Gaby Hinsliff in the Guardian

[transdimensional]

Hinsliff ( www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/18/if-britain-is-now-resetting-the-clock-on-trans-rights-where-will-that-leave-us ) concedes that "no debate" might not have been such a good thing: "We are going back to a time before “trans women are women”, full stop, no debate: and if it’s handled well, accepting that sometimes life genuinely is more complicated than that could ultimately be healthy."

Interestingly, when referring to the year 2010 as a pivotal point, she describes the Equality Act as having been pushed through by the Tory/LD coalition: "2010, the year an incoming Tory-Lib Dem coalition pushed through an Equality Act drawn up by the outgoing Labour cabinet minister Harriet Harman".

According to Wikipedia, the Equality Act completed all its parliamentary stages before the 2010 general election, so I'm not sure in what sense it was pushed through by the incoming government? Did it need a ministerial order (secondary legislation) to bring it into effect?

According to Hinsliff: "As Harman has said, that act reflected a hard-won, sensitively negotiated consensus between Stonewall and women’s rights groups that is frankly hard to imagine today."

This brings on two thoughts:

1. The reason it's hard to imagine today is that Stonewall later became very militant. At the time of the Equality Act, Stonewall was such a moderate, centrist organisation that it did not even advocate same-sex marriage yet (it did so for the first time in Oct 2010, after the GE).

2. Was there really a sensitively negotiated consensus between Stonewall and women's groups? If so, why could people not agree subsequently on what the Act actually meant? Wouldn't that have become clear during these supposed negotiations?

For nearly a decade now whenever I see Hinsliff's name I immediately think of her notorious article about the attacks on young women in Cologne on New Year's Eve 2015.

Me too. She wrote an awful trans one a few years back as well.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3391208-it-may-be-a-while-before-older-women-stop-feeling-erased?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

“As Harman has said, that act reflected a hard-won, sensitively negotiated consensus between Stonewall and women’s rights groups that is frankly hard to imagine today”

Perhaps a better educated journalist on these topics could have pointed out that the reason Stonewall was not in conflict with women’s rights groups in 2010 was because back then they were fighting for the rights of lesbian and gay people, rather than for those who believed in gender identities.

I read the article but it doesn't begin to touch on what pushed the trans demands way beyond pressure point.
Has there been any utterances from that grifter Zoe Williams yet.

Is this somewhat of a reverse ferret from her? I read it this morning and thought it was interesting that she seemed to be acknowledging that there is another side in this (women's rights campaigners) who have been hard done by over the last 15 years.

The 'sensitively negotiated consensus' was Stonewall saying quietly to government 'we want this or the men will be sad' and then women being told to be kind girls, shove over and share.

Fuck that shit.

That’s exactly what I thought when I read that bit - Stonewall didn’t add the T to their remit for another 4 years or so, so what the fuck was Harriet Harman negotiating on women’s rights with them about?

Either HH has forgotten who was actually in the room (I’m guessing Press for Change/GIRES/Beaumont Society) or she knows damn well it wasn’t Stonewall but it’s convenient to name check them now so that they can be positioned as the lone fall guy (seeing as Stonewall’s public reputation is already down the gender neutral toilet).

(Just adding the screen shot for posterity!)

I like the way that she has to fantasise about sex realist women not being ready to be magnanimous. Possibly because she has no friends or colleagues who feel able to challenge her.
Did GH sign that infamous letter about Suzanne Moore? The one that 300+ colleagues signed? Did she ever support Hadley Freeman?

See lots of sensible suggestions and commentary on FWR alongside the acknowledgment that it shouldn’t have taken the time, money and personal cost to so many brave women to get here.