Translucent statement....worth a look!!!

My Nan used to say: if brains were dynamite, he wouldn’t have enough to blow up his hat!

Oh please don't stop them, we're going to enjoy this. Who's got the popcorn?

Exactly this. Now people are organised and can resist this nonsense, the whole thing has collapsed like a house of cards. It is over. They just can't admit it.

If brains were dynamite he wouldn't have enough to part his hair. 🤣

If they'd brains, they'd know that it's impossible for a human being to change sex, so any ideology or campaign based on the opposite of that fact is fatally flawed.

I think the loudness, the aggression, the #nodebate, the vilifying, the violence, the fog of confusion, the 'it's all too confusing', the nasty condescending sarcasm [see the Sunderland Minster thread], the threats of litigation, the 'toxic culture war', the name-caling, the personal attacks etc etc are there to try to cover the factual void at the centre of transgenderism.

It's 'bluster and shout and threaten your way out of having to engage your brain and defend your claims in a reasonable way', isn't it?

Cause or effect?

As my Dad used to say - If they had brains they’d be dangerous.
We should be eternally grateful that they haven’t.

the Mantrums just keep coming and coming.

If you want to peak, listen to them speak.

Imagine if this lot were clever.

Not well. Still stalled at less than half with only 4 days to go.

I think Mummy and Daddy should have said No more often when Steph was a little boy.

”constitutionally illiterate” is a good way to put it @ApplebyArrows

I guess Steph is still trying the “if they just listen to us speak, they’ll come round to our way of thinking” plan. I’ve no idea why, when the last few years have shown it has the opposite effect.

Thing is though they're not campaigning for a new law. They're campaigning for a "debate", which won't change anything.

If if the trans activists had their act together they'd have been campaigning for amendments to the Equality Act from the day of the judgement. For some reason they haven't done that and have resorted to sniping about how the judges are evil, trying to get the government to just ignore them etc. It's constitutionally illiterate. These people run off emotions and emotional arguments are really, really bad at anything that involves a modicum of intelligent thought.

This is, I imagine, largely imported from the American websites these people spend too much time on, because in America moaning about the Supreme Court not supporting your morally preferred position (what the constitution actually says is irrelevant) has been a national pastime of both right and left for decades.

What

They are entitled to ask HMG to pass a new law which would have the effect of undisapplying the GRA to EA2010 and to all sex-relevant instruments outwith EA2010 such as WR1992. And overcoming the two-tier GRC problem by extending sex to include acquired gender whether certificated or not, thereby reversing Haldane (I do not think that the SC had this option, because ScotGov did not cross-appeal).

It's a horrible idea, which, according to the case law that is building up, has bad human rights implications. But they can ask for it.

It doesn't look as if they understand what they're doing, but maybe it would be good to have a parliamentary debate. Sunlight.

"A debate to reverse the judgement of the SC". 🤯 Because that's how the law works, right. 🤯

I guess if you're stupid enough to think you can be a women just because you want to, you're stupid enough to think you can reverse a judgement of the SC just because you want. 🤯

Well I di agree with them. It should be fully restored. Just as the supreme court ruled it should.

Hahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahahahshahhahahhhahahah

I was going to say something about hairdressers leaving matters of the law to lawyers, but then I thought of a "lawyer" and a kimino-wearing barrister and now I have nothing.

Tell me you don’t understand how the law works!

They really don’t get it.

I mean IANAL, but I’m sure the Supreme Court Ruling was in fact to “restore the full effect” of The Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act. You know, before the world went batshit crazy.

This is wrong on so many levels. No wonder there is a group of male people who are clinging to what they consider their moral right to access female single sex provisions where there is none at all.

They really do believe that the laws before were totally in agreement with them, don't they?

All this is is clarification, the laws literally haven't changed.