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.

clamping down on democracy in the name of saving democracy.

Saving us from ourselves. Starmer hasn't forgiven the electorate for brexit and doesn't trust us to make the correct choices.

Guess he’ll have to pee at home then. Hope he doesn’t have a wife.

There's a part of me that says he (Starmer) has a point: Brexit was a shit idea which hasn't (of course) produced the results people who voted for it hoped for. But what I want from politicians is that they set out arguments to convince the electorate of the rightness of their choices, isn't that how it's supposed to work?

Just listen to the high priests of the regime, Alastair Campbell, Neil Kinnock and the like, they're quite open about the point of politics being to stop the voters making the wrong decisions.

Of course this is based on the idea that the people in charge are really good at making the right decisions. It works pretty well if you're being ruled by Frederick the Great, not so well if Rachel Reeves is the best we can do.

I wouldn't go that far.
Starmer is a coward but not a philanderer as we know Boris is.
Boris is the class clown who got to be PM.
Starmer is a charmless lawyer.

I’ll take not cancelling elections, jury trials and not having the threat of digital ID. Seriously bad.

I think this talk of 'cancelling elections' is a bit rich, frankly. It's not like the govt sent out a fiat to councils ordering this. And DBS checks on MPs; is that really such a bad idea? I suspect many MN posters would be all in favour. And is Rachel Reeves really that bad? Her room for manoeuvre is very limited, and, of course, she takes the stick. It's a thankless job, and I'm very suspicious of the patronising and sexist "Rachel from Accounts" meme.

Bloody hell, that sounds a lot like me sympathising with the govt! 😁

This. We aren't being ruled by the incorruptible Lord Vetinari, assisted by the equally-incorruptible Drumknott and Vimes. But these politicos like to pretend that we are and they are the Roundworld Vetinari, Drumknott, and Vimes.

He can use the men’s. But this is the point women make about keeping their younger sons with them in the toilets. And that is why it is right and proper that that happens.

The Russell Brand trial will also help people realise what can go on in public toilets and why we need to design them so they are as safe as possible not as private as possible.

This isn’t saying he is innocent or guilty, just that toilets are the location repeatedly mentioned.

Its back to changing the focus. TRA will say its cis men not trans who sexually abuse in public toilets. We need to make it clear that making toilets enclosed enables these attacks.

Well yes of course he can use the men’s. My comment was a little tongue in cheek- I’m so sick of these men who think they can trample all over women’s spaces.

If we keep the focus that single sex designs are the only ones that can have the door gaps for health and safety then all people have to stick to toilets of their sex (children and cleaners excepted). You need a single sex environment in front of the cubicles for there to be a door gap. It’s a health and safety issue. It is also an economic one if the government change rules as so much provision would have to change to mixed sex designs.

The problem with researching toilet incidents (a death or an attack) is that it’s difficult to assess what the conditions are because more single sex toilet cubicles have become private. This is causing problems with safety. Universal designs can be used as a single sex toilet - the only difference being the pictogram on the door. As you said it’s the design that’s the major issue as well as who is allowed in.

BonfireLady · Today 12:15

Have you read Brave New World before? I read it first when I was 12 and the librarian said it wasn't suitable.

I won't give the ending away.

No, I've not. I like a memorable ending.... 😬 Often in these books it's not a happy one of course.

I have read 1984 a few times (starting in childhood), the Handmaid's Tale a couple (in adulthood) and more recently I read Blind Faith by Ben Elton - I really enjoyed that and it felt very relevant to what's happening now with free speech, enforced belief and denial of science. It was on a MN thread where I first heard of it.

Someone also recommended Identity Crisis by him on the same thread, so I read that too. It was really bizarre reading it at the same time as the Hampstead ponds stuff that's been happening recently IRL because that issue comes up a few times in the book.

She lied on her CV and she lied about the Black Hole. Liar, Liar Pants on Fire. Being a woman is irrelevant, equality in the workplace is as well won as it probably ever will be and it wont last. There is blinding evidence that there is a (united and unifying in male population) that want to “put women in their place”and welcome men from countries that think this way and believe women are there to serve only them, so she and her female Handmaiden colleagues simply trying to save their own skins.

Do women here think it was reasonable to make the Labour deputy leader contest all-women?
That future MP candidate lists be 50/50 male/female quotas as they have been in the last 15 years?

At this point I'd settle for anyone of either sex who was basically competent, honest and not out of their bloody tree.

This just is Labour.

Mandelson explained it, his fantasy of a 'post democratic era' where qualified people like him would make the little people do what he thought was good for them, without them having a power of resistance. Because it's really inconvenient.

This is why you never vote Labour.

We have them back in every decade or so to remind ourselves, but it's always like this. Always.

I wrote to my MP last week, copying BP. I've forwarded the email to Kemi Badenoch, urging her to make a massive deal out of contempt shown for a) British values (the rule of law), and b) women and girls' safety just as the VAWG campaign is launched. My MP now knows I've had it with Labour, after 46 years years of loyalty.

Its a shame when party politics get in the way of facts!

And like it or not, althought consultation took place during a Tory Government, instigated by the Women & Equalities Committee**, it was these very same Tories (or even - hold your nose p Liz Truss) who decided to ignore the "majority" response to the consultation that there should be self id. (It was said they had said that too many identical responses were received so they discounted a large number of pro self id votes as not genuine)

Imagine if those responses were being analysed now? Gulp!

** I think the Chair was Maria Miller? and not sure but think this Westminist Hall debate was part of the push to try and get self id accepted. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2018-0254/

Sort of sad that the Women & Equalities Committee of all UK Government's make their priority destroying women's rights.

First became aware of, and a fan of, Kemi Badenoch, as she was instrumental in pulling back the Tory govt from the precipice on this one, and still deep down hopes she's the next PM in 2029.

In 2016 Maria Miller, following the Woman and Equalities’ Trans Equality Inquiry and subsequent report which was mostly batted away by the government at the time, brought a Private Member’s Bill to change the Equality Act 2010 and make “gender identity” a protected characteristic in place of “gender reassignment”. It would also designate that things segregated by sex would instead be segregated by “gender identity”.

Transgender Trend explains here what the implications of this would be:

https://www.transgendertrend.com/gender-identity-rights-of-the-child/

It didn’t get far because not long after the 2017 general election was called. The push for the GRA to be changed to self ID happened after that.

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/1936/stages/9139

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/1936/stages/9139 goes to https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-12-01/debates/38CFE29B-D261-45DF-9C31-0546E3CBC3B8/PointsOfOrder

Mrs Maria Miller, supported by Jess Phillips, Mrs Flick Drummond and Ben Howlett, presented a Bill to make gender identity a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 in place of gender reassignment and to make associated provision for transgender and other persons; and for connected purposes.

Let us never forget that Jess Phillips supported this nonsense.

You read that piece and think, obviously this is bonkers. But isn't that pretty much where they are in Germany?