Brigitte Phillipson blocking EHRC guidance

[lcakethereforeIam]

I'm not sure if there's anything new here though

Phillipson blocks trans guidance after landmark Supreme Court ruling https://share.google/P91PBE5Cy4ROwsdA1

It's a very stark article in the Telegraph.

Even just associating the Govt with the Good Laugh Project like this. at a point where folk are rapidly wising up about them, is hardly a good look. But when you have a Minister who has not bothered to read up on her own brief and get on top of the issues, perhaps it's not surprising.

Bridget Phillipson is a walking demonstration of

𝚃🅷𝕖 ℝ𝑖𝕘𝗵𝖙 𝓢ⓘ𝐝🅔 🅞🅵 𝐻𝚒𝘀𝒕𝒐𝑟🅨 𝙼𝕒🅺𝚎𝖘 𝒀ℴ𝒖 𝐒𝒕𝕦𝐩🄸𝚍

If the SC had decided TiM were women wouldn't the peripatetic massage therapist who only massaged other women have found herself being sued for not massaging head tilting men?

I'll definitely be voting conservative , it's the only party which knows what a woman is. And my MP is Tory, Rebecca Paul who is campaigning to get men out of the local women's prison

Also, does this pregnant woman hold a GRC? It's not impossible but it's terribly transphobic for Phillipson to refer to her using that terminology. If she doesn't have a GRC she shouldn't be using the men's anyway in the topsy-turvy world where the SC had been on glue.

She has apparently parroted something handed to her by an activist who has also neither been able to read nor understand the judgment they are in court discussing

She has had to defend this publicly so has fully understood the judgment. She is either an activist or has a very close relationship with an activist.

This isn't a mistake but a deliberate ploy to seek to change SSS through policy. Micheal Foran spoke about this. The TRAs lost legally so changed approach and looked to influence via policy and Stonewall influence in companies. It has been extremely effective until Maya and FWS.

Given Lammy believes men can grow cervixes, Landy wants to "protect the dolls", Starmer believes women can have a penis..I would say the Labour are TRAs but did a bait & switch to get into power.

If the guidance changes as a result of this Labour government I will never ever vote Labour again and influence my children. It will be such a betrayal that will last in people's memories.

What she is not doing, obviously, as it would be devastating to her nonsense case, is flip it on its head.

Should a woman masseuse ever be permitted to refuse to massage men in her home, if those men claim to be women?

Because that is the reality women are fighting back from, and that is what she wants to embed in law apparently.

Should women ever be permitted to separate themselves from men, Bridget? Lesbians? Rape victims? Changing rooms? There is no case by case. Women either have to validate men with their bodies, or they don't unless they want to. Which is it?

Not to mention: we did all that.

She seems to have missed it, but it was called the GRA.

It affected women so badly they fought through the court for years to get to the SCJ. There's piles of evidence. Heaps of it.

But Bridge would like a re run please. A bit like Wes wants to experiment on another 200 kids and make absolutely sure it really does do them life long damage.

She has had to defend this publicly so has fully understood the judgment.

I don't know about that, I would never underestimate the potential for incompetence. But Starmer must understand the legal details. If he is trying to undermine a Supreme Court decision, that is really bad. (And I hope the Conservatives challenge him on this).

It's a bare-faced lie being used by traitor Bridget as a delay tactic.
There must be a lot of trans + trans allies Labour voters.
Unfortunately, it will take years for most of them to realise that they are supporting child abuse so that men with a fetish can legally be peeping Toms and flashers in women only spaces.

She seems to want single sex services to remain, but let the individual, regardless of their sex, determine which service is best for them.

Which goes back to the question what criteria were the single sex services justified in the first place? And why are those justification not important after they are built.

But frightening (I think) that despite the paucity of defensible arguments, this multi headed hydra of an ideology seems unkillable.

Despite Cass, the SCJ and many tribunal wins we are seeing a rash of pushback: the PB trial, couple of dodgy judgements esp Peggie and this nonsense. I just hope it’s death throes but I fear it isn’t

Am I too pessimistic?

This is what most careerist politicians do.
They have zero convictions, zero moral compass, they go with whatever their supporters want, no matter how evil or how damaging to children.

I’m not interested in voting Tory either. They had years to sort this out and would throw us all under the bus again if they thought it would win them votes. KB won’t be leader at the next election and no man is going to prioritise this. I know this makes me politically homeless and I hate that, but I’ve had time to get used to it over the last few years. At least I’ll be in excellent company.

Bridget Phillipson and all the other TRAs want "single sex" labelled spaces to exist purely for the purpose of neatly corralling the partially-sentient service bipeds so that they are conveniently available for the validation of the actual real humans.

She may well be. Her approval rating is almost higher than all the other male politicians leading and going up quickly.

This whole debarcle really shows how out of touch Labour are. It's been on the front of all the national newspapers, widely talked about on social media and keeps appearing on trending news stories, fairly major in political terms. However absolute tumbleweed from Starmer and his cronies. They are a complete embarrassment.

Like all political parties, the only thing they are interested in are votes.
It's like TV ratings, it doesn't matter how bad the show is so long as millions are watching it.

Young people but especially young women have been groomed into believing this utter bs and are its strongest supporters. It's the only reason the Greens have expanded in the past decade - the trans allies youth voting base.
Gullible young women who want to be seen to be kind.

We need to stop grooming girls to be kind - it makes them stupid and super easy to manipulate and is one of the reasons so many young men (and old) think women are less intelligent than them.

I am not some-one who writes to my MP (Labour) about everything I take issue with. However, I am so mad about this that I have written to her, copying Bridget Phillipson. The letter points out three ironies: 1. a government led by a former DPP is sidestepping the British value of the rule of law 2. a Minister for Women is delaying the guidance that once implemented will protect women 3. Bridget Phillipson's action undermines the government's campaign against violence against women and girls, launched this week. I have also pointed out that Labour will lose votes from progressive, university-educated women living in cities, to add to the 'red wall' votes already lost to Reform.

My head right now: 🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯

Just listened to ( I think) Alex Davi’s Jones talking on Womans hour about the Governments strategies on violence to women and girls. Referenced Bridget and Girl Guiding as having expert knowledge. Incredible. It seem they have no idea of how stupid this looks?

I'm not sure you are being too pessimistic. These allegedly "powerless and bullied" transactivists are among the most powerful men in society. They've been given uncontrolled access to children and schools and have been able to spread their pernicious notions about transitioning being great for children and safeguarding being bigotry if it involves saying no to anyone advocating sex change.
We now have a generation of children who've been coercively controlled and openly intimidated into saying "yes" to men demanding access to undressing girls, female sport etc. And this government are mainly on the side of these men. Often because MPs have vulnerable children / relatives caught up in this. Thus they see the issues purely through their vulnerability rather than noting all the predatory demands made the powerful men in charge.

Yes, this is it. She wants men who say they are women to be allowed to use women-only spaces, but we have to maintain the illusion that these spaces are still single sex.

Ah but Bridget logic means the spaces would be single sex because, all together now: 'TRANS WOMEN ARE WOMEN'.

And round and round and round we go.

Can someone please stop this thing? I’d like to get off.

I've just re-read yesterday's Telegraph article which broke this story. In my haste, I missed an important detail. The Telegraph spoke to an informed person (no name given) who thinks BP's endgame is to stall pending the outcome of the High Court case being brought by the Good Law Project so she can, provided the Good Law Project wins, go back to the EHRC and ask them to revise the guidance.