Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

I'm unfortunately in Stella Creasy's constituency

52 replies

Circumferences · 22/04/2025 18:19

Stella Creasy has just sent a very lengthy email to all her constituents regarding the Supreme Court ruling.

It's absurd.

She firstly bemoans how more questions are raised than are answered (I'm sorry, no Stella, the big question "what is a woman" is now answered.... finally).

She then in her second paragraph addresses how transwomen are now more frightened of getting abused because of the ruling.... (Perfectly upholding the hyperbolic rhetoric of trans activism)

She then has the gall to say "single sex spaces have always been possible to arrange" while she and her TRA buddies were instrumental in dismantling single sex spaces and making them impossible to arrange! (Grr)

She then admits that basically what's the point of a GRC when it doesn't make a difference in real life (she's crying real tears at this point) but at least she's telling the truth at this point.

She then bemoans the "toxic nation of debate around sex/gender" as if her TRA buddies are victims in all of this!

No recognition whatsoever to the bravery and strength of the women of Scotland who brought this case to court. No recognition whatsoever to the abuse and sometimes actual violence inflicted on women by her TRA pals. No recognition towards what a brilliant result this was for women and girls across the world.

Stella Creasy, you never had my respect but now there's no chance.

OP posts:
WorriedMutha · 22/04/2025 20:26

My sympathies. I'm in your neighbouring constituency but as I am also in East London WRN, I do get to hear about the utterances of Stella. Unfortunately she has a stonking majority so she can carry on with her pet projects without regard to what the sane majority of voters think.

UptonFunk · 22/04/2025 20:44

Re-reading this - is there a chance that she doesn’t understand the law? Or how it’s actually been enacted by public bodies on the ground? Could an MP quote the mantras yet have zero grip on the detail?

Secondly, it is not clear how this ruling will be interpreted on a case by case basis as the court requires. Single sex spaces have always been possible to arrange and protected– the Equality Act has always enabled the exclusion of someone of a different biological sex on a proportionate basis. This was and is the case for both women’s refuges and women’s sport. The ruling now means it is important to confirm what ‘proportionate’ means and how this will be interpreted and if it will be expanded. There has been much speculation on public toilets, all women shortlists, female representation on public and private bodies, changing rooms and more- this change could affect these matters and the guidance issued to those responsible for them.

IANAL and even I know that:
a) case by case basis is on each facility and not each person.
b) the EHRC 2022 guidance is clear that “privacy and dignity of women” is a legitimate aim.
c) biological single sex provision has always applied to the full list above - even though public bodies flouted that law encouraged by politicians chanting TWAW….

Stella either believed the nonsense and is now trying to cover up her involvement or she never had any idea what she was talking about.

Not sure what’s worse

Pluvia · 22/04/2025 20:56

Stella Creasy can't possibly have the email addresses of all her constituents. Do you mean all party members in her CLP?

UptonFunk · 22/04/2025 20:58

Pluvia · 22/04/2025 20:56

Stella Creasy can't possibly have the email addresses of all her constituents. Do you mean all party members in her CLP?

It’s a reply to constituents who contacted her

Original poster
Circumferences · 22/04/2025 21:19

Long ago in the distant past I contacted her about GRA reform.

I think now that this is a reply to all her constituents who contacted her about this. I thought she might have sent this to everyone generally!

OP posts:
Mypeniscalledstella · 22/04/2025 22:12

Nothing to add, but I couldn't resist the opportunity to resurrect an old username!

sweetsardineface · 22/04/2025 22:27

Write back to tell her you won’t be voting for her next time.

Ohyoudodoyou · 22/04/2025 22:41

UptonFunk · 22/04/2025 19:07

Here it is in full:

I’m writing to you as someone who has been in touch with my office about the status of trans people in the UK – whether you have been in touch recently about the recent Supreme Court ruling, to express your concerns about single sex spaces or simply to ask for more information about my work on this issue.

I want to acknowledge the toxicity in the public debate around trans rights – and recognise that many in public life have sought to exploit that. I have always rejected the polarisation that comes from those who use women’s bodies as their battlefield for a ‘culture war’ – whether in my work to promote abortion rights, to tackle discrimination against mothers or to support reform of gender recognition processes. I do not see these as conflicting, but complementary objectives. I know that not all residents will agree with this, and so want to be open with where I stand.

Specifically, last weeks’ Supreme Court ruling regarding the Equality Act raises more questions than it answers about how best to balance the rights of those who are transgender to access services with those who are not. Specifically it sets out that the concept of sex in the Act is based on biological sex- it also sets out that transgender people should retain protection against discrimination. In doing so, the ruling clarifies how the courts should read the 2010 Equality Act- and consequently raise serious questions about the viability of the 2004 Gender Recognition Act (GRA). This is because the GRA states that those who have a gender recognition certificate (GRC) ‘become’ the sex of that certificate, ‘subject to the provision’ made by the Act or any subsequent Act which includes the Equality Act.

There will no doubt be substantial further legal debate over the impact of this ruling- having read the ruling in full I want to let you know the questions that I have. These are the issues I will be seeking to raise because I believe that politics must not absent itself from these issues. Firstly, it is now not clear what rights securing a GRC offers if the sex on the certificate someone who ‘becomes’ this is defined by biology. In making their ruling the judges highlighted it is not legal to ask someone to present a GRC when accessing services. They also stated no one who is transgender should be treated differently whether they have one or not. Given this, we need urgent clarity as to what impact ‘becoming’ someone of a different gender now has. Indeed, those who brought the original case argued that those who were biologically male could become women under the GRA legislation as it did not require any form of surgery to be performed- and that it was now a redundant Act. Whilst the judges rejected this argument, it is not clear how and when a GRC now influences service provision, if at all.

Secondly, it is not clear how this ruling will be interpreted on a case by case basis as the court requires. Single sex spaces have always been possible to arrange and protected– the Equality Act has always enabled the exclusion of someone of a different biological sex on a proportionate basis. This was and is the case for both women’s refuges and women’s sport. The ruling now means it is important to confirm what ‘proportionate’ means and how this will be interpreted and if it will be expanded. There has been much speculation on public toilets, all women shortlists, female representation on public and private bodies, changing rooms and more- this change could affect these matters and the guidance issued to those responsible for them.

In the aftermath of this ruling, I spoke out about this impact and the need not just for lawyers but politicians to do better in resolving these tensions. You can find my statement here:

From your correspondence I’m very aware of many transgender residents of Walthamstow who are fearful that they may face more hostility and discrimination as a result of recent developments – and also of residents who want to be able to discuss the value of single sex spaces and how to provide them but are concerned this will lead to abuse. I will always uphold the right of transpeople to identify themselves as such without being asked to justify this status, and I continue to recognise – as I always have - biological sex as a source of direct discrimination.

The complexity of biological sex and assigned gender are not theoretical discourses or social media clickbait. They are lived experiences for many who now fear the political manipulation of this ruling, and the erosion of hard fought for progress on women’s equality. Already the abuse and poisonous nature of discussion of this ruling by both parliamentarians, campaigners and the press has made it almost impossible to navigate what happens next- that is in no one’s interest. I have a track record of speaking out in support of those who disagree with me on a range of concerns to be heard without fear but with accountability- I will continue to do that.
As and when there are updates on this matter I will share them with you – and especially if and when there are opportunities for public engagement either via parliament or directly through Government. Please also feel free to share this with any other local resident you know is interested in this matter.

Thank you once again for writing to me – whether you agree with my approach or not, I value the candour and concern that residents have shown on this issue.

Stella

By transgender residents she means 20 something lads wearing nail varnish and crop tops.
she’s another idiot MP not doing her job properly and too busy on social media spinning discs and trying to be seen as a bit of a hipster. She’s let women down and that’ll be her legacy.

bigknitblanket · 23/04/2025 08:57

Does anyone ever think that if you got one of these people on their own in a room and discussed the issue one to one, they’d come round and realise what bollocks they’re talking? Or is that just wishful thinking?

Pluvia · 23/04/2025 10:11

It doesn't work. For many It's like religion. People believe in it and are unshakeable and no amount of rational argument will shift them. They get very emotionally upset when required to discuss it because of the cognitive dissonance they experience — which is possibly why they talk about being attacked and feeling their lives are under threat and in danger of being erased. They know there's no rational defence or evidence to support anything they say but they can't shake their belief.

There's some speculation that there's something genetic going on: Dean Hamer's book The God Gene, suggests that the gene VMAT2, which regulates neurotransmitter transport in the brain, might influence spirituality. I know that when I've encountered groups of trans people I'm struck by how neuro-diverse they seem.

UptonFunk · 24/04/2025 16:52

Pluvia · 23/04/2025 10:11

It doesn't work. For many It's like religion. People believe in it and are unshakeable and no amount of rational argument will shift them. They get very emotionally upset when required to discuss it because of the cognitive dissonance they experience — which is possibly why they talk about being attacked and feeling their lives are under threat and in danger of being erased. They know there's no rational defence or evidence to support anything they say but they can't shake their belief.

There's some speculation that there's something genetic going on: Dean Hamer's book The God Gene, suggests that the gene VMAT2, which regulates neurotransmitter transport in the brain, might influence spirituality. I know that when I've encountered groups of trans people I'm struck by how neuro-diverse they seem.

Neurodiversity creates very black and white thinking. Impaired ability to understand others' POVs. And with the added dash sometimes of Oppositional Defiance and/or Rejection Sensitivity. My DH has the full alphabet soup and it is a total nightmare to live with. The RS in particular means even the slightest hint of contradiction or a raised eyebrow sparks a full mantrum. It is all too familiar with the trans lot. Our kids (also neurodiverse) have to make accommodations for him - their father!...

I look at the slightly-squiffy-eye-gaze and fixed smiles in photos from trans rallies and autism screams out at me. Also on the footage from Saturday's rallies - the odd hand movements which come from hypermobility/motor issues that are part of the autism diagnosis. I heard a trans woman speak about how they had gone to a pride march back 3 years ago and they were so happy because they found friends, and a cause and discovered why they had been unhappy before - GI solved all their problems. They went from a male with social difficulties to a stunning and brave women fighting for justice - and a new wardrobe with lipstick to boot. I felt really sympathetic for them. They sucked at being male. Being female had magically improved things - so of course they will cling on to that. But that is no excuse and they can be as feminine as they like - just not actual women

UptonFunk · 24/04/2025 16:57

bigknitblanket · 23/04/2025 08:57

Does anyone ever think that if you got one of these people on their own in a room and discussed the issue one to one, they’d come round and realise what bollocks they’re talking? Or is that just wishful thinking?

I think a few women have tried that with Stella. She has nodded along but ultimately stuck with the TWAW rhetoric. Her email - like Lisa Nandy - showed she doesn't have an understanding of how the law has been interpreted by the public bodies. So will she realise? Or will she carry on defending the indefensible in a tone deaf way?

Unkindly - I'd say her morphing - post kids - into a frumpy multi-coloured Pru-Leith lookalike might suggest that tone-deaf is most likely.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 24/04/2025 16:59

That's the last shred of respect I had for her, gone.

What a twat.

thedancingclown · 24/04/2025 17:06

how transwomen are now more frightened of getting abused because of the ruling....

so how does she explain the abuse and threats of violence and death threats from these ‘vulnerable’ transwomen. The events in London are an example.

northwestgirl · 24/04/2025 17:15

pizzaHeart · 22/04/2025 18:51

Well she was really busy this Sunday!
How did she get email addresses? Is it even allowed?

tell me she used BCC

RedToothBrush · 24/04/2025 17:18

Sadly looking at the numbers, she has just about the safest of seats. However she's liable to help other MPs lose their jobs. She won't be popular with a lot of other Labour MPs for this.

Short of a good independent standing I think you are stuck with her for the next 20 years.

Move.

crackedpaint · 24/04/2025 17:25

What exactly are these terrified transwomen so scared of? Is it the lack of access to women and women's spaced to thereby extract all that lovely validation and "euphoria " from? Why can't men be the ones to accommodate other males who dress atypically? Why is it always women who are the one's who are told to accommodate men? Why does Stella put men's rights above women's right? Why does she want men to have access to vulnerable women or to be used by men as a prop for his sexual gratification of a fetish? Haven't women fought long and hard for their own spaces to get away from men and their exploitation of us?

Why does she side with men over women? Is she really that stupid or is there something else going on?

SigourneyHoward · 24/04/2025 17:32

Back in the day when she was a new MP I had some engagement with her. I had been impressed with her approach to some issues but I and a colleague met her, completely changed my mind - she was one of those people who were always looking over your shoulder to see if there was someone more useful to speak to. Granted this was in parliament so she was right in that respect but she didn’t need to be so obvious about it!!

FlirtsWithRhinos · 24/04/2025 17:33

crackedpaint · 24/04/2025 17:25

What exactly are these terrified transwomen so scared of? Is it the lack of access to women and women's spaced to thereby extract all that lovely validation and "euphoria " from? Why can't men be the ones to accommodate other males who dress atypically? Why is it always women who are the one's who are told to accommodate men? Why does Stella put men's rights above women's right? Why does she want men to have access to vulnerable women or to be used by men as a prop for his sexual gratification of a fetish? Haven't women fought long and hard for their own spaces to get away from men and their exploitation of us?

Why does she side with men over women? Is she really that stupid or is there something else going on?

I honestly don't know. They on the one hand reject the idea that being female is relevent to being a woman, but on the other insist female people are not allowed to have female-only stuff because it excludes them.

viques · 24/04/2025 17:36

Well I would message her back and say how lovely that she has such loyal constituents who will no doubt all vote for her in gratitude for her stand in going against the letter of the law on their behalf. Then say that unfortunately , as a woman who believes that the definition of a woman should be based on biology you will not be voting for her as you don’t want to waste your vote on someone who can’t grasp simple science.

Fenlandia · 24/04/2025 18:04

UptonFunk · 22/04/2025 19:19

I saw that - others have said it’s useless. I thought it was needed if you wanted to change a birth certificate and marry/die in your desired gender. Still does all those things

Show quote history

Ruth Hunt herself said in 2018 that a GRC is just admin, when she was trying to pretend it wasn't a golden ticket to women's single-sex spaces!

FlirtsWithRhinos · 24/04/2025 18:34

You know who might get good use of a GRC? All those mythical 6 ft beardy trans men at risk of being challenged in the ladies toilets can use them to prove they are genuine trans men and their actual biological sex is female. Phew - no need for the TRA's much trailered genital inspections after all!

And now since GRCs won't confer additional cross sex privileges but can protect existing actual sex rights, there is no reason not to make them super easy to get!

Win win right? TRAs will be so pleased to have a solution to so many of their "oh dear but what about...." problems, right?

UptonFunk · 24/04/2025 19:03

BabyOrca · 24/04/2025 17:11

But she was happy to kick-start her career off the back of an all-female shortlist

Page currently deleted from the Labour website but here is the archive from 5 years ago:
https://archive.is/3m5yU

UptonFunk · 24/04/2025 19:05

FFS The hypocrisy. Here are labour's "diversity hires" that presumably would not have made it through on a fair fight.

#"Women selected using AWS work at senior levels, and do so very effectively. Shadow Cabinet members:
Angela Rayner
Rebecca Long-Bailey
Sue Hayman
Cat Smith
Valerie Vaz
Chi Onwurah
Angela Smith
Christina Rees
Barbara Keeley
Nia Griffith
Gloria de Piero
Paula Sherriff
Stella Creasy
Rachel Maskell
Jess Phillips
Tulip Siddiq
Holly Lynch
Heidi Alexander
Rupa Huq
Melanie Onn
Luciana Berger
Thangam Debbonnaire
Maria Eagle
Lilian Greenwood
Kerry McCarthy
Rachel Reeves
Shabana Mahmood
Lisa Nandy

Swipe left for the next trending thread