Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Brigitte Phillipson blocking EHRC guidance

1000 replies

lcakethereforeIam · 18/12/2025 20:55

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
46
MrsOvertonsWindow · 19/12/2025 11:26

We need to keep pointing out that Labour wedging men in spaces where girls and women undress are attempting to decriminalise voyeurism and indecent exposure. At the same time as they claim to be concerned about VAWG.
Hypocrites.

SionnachRuadh · 19/12/2025 11:39

junipery · 19/12/2025 11:13

The only glimmer of light is GLP’s very low success rate.

Labour MP Alex Davies-Jones was talking about VWAG on the radio the other day and funding refuges etc. But it still took 3 or 4 goes for the presenter to get her to say that trans women wouldn’t be able to get into women’s refuges. They are just so resistant to actually applying the law it’s maddening.

ADJ is basically a good egg, sincerely dedicated to tackling VAWG, and might even get some useful things done. But she will absolutely avoid talking about single sex spaces unless put on the spot and repeatedly asked.

It's very much the Jess Phillips problem, except Jess gets into more trouble by being a shameless publicity hound. ADJ is much more of a low profile, get your head down and do the work, kind of minister, but still subject to the same internal Labour pressures.

moto748e · 19/12/2025 11:42

The "incredibly complicated" argument is used a lot by the fence sitters in this debate.
I would be happy for someone to actually detail how it is incredibly complicated, but instead they say it's "complicated" and refuse to elaborate.

Exactly the same thought has gone through my head! I missed this story yesterday. Wasn't Bridget supposed to be the 'sound' one who would do the right thing, not like that Lucy Powell? What is wrong with these Labour women?

And the animals looked from Bridget to Lucy, and Lucy to Bridget...

RoyalCorgi · 19/12/2025 11:44

Itsallagameyouknow · 19/12/2025 10:59

I have used a toilet of the opposite sex myself and I hate other people for doing the same.

Not very bright are you.

A good deal brighter than you, it would seem.

Let me explain it in really simple terms.

The law says that when a space is reserved for one sex, as is the case with eg toilets, changing rooms, prisons, then the other sex cannot be admitted. There are two reasons for this. One is to keep women and girls safe from men. The other is to maintain privacy and dignity for each sex, but particularly for women.

Very occasionally, women might breach this rule by using a men's toilet (guess what, women aren't choosing to go into men's prisons or changing rooms). Why? Because society has so little regard for the needs of women that historically it hasn't provided adequate toilet facilities for them. Women, as we all know, take longer in the toilet than men, because they need to use cubicles rather than urinals and because they sometimes have periods to deal with. Quite often, too, women have more urgency than men because of pregnancy or because of bladder problems as a result of childbirth. That means that very occasionally, women will use the men's toilets – not because they want to (I never WANT to use the men's toilets) but out of sheer desperation.

This, of course, is very different from the reasons men use women's toilets. And in a sensible, tolerant society, people will accept the reasons a woman might, now and again, use a men's toilet.

It is possible that you are extremely stupid and don't understand this. I think it's more likely, however, that you understand it perfectly well and are pretending not to understand it. It makes reasoned debate on the issue almost impossible. Is that your intention? Or do you just enjoy looking like a fool?

Pingponghavoc · 19/12/2025 11:46

Labour were so convinced that the SC ruling was going to go the other way, they don't know what to do.

But even if it did, it would have only applied to GRC holders, so lots of the stalling and arguments make no sense.

lcakethereforeIam · 19/12/2025 11:56

But...but...what if the pregnant person is carrying a foetus that is going to be identified as male at birth? What then, huh!? Didn't think of that did you?

I've peed behind bushes when I've been caught short when out in the countryside. I didn't check if the bush was labelled male or female! Really, you people!

This could be an easy win for Labour. It would be a chance for Starmer to show some backbone. The ta are bound to kick off but there's no argument they could come up with that he couldn't easily put down with logic, common sense, science and, even, compassion.

Eta sorry, I meant 'assigned'.

OP posts:
ItsCoolForCats · 19/12/2025 12:16

What hope do we have of this being sorted out when the decision in the GLP judicial review is delivered? If the JR rules that the interim guidance was lawful, how can the government continue to sit on the updated code of practice?

A month ago I felt quite optimistic. After the recent tribunal decisions and the continued delaying tactics of the government, I feel less so now.

Itsallagameyouknow · 19/12/2025 12:17

RoyalCorgi · 19/12/2025 11:44

A good deal brighter than you, it would seem.

Let me explain it in really simple terms.

The law says that when a space is reserved for one sex, as is the case with eg toilets, changing rooms, prisons, then the other sex cannot be admitted. There are two reasons for this. One is to keep women and girls safe from men. The other is to maintain privacy and dignity for each sex, but particularly for women.

Very occasionally, women might breach this rule by using a men's toilet (guess what, women aren't choosing to go into men's prisons or changing rooms). Why? Because society has so little regard for the needs of women that historically it hasn't provided adequate toilet facilities for them. Women, as we all know, take longer in the toilet than men, because they need to use cubicles rather than urinals and because they sometimes have periods to deal with. Quite often, too, women have more urgency than men because of pregnancy or because of bladder problems as a result of childbirth. That means that very occasionally, women will use the men's toilets – not because they want to (I never WANT to use the men's toilets) but out of sheer desperation.

This, of course, is very different from the reasons men use women's toilets. And in a sensible, tolerant society, people will accept the reasons a woman might, now and again, use a men's toilet.

It is possible that you are extremely stupid and don't understand this. I think it's more likely, however, that you understand it perfectly well and are pretending not to understand it. It makes reasoned debate on the issue almost impossible. Is that your intention? Or do you just enjoy looking like a fool?

That was a lot of words to say “When I do it it’s ok but I hate it when others do.”

moto748e · 19/12/2025 12:17

Good piece by Harris.

I honestly expected better of Labour. I thought that at the very least they would use the Supreme Court’s ruling to excuse their own gullibility in having parroted the Stonewall catechism through years of opposition, and would now disown it under the cover of the law. But I was wrong.

I thought that too, but even that hope was too high a bar, obviously.

OneWildandWonderfulLife · 19/12/2025 12:19

Do you think it’s possible that she has piggy backed on to the GLP nonsense, knowing that they haven’t got a chance of winning, and at the point they lose she can shrug and say what more can I do? Look, I’ve supported this trans rights group, it hasn’t worked, soz! We will now have to implement the law.

I know, I know, clutching at straws, but I am so hurt by what Labour are doing to women, my whole family have been Labour voters for generations, and last GE I voted Tory purely on this issue. I keep waiting for my father and grandfather to stage an intervention from the after life, and frankly I think there is more chance of that than Labour doing the right thing!

AnotherAngryAcademic · 19/12/2025 12:30

senua · 19/12/2025 11:16

What happened to LabourLosingWomen? Can you get that trending. It would be embarrassing whilst KS is (pretending) to do his VAWG thing. Raise a stink whilst Parliament is off for the hols.

I think that getting #LabourLosingWomen trending is an excellent suggestion

zurigo · 19/12/2025 12:33

I didn't think it was possible to despise Bridget Phillipson any more than I already did, but yet, here we are! She's an absolute disgrace. God I hate this government!!!

flyingbuttress43 · 19/12/2025 12:33

We don't need men to take away women's rights when there are women prepared to do it. F off Phillipson, you complete waste of space.

As Madeleine Albright said: "There is a special place in hell for women who. don't help other women."

lcakethereforeIam · 19/12/2025 12:36

Another exceptionally well worded article in the Telegraph

https://archive.ph/9u1uj

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/19/phillipson-block-supreme-court-trans-ruling-women/

There's another piece that mentions JKR but i'm waiting for it to archive.

Access Restricted

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/19/phillipson-block-supreme-court-trans-ruling-women

OP posts:
BonfireLady · 19/12/2025 12:41

RoyalCorgi · 19/12/2025 11:44

A good deal brighter than you, it would seem.

Let me explain it in really simple terms.

The law says that when a space is reserved for one sex, as is the case with eg toilets, changing rooms, prisons, then the other sex cannot be admitted. There are two reasons for this. One is to keep women and girls safe from men. The other is to maintain privacy and dignity for each sex, but particularly for women.

Very occasionally, women might breach this rule by using a men's toilet (guess what, women aren't choosing to go into men's prisons or changing rooms). Why? Because society has so little regard for the needs of women that historically it hasn't provided adequate toilet facilities for them. Women, as we all know, take longer in the toilet than men, because they need to use cubicles rather than urinals and because they sometimes have periods to deal with. Quite often, too, women have more urgency than men because of pregnancy or because of bladder problems as a result of childbirth. That means that very occasionally, women will use the men's toilets – not because they want to (I never WANT to use the men's toilets) but out of sheer desperation.

This, of course, is very different from the reasons men use women's toilets. And in a sensible, tolerant society, people will accept the reasons a woman might, now and again, use a men's toilet.

It is possible that you are extremely stupid and don't understand this. I think it's more likely, however, that you understand it perfectly well and are pretending not to understand it. It makes reasoned debate on the issue almost impossible. Is that your intention? Or do you just enjoy looking like a fool?

🔥 I think you broke the internet 💪

Bridget Phillipson, please please be lurking on this thread. Here is your updated guidance ⬆️

nicepotoftea · 19/12/2025 12:43

The Conservatives should be having a field day with this.

Irrespective of the actual issue, Labour would rather dither than give clear advice to businesses. You could argue that they just need to follow the law, but Labour are intentionally making it more difficult for businesses and organisations that do, while leaving them to face the legal consequences and cost if they don't.

Judge Kemp also introduced uncertainty, but anyone who suggests that his tribunal decision can be relied on at this point is stupid or cynical.

EasternStandard · 19/12/2025 12:45

zurigo · 19/12/2025 12:33

I didn't think it was possible to despise Bridget Phillipson any more than I already did, but yet, here we are! She's an absolute disgrace. God I hate this government!!!

Many feel as you do, which is small comfort I know.

lcakethereforeIam · 19/12/2025 12:49

There's also an article in the Times but I can only see the headline. They've got wise to me. If I click on anything I get told to get a subscription 😔

OP posts:
BonfireLady · 19/12/2025 12:56

Itsallagameyouknow · 19/12/2025 12:17

That was a lot of words to say “When I do it it’s ok but I hate it when others do.”

Bridget, are you actually here?

Shortshriftandlethal · 19/12/2025 13:04

JustTryingToBeMe · 19/12/2025 08:21

I saw this this morning and I am absolutely outraged at her betrayal of women and girls. How does her view square with Keir Starmer’s statement that they are going to crack down on misogyny by forcing schools to teach boys that their behaviour is unacceptable? The very fact that this tells men and boys that they’re rights Trump women and girls rights fairly and squirely is surely ridiculous. How can such a tiny, unpleasant group of men ride rough shot over the rights of 50% of the British population?
Surely there must be something that women can do to stop this madness? Can we set up one of the petitions which forces a debate in Parliament when the number of signatories gets to a certain amount? At least if we could do that it would demonstrate which politicians understand biological sex and which politicians are completely sucked into the trans ideology to the detriment of all women and girls.

We already know who understands the reality of sex and who doesn't. Not one person in the Labour party stood up to defend Rosie Duffield and it had to be cross bench MPs that did so. My Labour MP tells people she was elected on a trans rights platform. Kier Starmer wanted to mke it easier for men to get a GRC.......Labour cannot be trusted. One of the few who can is Shabana Mahmood, I imagine

Kucinghitam · 19/12/2025 13:15

Shortshriftandlethal · 19/12/2025 13:04

We already know who understands the reality of sex and who doesn't. Not one person in the Labour party stood up to defend Rosie Duffield and it had to be cross bench MPs that did so. My Labour MP tells people she was elected on a trans rights platform. Kier Starmer wanted to mke it easier for men to get a GRC.......Labour cannot be trusted. One of the few who can is Shabana Mahmood, I imagine

Edited

But-but-but-but it's our duty to vote Labour because Reasons! We get scolded for saying we're politically homeless, and some po-faced faithful will come along with the stupid bus analogy again.

moto748e · 19/12/2025 13:18

Bus wankers! 😂

nicepotoftea · 19/12/2025 13:22

Shortshriftandlethal · 19/12/2025 13:04

We already know who understands the reality of sex and who doesn't. Not one person in the Labour party stood up to defend Rosie Duffield and it had to be cross bench MPs that did so. My Labour MP tells people she was elected on a trans rights platform. Kier Starmer wanted to mke it easier for men to get a GRC.......Labour cannot be trusted. One of the few who can is Shabana Mahmood, I imagine

Edited

The thing that confuses me is that Stella Creasy has made repeated arguments that women face structural disadvantage in Parliament because of their reproductive role, yet seems completely sanguine about the prospect of removing the concept of sex from equality legislation.

Logically Stella, if anyone can have a baby, who cares? It's just a lifestyle choice.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.