The Times has seen a copy of EHRC's final guidance

[Igneococcus]

and it looks like it's pretty rubbish:
"Under the new guidance, places such as hospital wards, gyms and leisure centres will be able to question transgender women over whether they should be using single-sex services based on how they look, their behaviour or concerns raised by others."

https://www.thetimes.com/article/82eecc43-711f-4c0a-b669-42d09d60d63e?shareToken=e5c7b92df4468caa07dbd71d66c660ab

It's all bollocks anyway, however they kick it around.

Even if they manage to force the 'watering down' of the guidance so it says men have more rights than women, and women aren't allowed single sex spaces because of sad men, it will not change the law .

It will just mean the guidance is wrong, and women can go on sueing the ever loving fuck out of every public body.

This slide (Mermaids is its evil creator I believe) always makes me chortle.

Firstly I choose to see the first three figures on the left as having resplendent handlebar moustaches. And flathead No5 with the giant nose is gazing across at these glorious taches in envy and admiration, while trying to avoid staring directly at radioactive No6. Confusingly there are some hints of a possible early pregnancy for No5? May just be an unflattering top.

No4 and No9 are very happily married. They met and fell in love while modelling for those popular and so profitable Toilet Signs.

The five figures on the far right all look the same. Make more of an effort, male stereotypes! At least change your parting like those befrocked figures on the far left. No7 is at least trying, with the odd mutton-sleeved top and airing his armpits. No7 must be baffled as to why his groin is so much lower and his legs so much shorter than No1 through 6. Is he actually wearing a onesie?

To be fair, the diagram at least makes a stab at explaining what the spectrum is. (handlebar moustache to maybe little tiny moustache), which is more than people do when they claim that sex is bi-modal.

Yes, prevaricate, prevaricate seems to be the government's position. I suspect they are stalling until the outcome of the GLP judicial review.

But being optimistic 🤞🏻, hopefully this will finally dismiss the case by case argument, which was parroted to me by my Labour MP.

I honestly don't think the hat trick of Sandie Peggie, GLP and Darlington will stop the prevarication. The government will identify as this being ok. In the same way as they identify that saying 'no we didn't break our budget promises because very technically that word meant something very slightly different to what it is understood as meaning by everyone else in the country' as being believable and convincing. And they will identify as it being absolutely ok that everyone must keep the laws they find convenient but they can ignore and know better than laws that they find inconvenient. Couldn't lie straight in bed.

Maybe pressure will come from businesses. If Leonardo lose their case, then it will highlight the cost to businesses of breaking the law. So the government will have to weight up whether it is better to have guidance that accurately reflects the law to prevent businesses from getting sued, or whether they want to keep muddying the water to placate the activist MPs.

If there's going to be pressure it has to come from businesses. NHS trusts etc seem more than willing to soak up tribunal losses, and health ministers don't seem particularly bothered by that.

Olly Alexander has organised a concert in support of trans rights at Wembley next year. Because apparently hate crimes are up as a result of the SC judgement and the EHRC interim guidance.

The money raised will go to...the Good Law Project. Oh dear 🤣

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2025/nov/28/sugababes-sophie-ellis-bextor-wolf-alice-and-more-to-play-all-star-charity-concert-for-trans-rights#:~:text=Artists%20including%20Sugababes%2C%20Wolf%20Alice,of%20trans%20rights%20next%20year.

This Govt (and the Scottish Govt) remind me of sulky teenagers. They are just stringing out the delay in doing things they don't want to do and that they dislike being made to do.

There's little to no accountability in public life these days and this lack of accountability makes it difficult to distinguish between incompetence and corruption in public servants. If there's no shame in public servants and if their sense of 'honour' doesn't make them feel as though they should apologise or resign, then we are at the mercy of people with brass necks.

Zack Polanski Will make an appearance (of course). And I'm sure Jolyon Maugham will also appear on stage - Messiah like- at some point.

Trans rights to do what? What 'hate crimes' exactly?

We're honestly going to see a benefit concert for adult men not getting their own way.

Have they really no clue how the general public are going to view this?

I suspect genuine fans of these artists won't care that their money is going into a company (and presumably a lifestyle for Maugham) that won't be able to do anything productive with it.

I guess everyone's a winner though: the artists and attendees get to virtue signal, everyone gets to enjoy the tunes and Maugham gets rich.

Although of course, not everyone really is a winner: common sense, the safeguarding of vulnerable children (and young adults) and women's rights seem to be fair game collateral damage here.

I really hope they all use this platform to celebrate the experiments that the NHS is doing on children's bodies and brains in the PB clinical trials. It seems only fair that the crowd gets to hear the types of projects that their money supports.

"Jo Maugham, founder of the Good Law Project, said: “To be trans is to celebrate the infinite possibility of the human condition"

Whereas back in the real world, the people who don't believe they have infinite privilege recognise that it is because they don't have infinite possibilities that they need rights.

Mostly it seems to be for one adult man who so far hasn't declared a trans identity.

Pretty much. I'd imagine quite a few of the hate crimes involve misgendering as well.

And we should all pause to spare a thought for the poor women who are unable to find suitable 'fem' underwear to accommodate their male appendages

www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1p8uccl/mtf_underwear_for_those_who_dont_tuck_uk/

Another article in the Guardian criticising Baroness' Faulkner's tenure at the EHRC.

Although, amazingly, it does contain some great quotes from Susan Smith.

The impression it gives is they are waiting to see the back of Baroness Faulkner and are pinning their hopes on Mary Ann Stephenson being a softer touch when it comes to enforcing the law. And they want to install some TRA-friendly commissioners.

Is there anything to suggest that MAS will.be anything other than fair and impartial? From what I have seen of her, she seems sensible. Is she really going to be a pushover?

www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/29/ehrc-guidance-single-sex-spaces

Also comment from the EHCR person that the handover and recruitment issues will kick the can down the road for a few more months.

Anything to avoid women's legal rights.

They need to recruit new commissioners, but in the nature of these things, if they launched the advert today they probably wouldn't get the new commissioners in until after Easter. If they advertise in the new year, maybe not until after summer recess.

There's no reason why the commissioner vacancies should have any impact whatsoever on the Minister laying the guidance before Parliament, but it looks very much like Phillipson wants to kick the can down the road, possibly until after the May elections when there might be a vacancy for party leader that she'd certainly be interested in.

it looks very much like Phillipson wants to kick the can down the road

It's looking like everyone who could make a decision right now is doing the same. My bet is that they are collectively waiting for case law to sort it all out, so they don't have to.

That will take years, given all of the current tribunals (Peggie, Darlington nurses and others) are at the first tier stage. It's going to take at least one high profile appeal judgement which specifically impacts single-sex spaces to move this on because of the cowardice being displayed by Phillipson and anyone else who could influence this.

By contrast, Falkner has shown conviction with her head above the parapet... and is getting it chopped off while the Phillipson gang stands by with a "what can I do?" helpless look on their faces. Starmer's random chants that it all needs to be implemented don't mean anything if he doesn't line people and processes up to achieve that.

I would suggest in the nicest possible way, that MAS wont be a pushover, but will not be one to make bold moves like writing to the Government about why they aren't getting a move on.

But the real danger will be if they appoint commissioners who are fully TWAW.

How much time did Baroness Falkner spend not being at work because she was attacked.

What is so incredible is that this isn't even about the EHRC, this is about a court ruling that has to be implemented.

The EHRC have done their part of the consequence of that, but politicians haven't.

And I think this really is because some still think that somehow the ruling shouldn't be implemented because it isn't "kind" and after all most women wouldn't want to insist of their rights at the expense of a tiny minority who might be upset that women should have rights and those rights supported and enforced.

So if the politicians start to bully MAS then it is up to us as much as campaign groups to say you of all people should be upholders of the law.

It does have to be said, clearly and as often as possible until it's being said in the papers and every interview: this government are happy for women to have rights and equality on paper, but not in practice.

And they see the law as something optional, to be used only when convenient to them.

It's beginning to look like the only way to get anything done in this government is to get Lord Hermer to tell Starmer he needs to do something.

When Tony Blair told Starmer that it's OK to say that women don't have penises, that worked too.

Obviously that's only going to keep working if the government support the digital ID that makes Blair rich (did I just say that thought out loud?) so having a backup Lord as an alternative person who can tell Starmer what to think works well too.

Sorted 👍

Sir Brian Leveson will work too, if the announcement on jury trials is anything to go by. Getting rid of something in Magna Carta because a judge told him to do it may be the most Starmer thing ever.

Of course, he's handed it over to David Lammy to implement, so that might mean suspects going on Total Wipeout to prove their innocence.

Of course, he's handed it over to David Lammy to implement, so that might mean suspects going on Total Wipeout to prove their innocence.

Yes! This is surely the best way to govern a country. It's both merit-based and fun. What's not to love?

Until about 2 years ago, I was an unwavering Lib Dems supporter (I really do wish they understood that sometimes sex-based rights are important, and then I still might have been at a national level) and this image really does feel very well aligned with Ed Davey. Thank goodness I can still be in touch with my progressive values and still appreciate sensible suggestions like this 🙃