Translucent organisation and my MP

[Inapickleiam]

My MP has been speaking in parliament today about Pride and promoting his support and link up with the Translucent organisation.
He's shared the speech on his FB page. I want to comment but have to get my words right, it's public.

I'm thinking something like 'I agree with many of your remarks here David, but I disagree with Translucent's aim to 'bin' the EHRC single sex guidance as I believe single sex provision to be vital for women and girls, especially, for example, in sports. Do you support Translucent's position on this?'

I'm not rushing in (going out in a minute!) and would appreciate any wise words.

TIA.

Hmmm. Probably not very helpful but I'd be suggesting he exercises some due diligence and checks the records of those representing Translucent. One of them organises protests outside women's conferences (FILIA) that enables people to openly threaten women delegates with sexual violence. One has an interest in extreme porn promoting a film that represented women being mutilated, abused and dismembered. And minimises VAWG by alleging its all about women's "egg shell skulls":

https://x.com/lliesl/status/1901659956970963238

Men with attitudes to women like this shouldn't be sharing spaces with any women and girls undressing.

Hmm, interesting. Apparently their CEO was in parliament today, he welcomed them. So he's close to them.

My other thought is to just ask if he has considered the views of women and girls in his constituency whose rights he is giving away.

Maybe rather than ask if he supports Translucent, point out that they're in direct opposition to the government's own policy on single sex spaces and ask if he's also in opposition to his own party?

Really there's a bit of shooting the messenger here. The EHRC really is just putting the SC ruling into practical language. It's improper to politicize that process as it doesn't change what the law actually states or how cases are litigated. If the MP feels the SC ruled incorrectly or that the EA is incorrect or confusing, then the proper course of action is to propose new legislation amending, repealing or replacing the EA.

I think this is good. Clear and to the point and might lead to readers really engaging. Unfortunately any attacks on the reputation of individuals risk being seen as personal and ignored.