Baroness Nicholson on twitter

[Winesalot]

I have been lurking on twitter lately and noticed Baroness Nicholson has been very active recently. Amongst her tweets are quite a few gems - letters to Liz Truss, tweets asking for evidence about Stonewall’s involvement CPS guidance just to name two.

This tweet I found very encouraging too.

It is imperative to restore the rights of women.I foresee a single issue, cluster approach;we make a new Women’s Rights movement lasting one year,solely to rescue womanhood from its destruction through today’s legal and social denial of our existence.Emma,BNoW

She has today written to Liz Truss again but this time with her concerns about the gross misinterpretation of the ECHR in the trans toolkits used in schools and recommends that such toolkits are removed from use now. Such support is great news.

twitter.com/baroness_nichol/status/1256326753850556418?s=21

I will try to post the letter for those not on twitter.

I look forward to seeing what what happens next.

I think it's worth saying at this point for the benefit of anyone lurking, that men with a paraphilia such as AGP are most likely to have another, or many other paraphilias, and the most common paraphilia is voyeurism.

Once they don’t get the thrill of it being ‘naughty’ then what will they do?

Move onto the next kink?

Lingerie designed for the male body will never catch on because it's not about that.

True and men’s boxers are uncomfortable.

The manager involved probs thought it would be a great idea to put on their cv and have a page on the website about how diverse and inclusive they are ("used our initiative to seek out a vulnerable minority!"), and much more fun and fabulous (like Ru Pauls drag race!) Than going to a group for actual vulnerable women.

I genuinely have no problem with anyone dressing or living however they want, even if its men getting a kick from womens clothes. Fine- you do you live your best life. But they should use the mens changing room for the dignity and safety of all customers.

M&s managers actively seeking out and inviting crossdressers into womens changing rooms is so tone deaf. And then treating them over and above female customers - Even saying the manager buys them coffee when they visit the store!

You can tell the manager doesnt believe they are women because they wouldn't get that treatment if they were!

@happydappy2 Yes they do! A friend of mine works in the local M&S in the Bra Dept. She's talked about a TIM who used to work in the Men's department then transitioned (in his 60's) then moved over to the Lingerie dept. Not sure if they are in the Bra dept specifically. But they were accommodated and allowed to use the ladies locker rooms etc as well. Although my friend is a little bit GC, she still talks of this person's "struggles" to transition so late in life "it must have been so hard for her", that kind of thing. Wish she'd just be honest but, event to me, she can't bring herself - I believe that's because she knows that person personally so there's an emotional investment there.

Judging from the article the manager is getting plenty of praise and recognition for her initiative from her employers.

M&s managers actively seeking out and inviting crossdressers into womens changing rooms is so tone deaf. And then treating them over and above female customers - Even saying the manager buys them coffee when they visit the store!

You can tell the manager doesnt believe they are women because they wouldn't get that treatment if they were!

Exactly.

I genuinely have no problem with anyone dressing or living however they want, even if its men getting a kick from womens clothes.

I do have a problem with this. It is not about having a kick from from breaching stereotypes or they would be looking at frilly, lacy polyester undies that fit. No, they have to place women subordinate to them in order to get their kicks, it is about denigrating women.

After all, they don’t simply try them

Posted too soon.

Alfterall they don’t simply try them on to see if they fit prior to purchasing them...

Hopefully the Baroness has seen the evidence shared on here before now of the man who posted about liking to wank on the floor of cubicles in women's changing rooms and then thinking delicious thoughts about females walking on his semen in their bare feet.

And the man who posted about using women's changing rooms and intentionally leaving the door half open in the hope that a female would walk in thinking it was empty and he could have the thrill of a female 'catching' him in women's lingerie. Ooh the thrillz and gigglz. It's flashing and indecent fucking exposure, and it's using women's bodies for non consenting sexual experiences.

Both crossdressing, self defining men having a lovely time exploiting the loopholes created by other spectacularly selfish males.

The Baroness has made the point before to M&S about BAME related issues: how many female people so affected will use a 'single sex cubicle' but inside a mixed sex room where males are undressing? Thinking of several colleagues I've had whose male relatives would flatly not countenance them ever entering an area where males were undressing. And where said males included those behaving in completely sexually inappropriate ways in plain sight while M&S Managers clapped like a bunch of sealions at the progressiveness of it all and tutted at anyone saying 'how inappropriate does this have to get before your brain engages?'

'how inappropriate does this have to get before your brain engages?'

I know. The mind boggles

"This time, some of the group modelled for me. They loved it"

I do want to lay this at the door of m&s tho and i have nothing against this group. Get up to whatever you want, as long as it doesnt impinge upon anyone else. And it does seem like thats what the group was doing, until m&s invited themself to their meeting to break down the "stigma" of crossdressers trying on lingerie in ladies changing rooms.

'how inappropriate does this have to get before your brain engages?'

This ^ so, so much. These are the people who then go and work at Claire's accessories and have some sad 10-year-old boy who has been exploited all his life as their poster child.

Maybe they don't see how it denigrates women.

I do think there is a large element of pity involved.

Middle-aged men in stockings and suspenders look pathetic. And women often don't see them as a sexual threat. Which of course in the traditional sense they're not.

The threat comes from them propagating the idea that wearing women's clothes make them submissive which becomes arousing.

Copping off to the idea of women being submissive is, of course, a threat to women.

Then the next step is legally defining what a woman is.

I think the legal definition is still 'adult human female'. I could be wrong.

It would be interesting to know, since being legally female is now a thing, and increasingly male born people choose to self identify as female as well as women. It is impossible to identify as something that does not exist and cannot be clearly defined, so both woman and female have become words supposed to mean 'adult human female and adult human males who choose that word by personal preference to label their identity'. And female meaning 'of the biological female sex and biologically male people who choose that word by personal preference to label their identity', ,with the additional personal preference labels of genderfluid, non binary and others involved too. If you remove the adult human female there is nothing to identify as.

The smoke and mirrors attempt to remove the whole concept of adult human female is nothing more than an attempt to put it in a cupboard where everyone knows it is, and swear everyone to a pact to pretend it doesn't exist while still using it as the basic concept . Because there's no such thing as a woman or a female, no one can be one or identify as one, the whole thing vanishes out of sight.

The legal definition in the EA 2010 is "a female of any age"

The GRA complicates matters by saying that holders have legally changed gender which is equivalent to sex. However the fact that exemptions are possible in both the GRA and EA makes that less concrete.

Hence TW now saying they are female.

Then the next step is legally defining what a woman is

The Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 defines women (for the purposes of the Act) as;

Section 2 of the Act provides that for the purposes of the Act, "woman" includes "a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (within the meaning of section 7 of the Equality Act 201010) if, and only if, the person is living as a woman and is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of becoming female".

To be included, a trans woman without a UK Gender Recognition Certificate or without gender recognition from another EU Member State11 must therefore meet the 3 following criteria:

1. Have the characteristic of gender reassignment as defined in the Equality Act 2010.

The definition of gender reassignment in the Equality Act 2010 is – "a person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex".

This definition includes thosereassigning their sex from male to female as well as those reassigning theirsex from female to male. A person who meets this definition is not covered bythe definition of "woman" in the Act unless they also meet the following twocriteria. The person does not need to have undergone any specific treatmentor surgery.

1. Be proposing to undergo, undergoing or undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of becoming female

This element of the definition means that the person has taken a decision to undergo a process for the purpose of becoming female.

1. Be living as a woman

This would not require the person to dress, look or behave in any particular way. However, it would be expected that there would be evidence that the person was continuously living as a woman, such as – always using female pronouns; using a female name on official documents such as a driving licence or passport, or on utility bills or bank accounts; describing themselves and being described by others in written or other communication using female language.

This definition in section 2 provides clarity that, for the purposes of applying the provisions of the Act, "woman" includes a trans woman who meets the definition set out. This provision only relates to the meaning of "woman" in the Act. This does not have the effect of creating a new legal definition of woman in any other context.

The Act does not require an appointing person to ask a candidate to prove that they meet the definition of woman in the Act.

and being described by others in written or other communication using female language.

Even though this might only be achieved by compelling others to do so.

It makes a mockery of the legal concept of duress.

She's serious!
twitter.com/Baroness_Nichol/status/1264534480024489989

For those not on Twitter, to this comment:

Think it may have started off 'accidental', at a time when trans hadn't raised its Hydra head. And now, its insufficiency for the load has buckled any original intent. It needs revision. How do we do it? I'm the wibbliest most insignificant bit-player in this show.

she replied:

I think just treat it like bindweed in an overgrown garden;pull it out by the roots and throw for burning on the rubbish dump;go back and do it again until the garden is clear of this poisoning.

Female is a fact, a biological state, in animals, in plants, in trees. It's not something that can be identified into.

I'm prepared to be polite about 'woman' having a flexible definition in some contexts if it doesn't shit all over female people, but no. Female and male are fixed states not personal choices, and my willing suspension of disbelief at this point says loud and clear, don't be so damn silly.

She has also posted her own email address on Twitter and advised a poster to use it:

[email protected] reaches me immediately.I don’t respond to nor do I take note of DM.