Good Law Practice launch a EHCR/Supreme Court challenge over toilets

[fromorbit]

After raising over 418K it turns out the GLP's amazing legal case is all about toilets. Details:

https://archive.is/TWRTl

No doubt it will fail like most of their previous legal cases.

Previous thread:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5336208-good-law-project-suing-the-ehrc-and-bridget-phillipson-letter-before-action?page=1

I use transsexual for the children who have been caught up in this because those children are being told that they can change sex, and medical treatment is always promoted for those children. No, they can't change sex, but they think they can, so they think they are transsexual. I also use it partly because I would like the people who promote this ideology to children to think about what they are actually promoting and how they are sexualising children.

I agree that transvestite is the most appropriate term for most adult males who identify as 'trans', because most of them don't have any medical treatment and their only claim to being 'trans' is that they like wearing women's clothing. The ones who do have cosmetic medical treatment are just taking transvestism to an extreme.

Those children aren’t transsexual, they are mislead

I wonder if rather than opposing the TRAs, the best way to neutralise them is not only agree with them, but agree fiercely ?

The science about changing species needs to be investigated and funded further, surely ? Otherwise furries are just sad losers poncing around like they'd fallen into a primary school dressing up box. What about their rights ?

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/25222180.southampton-meeting-leaves-got-news-bemused/

He's straight up lying on Bluesky. Claiming the protesters have "no history of violence" erm weren't six of the Scottish branch arrested & 1 charged with assault last month?
Also the "history of peaceful protest" doesn't square with their cricket stunt last year, and he's still lying by omission about his children being involved.

Is his reading comprehension impaired? He states no explanation was given as to why EHRC staff were not attending the office, yet in the passage he quotes it says quite clearly that they’re not attending as a direct result of the protests. Not very bright.

And you've missed my point.

Boris Johnson (waving his arm across an sea of journalists) :

"There are no journalists here"

Calling them ‘transexual’ legitimises the term. They are no such thing.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmcomloc/636/636.pdf

This is a government report on the provision of public toilets published 2008. No mention of gender neutral toilets. Lots of mention of gender - clearly as the ‘old fashioned’ way of using it to mean sex. You can easily tell that from the way it talks about urinals for men etc. There’s also no discussion of T in the LGB. This is only 13 years before Stonewall were mentioned in 67% of the consultation responses for the public toilet consultation, where 83% were apparently in favour of ‘non-gendered’ toilets. This led to bizarre results like only 2% of people being in favour of disabled toilets.

There is lots about cottaging etc and it is matter of fact. There is no suggestion people had a need to be in opposite sex toilets or it would have been a point of discussion.

Since then in the next 10 years, toilets suddenly became about more than they had been before. It shows just how quickly this has happened to the point, in the EHRC consultation, that there’s the new example where they state single sex toilets are best for safety and comfort but actually forget that because we are going to do something else instead…

Considering how difficult it is still to get good toilet provision for people with disabilities, to get to this point, so quickly, it really is mind-blowing.

If you asked ChatGPT for a plan to reverse the loosening of the urinary leash in a way that masked it's anti-women agenda, it would have invented TRAs.

In fact I can't be so sure it didn't. You could run LLMs on HPC estates in the noughties ....

What do you think the best term is? I'm open to suggestions and I'm prepared to reconsider my own view.

Some TRAs have been very open about how children are being used by their movement. One of them, Autumn Sandeen, said: “I’ve always said there are two groups that are going to make change in transgender legislation and the “gender identity and expression” related language in legislation. It’s going to be trans youth because they take, you know, they demystify it and take the sex right out of the trans experience.” (Unfortunately the youtube video of him saying this was taken down a few years ago.)

I think 'sex' should be put right back in there. These children are being used as pawns by a men's right movement and sexual fetishists.

There's more about this on Miranda Yardley's site.
A Full Life Uninterrupted By Transition - Miranda Yardley

Yardley says this about the term transsexual:
The word “transsexual” is more tightly defined, being someone who undertakes a surgical, medical and social transition in order to attempt to live permanently as a member of the sex opposite to which they are born.

This describes children who are caught up in this ideology more than it does adults. Most adults have no medical treatment. Children are always pushed towards puberty blockers and then other treatment as they get older. Many of these children actually believe they can change sex. This makes them 'transsexual' rather than 'transgender', which has the feel of something which is just a cutesy dressing up game or simply not conforming to gender stereotypes.

I'm sure if we started talking about "child transsexuals" rather than "trans kids" a lot more people would be asking questions about what's going on.

What do you think the best term is?

’children’

We need to define which children we are talking about, and what is being done to them.

Even if they have no surgery or medication until 18, they have been groomed into believing this is their path since childhood. Its not as if they suddenly develop insight at 18.

They are children who have been groomed and suffered medical abuse by transideologists. Calling them ‘child transsexuals’ is a bit like calling the abused girls in Rotherham ‘child prostitutes’

@Dwimmer spot on i doubt i will live to see the day that this is recognised as a crime.

i am just thankful my children grew up without this and that my grandchildren will be safe from this ideology.,

Children aren't trans anything.
But children can be gender-questioning and/or gender-non-conforming, and therefore vulnerable to being 'transed'.

Not really. I see it more like calling abused girls "abused girls". A transsexual is someone who takes medication and/or has surgery so as to look like the opposite sex, which is exactly what's being done to these children.

Talking about "trans kids" or "transgender kids" is like calling those abused girls "child prostitutes ". It implies that nothing is wrong with what's being done to them.

Try talking to a TRA about transsexual children and see what sort of reaction you get.

"Children who have been groomed and suffered medical abuse by transideologists", while an accurate description, is a bit of a long-winded way to refer to them every time you talk about them.

Talking about "trans kids" or "transgender kids" is like calling those abused girls "child prostitutes ". It implies that nothing is wrong with what's being done to them.

Are you suggesting that children who are repeatedly raped have had nothing wrong done to them?

No.

Being dishonest again on Bluesky, he's put his own words in quotes after a link to the EHRC/TKDB judgement so it looks like he's actually quoting the judge. He then blocks anyone who points out how misleading this is, screenshot for when he gets round to blocking/deleting as usual.

Oops missed the link to his bluesky post

I was a bit puzzled by this post in the middle of the night when I replied to it. I couldn't see how you could have misunderstood a simple statement so completely.

Reading it again, without the context of my earlier post I think I can see why you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not using the term 'transsexual' as a synonym for 'trans' or 'transgender', but with a completely different meaning.

You need this context from my earlier post:
I'm sure if we started talking about "child transsexuals" rather than "trans kids" a lot more people would be asking questions about what's going on.

I am saying that the terms 'trans kids' or 'transgender kids', like 'child prostitutes', are inaccurate terms to describe what is going on. 'Transsexual children' is telling it like it is while 'trans(gender) children' is a euphemism.

These children are being given unnecessary medication to make them resemble the opposite sex, or at least arrest their sexual development. It also brings back into view the sexual element of the trans movement which the trans movement wants to hide, particularly in relation to children.

As I said in an earlier post, try talking to some TRAs about 'transsexual children' rather than 'trans/transgender children' and see what sort of response you get (please post here what they say).

Any reference to children as ‘trans’ anything embeds the idea that trans is a legitimate physical state in need of some sort of treatment. They are not ‘trans’, ‘transgender’ or ‘transsexual’, they are children who have been groomed to believe something about themselves.

Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere or, indeed, if there is a another thread more suited:

Scottish schools to create single-sex toilets after gender row - BBC News

I agree. I only use the term 'transsexual' for children, because the TRAs hate it being pointed out that their movement is sexualising children and damaging their sexual development.

I think it's particularly important to stress this when talking to 'respectable' TRAs such as MPs (like those on the WEC).

I also think it's useful to (sort of) use their terminology when talking to them, but stress something which they are keen to brush under the carpet.

So when writing to my MP, for example, I might say something about how I believe transsexualism is for adults, and ask them why they believe that children can be transsexual. Using the term 'trans' or 'transgender' won't have the same effect. 'Transsexual' conjures up a completely different picture from the other terms.

I don't see how you could ask this question of an MP without using the term 'trans' at all. My preference in such a situation is to use 'transsexual'. How would you phrase this question to your MP (or someone else if your MP is one of the sensible ones who doesn't believe that children can 'be trans')?