Guardian gets it right

"Attacks on the exclusionary nature of such spaces by the trans rights movement are a key reason why gender-critical feminism exists." This is an obvious paradox. How can there be trans exclusionary spaces if the movement for trans exclusionary spaces came from people being upset about trans exclusionary spaces?

I genuinely cannot untangle the logic of that last sentence. Well, I say logic, but...

(ETA it's from the Reddit thread commenting on SR's piece)

That's very unfair.

Susanna Rustin has been GC from the very beginning and has written in support of women's rights for years.

It can't have been easy staying and fighting the good fight with Owen Jones and the TRA lot on staff.

While I am skeptical of how Reform might handle the process of straightening this all out, you are absolutely correct that we had laws covering pretty much all of the stuff contained in the EA '10 which worked fairly well.

What the EA '10 has done by consolidating those other Acts is to deny nuance around exactly what rights we are willing to offer each of the applicable characteristics.

For example there are both mutable and immutable characteristics, some permanent some not.

I'd particularly like to see the characteristic of "belief" reformed. It is nuts that trust in verifiable facts is treated weight as superstitions. It would be nice to have a "truth is a defence" condition where right conflict, i.e. there is in some circumstances a heirachy of protection.

Seems the tide has finally turned and the rats are leaving the sinking ship in a reverse ferret motion......

Hilarious though that Reddit thinks the Guardian is stuffed full of terfs. Lucy Mangan is a massive terf according to Reddit 🤔

I don't think people should get too excited that the Guardian is changing course. Susanna Rustin is pretty much a lone GC voice at the Guardian. They do occasionally publish articles from her on this topic, but it will be back to the usual emotive, manipulative tosh again after this.

repeal and replace not repeal and leave a big hole.

This was published where??? What's going on today? First James Murray on R4, now this? What next?

There will be a counter opinion piece later this week, I expect.

This from the same poster:

The code confirms that there is no legal way to open a single-sex service to people of the other sex, even if they are trans." Terfs once again saying that nobody is allowed to advocate for changing the law.

No one is saying that they cannot advocate to change the law, yes they can but instead of trying to do it on the sly as they have before they are required to do it openly, with full public awareness, giving coherent arguments and evidence.

Genuinely insane that they say "its the law" as if they're reciting some kind of ancient text that was sent by god and not a court ruling by a bunch of old out of touch judges.

This is hilarious as if they weren't repeatedly shouting It's against the law to refuse transwomen entry into every and all single sex spaces for women. Funny how when it is their own made up version of the law we all have it rammed down our throats but when the Law is stated unequivocally as it is and always was you musn't mention the Law.

I am wondering who is using the shared brain cell amongst those posters, clearly not this one.

Hmm the Guardian still with the pronouns, I see. Well, there's still a way to go.

The Alexandra Parmar-Lee article is linked along side it. Maybe Rustin was asked to do a sort of right-to-reply.

I tried to read one of the responses and their arguments make no sense at all.

Ferrets , reverse ones, surely...

💯 this, unfortunately. Weasels

Did you see the correction at the bottom? Someone has been naughty.

This article was amended on 1 June 2026. Owing to an error introduced during editing, an earlier version used the incorrect pronoun for the character Zee.

Not just catastrophising but appropriation of a concept that is specific to Jewish persecution. Trans activists do this with the Holocaust too, of course. It's one of the most unpleasant aspects of trans activism - though there's plenty of competition for that title, of course.

That's probably the same kind of Day One as the Day One on which Trump said he would end the war in Ukraine.

By day 1,001 it's obvious that they are not using 'Day One' to mean Day One.

I knew it was going to be Susanna Rustin. She's the lone (and presumably lonely) voice of sanity at the Guardian.

Blood libel, and on the first day of PRIDE! Oh my the wailing is loud today.

Attacks on the exclusionary nature of such spaces by the trans rights movement are a key reason why gender-critical feminism exists.

I don't appreciate the way she has framed this. It never was about "trans rights." I was about trans wants.

But, I suppose, being in the Guardian, even that would have been a step too far.

So far, Reform UK is the only party with a plan to repeal the Equality Act.

Suella Braverman Tory turncoat & former Home Secretary says they will repeal the Equality Act on Day One of a Reform government.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/02/17/suella-braverman-pledges-to-introduce-patriotic-curriculum/

"And second, that since there is no objective test of gender identity, there is also no failsafe way to distinguish a transgender woman from a man who wishes to access female spaces." This is just calling all trans women rapists. This is literal blood libel and the Guardian is printing it.

The catastrophising is off the scale. literal blood libel LOL