Carrie and stonewall

[impossibletoday]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/220d2f28-2615-11ec-8024-639cd6774533?shareToken=7827608cf64703bf5602ca031254a536

Yes and plenty of non-Tory politicians are still wanging on about it in a very unsustainable and uninformed way, so it's conspicuous that she didn't.

Although I do think we shouldn't really be calling the topic "trans rights" (though I know I have been too) as if that's the issue that's at stake. It is not trans rights - reasonable ones like what everyone else has - that are under question, but further rights that are demanded by an ideology and that endanger others. It's sex-based and LGB rights that are being threatened.

@NecessaryScene

Maybe a daft question, but why is a politician's wife giving a speech at a party conference?

She is a party member herself.

But she wouldn’t be up there speaking if she was a party member but not the prime minister’s wife.

Although I do think we shouldn't really be calling the topic "trans rights" (though I know I have been too)

Yes it should be exclusive trans rights/opportunities
exceptional trans rights
trans prerogatives
the transgender exceptions,
specifically trans rights