Aren’t the front pages and headlines glorious!

[SameyMcNameChange]

I know there is a fair amount of bandwagon jumping, but it feels like the newspapers have finally read the room and realised that the SC ruling is welcomed by FAR more people than it disappoints. And so the front pages have smiling faces and headlines that would never have been published before.

Even, for example, the Metro which has had a pretty shocking record before has a pretty clear headline and a picture of smiling women.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czd3jg60q4no

The coverage is great - lovely to see ordinary women who have fought for so long in the headlines..
It's very entertaining to see an overprivileged group who have been enabled for so long to trample over the rights of women and girls still centring themselves as the victims of all this . The reality is precisely the opposite.
The judgement clearly pointed out that trans people retain the same rights as the rest of society. Yet the current whingefest from them demonstrates the consequences of them never being told no before.
Time to grow up.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce84054nqnyo

NHS will be pursued if gender policies don't change, equalities watchdog says

Right, who knows the best email address for NHS Fife?😂

It clarifies the law. It gives women and girls back their rights that government departments and other organisations had effectively stolen from them. Surely that is indeed glorious. And yes you should indeed be outraged that women's rights and needs have been given to men. Illegally.

This, all day long!

What an idiot.

Ouch!!

That is a very clear, and surprisingly balanced, article.

This is a solution to address women’s need for single sex spaces and legal recognition of our rights as female. At what point did trans rights activists ever consider women when demanding “rights”?

I'm happy about this. If you pushed me on it, I'd say a woman is a woman. You are born your sex.

However I also have a feeling that having trans people and supporting them is good for society. I feel like the extremism ends of society will be encouraged by these news. So part of me does support trans people for the purpose they serve, which sounds awful, in furthering tolerance values.

But, I also think there's an interplay - we don't have the resources to create trans only spaces. Neither is society going to share women's spaces (don't think we should). It took how many millennia to progress women's rights. Trans people complain they don't feel safe. That is the experience of women for milennia. The issue is not with women who don't want to give up their spaces, it's with violence perpetrated by men.

If there were limitless resources, would we care as much about this? Probably not. But there aren't. It's not the world we live in.

I do sympathise and I think trans hatred will get worse.
But do support the ruling today. However I think it will come back to courts again in future.

To nit pick, it doesn’t say ‘isn’t the ruling glorious’ it is ‘isn’t the coverage glorious’. And the reason I think the coverage is glorious is that finally the newspapers and other media have caught on to the fact the most people are very pleased about this ruling. Poll after poll has shown when people are asked the specific hard questions ‘should make people be in women’s sports/changing rooms/prisons’ they say no.

The newspapers could have illustrated this ruling with pictures of people being sad about the ruling. Clearly there are people who are sad about it. But newspapers sell if they write what chimes with how people feel. And the vast majority of them went with ‘people are happy about this’.

If there were limitless resources, would we care as much about this? Probably not.
I'm not sure it is really about lack of resources; to take an example, in sports where a trans category has been created take-up has been low or non-existent.

Bollocks.

(Or no bollocks, as the case may be.)

There is no third sex.

There are some disorders of sexual development. These used to be called intersex conditions, but the term has largely been dropped because it's misleading. Nobody with a DSD is 'between sexes', they're all either male or female. Types of DSD are sex-specific, the fact you have a particular DSD is proof, not negation, of your sex.

No human in history has ever been found to have both male and female sex organs that are complete and fully functional. Ever. The human hermaphrodite is a porn trope, not a medical reality.

Delightful to see these headlines. Trans people have not lost rights at all, they have lost privileges they should never have been given to the detriment of womens hard won rights. I'm also glad to see certain nhs boards have been caught with their metaphorical trousers down by this ruling. Go Sandie and the Darlington nurses!

do support the ruling today. However I think it will come back to courts again in future.

Can it, though? I thought the Supreme Court judgement was the end point. Where could it go now, legally?

My question to you is " What do you mean by a trans person"?

Genuine question!

I do think that some organisations will try to subvert the ruling,and the government will continue to fudge......which is why there will have to be more court cases going forward. But when they happen.....the ruling will provide very clear instruction.

I think any legal challenges will be on the basis of claiming that the single sex exemption has been incorrectly applied rather than on the basis that someone of the opposite sex should be able to use a single sex service

This is a good case to test it on.

Should those nurses have been made to accept undressing in front of a male to meet his emotional and whatever other needs?

Is a male owed the 'right' of access to a non consenting woman's body?

Is this a good 'right' for men to have, do you think?

How is this equality for women? Why should it be right that they are a lower class of subordinated human on a sexed basis? Particularly when the man in question would like them to take their clothes off on the grounds that he identifies as a woman but is using power that only a male until yesterday was argued to have?

Is it harmful, disrespectful to that male to say to him no, you cannot make women give you that experience because they have rights too and this is not ok, but you can have a separate changing facility here that meets your needs?

Are people seriously arguing that refusing men the right to control and access women in a state of undress is harmful to men ?

Toooooo late

I walked past the newspaper rack in M&S at lunchtime and it literally stopped me in my tracks, the enormity of it. The tide really has turned. Barely any mention of it on SM from my friends which has really surprised me, and the one person who has has barely had any response.

Well done you fabulous sheroic women.

I feel that itv are not supportive of this. They seem very sympathetic to the trans cause
www.itv.com/watch/news/what-does-the-gender-ruling-mean-for-women-transgender-people-and-same-sex-spaces/f3sb8kl

Of course, most media outlets have shamefully been quiet on the issue as it impacts women...and only focused on how it impacts those with trans identities. Many will simply double down in the face of the ruling.

The above video features quite a passable transwoman...and the inference is clear. The solution to the issue is third spaces. You cannot have a rule with some exceptions for passable trans people, because the rule then no longer holds..

If u watch the BBC or read the Guardian I feel sorry for you

Re SM, I couldn't be happier or more relieved about this judgment and the additional protections women now have. I haven't said anything on SM other than here, which is associated with a throwaway email address. I have mentioned my feelings about the judgment to three people, my partner, my mum and a former colleague who also had a baby in 2009 and joined Mumsnet. My workplace is completely captured and I still feel I need to be cautious. So my outward silence is completely misleading. I wonder how many people there are like me... I suspect there are many.

Agreed

And this is just a hunch, but I should imagine focus will be swiftly achieved after the first couple of £100,000 fines.