Sex Matters are asking you to email your MP this weekend

[PachacutisBadAuntie]

Re the delay in publishing the EHRC guidance. Can't see a thread on this yet, please do email if you can.

sex-matters.org/take-action/write-to-your-mp-the-government-must-stand-up-for-womens-rights/

@RayneBowTrout I am very much in favour of concentrating Peter Kyle's mind on crafting an appropriate response to your email. 😈

No, no and no!

I think part of the thing with the Labour Party is that it wasn't just about rooting out the so-called 'looney Left', because genderwoo is present across all wings of the Party. Well, it's in the Tories too, so there you go. And you don't quite get that ringing endorsement of trust that you might have hoped for from the PM!

It's more than being a tad wary! No there no need. But it doesn't stop me from looking into where Labour was / is with the idea of it. B&H you have kids as young as 7 being taught about trans and gender identity at school, you had until recently GPs (Sam Hall) advocating Gillicks Competence / informed consent and prescribing kids puberty blockers; conversion is rife in Brighton

My MP replied. I’m disappointed by his response.

Thank you for getting in touch about this.

My approach to this issue has consistently been to try and emphasise the respect that we are all due in life, and the importance of compassion and empathy. I also, obviously, want to help people and organisations understand and comply with the law.

However, I fear that the EHRC ruling does not provide the clarity we would all wish. It was an 88 page ruling, and that, almost by definition, is not going to be straightforward. It is also subject to ongoing court challenges, especially in relation to how the judgement apparently contradicts the European Convention on Human Rights, and I have concerns over the practicability of some of it's provisions.

We all deserve the security and protection that the law can offer, and while this is especially true for women, I also think it's true for marginalised and vulnerable minorities.

Responses like that just increase the blood pressure!

Did he mean to say the SC ruling?

'EHRC ruling' = hasn't got a clue what he's on about and doesn't care

@cornflakejamtart you should reply and ask for details of the 'ongoing court challenges' just for a laugh

I am been thinking about replying! I’d quite like to him to expand on what he feels is unclear too. But you’re right, his response makes it very clear he doesn’t care so I’m not sure I’d even get a response.

I frequently get the same vibe from mine. Irritating bloody women asking difficult questions as if they and these things matter when he's being very Busy And Important. (He also with the BBC Identifies as not being institutionally biased. Don't BiasShame him.)

Done!

I've just had a written reply from my MP (on very swish paper which I did enjoy) and the wording is exactly the same as on @SaffyWall which is strange as its a different MP. Would they share resource maybe?

Im still waiting a response from my Con MP. Bit surprised as she has only a 600 majority over the SNP.

I'd write back & suggest that your MP actually read the 88 pages of the SC judgment as they are a model of pellucid clarity & describe the law as it must be followed & ought to have been followed for the last 15 years.
The failures of respect, compassion & empathy lie in the refusal to abide by the law & to extend to women & LGB people the rights & protections that are legally theirs, & in a staggering contempt for safeguarding.

So the alternative is to discriminate against all the female customers by forcing them to share mixed toilet facilities???

the other option is to just put the trans identified men back in the men’s facilities. Stonewall law falsely told them this was ok. Why should women suffer?

AGAIN.

How does this sound? I’ve never had contact with MP before. I’m also not super clued up on the issue, but obviously have some common sense or I wouldn’t be here.

Dear X,
Thank you for your reply.
Can I ask if you’ve actually read the SC ruling? It is not the same as EHRC. I’m wondering what exactly you feel is ambiguous? It is pellucid so I surprised by your comment. It describes law as it must be followed, and as it should have been for the past 15 years.
Compassion and empathy are extremely important. It is more than a lack of compassion and empathy towards women and LGB people to refuse to abide by the law, to deny them the rights that are legally theirs I feel is a hatred of women and LGB people. It is also a colossal safeguarding failure.
Could I please ask you to detail these ongoing court challenges because I am not aware of them? I would like to look into them.

Thank you and kind regards

What these responses seem to say is that those who put themselves forward to be MPs then admit they find doing their job a bit difficult.

Irrespective of their personal believes there has been a supreme court ruling. The ruling impinges on existing laws, and responsibilities of employers, events spaces and so on.

Not saying everything else should get pushed off the political agenda, but why aren't they just getting on with it.

I think this it what reflects that they dont think that ensuring women have their rights enforced.

That sounds really good but I'd keep it super simple. I think I'd expand SC to Supreme Court and EHRC to 'the EHRC guidance to the ruling'. I would replace 'It is pellucid so I surprised by your comment' with something like 'I have seen a number of comments on its clarity, even to non-specialists'. I think I'd replace hatred with something less strong, and maybe take out the safe guarding sentence in case it distracts him.
(Sorry you probably didn't want that much detail, I'm known as Ms Nitpicky for a reason 😳)

Also should add there are probably loads of women on this thread with much more experience of writing to nitwit MPs than me!

You are more forebearing than me. I've so run out of patience with my MP's prevarications that I now tend to address him in a somewhat terse fashion. You're probably right to be a little more friendly to yours but after so many attempts to break through his Stonewall conditioning, I have exhausted my milk of human kindness.

I've emailed my MP 'T' again. Suggested the way forward is men, like him, support tw, encourage them to use male facilities. Or campaign for fourth spaces, with an aside about the safety risks of fully enclosed toilet cubicles. Also asked him directly what he sees as the way forward. Also reminded him that the SC made no new law and got in a dig about the BBC.

Now I wait.

Eta I actually called him T, suggested he'd not read my email, just ran it through a rather stupid AI before telling him I wouldn't be so cynical.

@lcakethereforeIam I wonder how long he'll need to think about those suggestions 😁
Sex Matters sent an update on the 7th saying that more than 2,000 people have emailed their MP, hopefully every MP has had at least one!

I got a response from my Labour MP:

'Thank you for contacting me about the Supreme Court ruling on the appeal brought by For Women Scotland.

In April, the Court ruled that sex in the Equality Act means biological sex, meaning a person will be considered as their biological sex for the purposes of the Act, whether they have a Gender Recognition Certificate or not.

Ministers have welcomed the judgment for bringing clarity for women and service providers. They have emphasised that single-sex spaces must be protected, and that clear guidance must be available across a range of settings, from healthcare and prisons to sport and single-sex support groups. It also highlighted that trans people retain clear protections in law and should be able to live their lives free of harassment and discrimination.

I appreciate this is an issue with strongly held views on both sides of what has become an extremely polarised debate. I fully support the Government and the Supreme Court in their declaration that this case is not about the triumph of one group at the expense of another, about winners or losers, or ‘us or them’. Now more than ever, it is essential that people in positions of authority, such as politicians, speak out about the importance of treating everybody with respect, even when our beliefs differ.

As you will know, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has submitted a revised code of practice to the Government, following public consultation. The code is to support service providers, public bodies and associations to understand their duties under the Equality Act and put them into practice, taking the judgment into account.

Ministers are now considering the EHRC’s updated draft, to ensure it provides the clarity service providers need in line with the ruling, and that people will have appropriate access to crucial services.

More widely, I will continue to back the Government in its work to protect and support women. I support its mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade, and to ensure women’s equality and tackling discrimination is at the heart of its work.'

Do we think this is his own response? He doesn't really address the fact that it's already law and should be followed with or without the guidance.