but can still FOTTFSOFAWYGTFOSM.

On the whole, I think I'd still back the Lords over even the Commons to uphold reality, but clearly these misogynist feckers need watching.

I know they can't change the law but my take is that, in the short term, they're throwing as much mud at it as they can and that, in the longer term, they're hoping the next election will lead to some kind of centre-left coalition/agreement with Starmer replaced as leader and with the Greens and Lib Dems in a position to bargain. And despite the current polls, I don't think that's implausible

The Sandie Peggie case got loads of coverage in Scotland. The Darlington tribunal case hasn't started yet, but I'd imagine it will be widely discussed once it does.

There is still a lot of confusion around the terminology, but the majority of the public don't agree with men in women's changing rooms, regardless of how they identify. And many of the articles about the SP case referred to Dr. Upton as biologically male, much to the TRA's outrage.

Isn’t Sharron Davies a new Tory peer? She will be great at arguing for the implementation of the law ASAP.

The House of Lords ought to know better than anyone that the EHRC guidance is not the law. The Supreme Court judgment is the law.

Cashman has been a thorn in the side of women’s rights for a long time. At least his interference is now being publicized. For too long, he was pushing his transactivist views behind closed doors in the corridors of power, under the false flag of “LGBT rights”.

Sadly, not much media coverage of either Darlington or Peggie cases. Most people have no idea what is going on. There's a thread on MN, in fact, where OP actually says they thought (think?) transwomen means women who are trans (i.e. biological women who think they are men) and transmen are men who are trans (i.e. men who think they are women). It's the logical meaning of those terms, which is I guess why they were chosen. So maybe there are lots of people who wonder why a poor transwoman has to be kept out of the women's loos because they ID as a man and wear men's clothes.

I'd expect this from the previous head of Stonewall but how disappointing so many of them are women

How are they getting round the SC ruling that single sex spaces are legal but mixed sex spaces which are mixed because transwomen are allowed in (and thus discriminate against non-trans men) are illegal?
Presumably hope new head will change the advice and that the government will change the law and make certificated sex what is meant in the EA2010. That will, I think, cause electoral problems for a government already on its knees.
But hey ho, trans is so embedded in the entire world's institutions its advocates probably think they can push it. So far the UK is streets ahead on the dire results of trans rubbish - the fight sadly, is not over.

This is my thought too. The Darlington Nurses case is going to show the public exactly why women need single sex spaces.