Zack Polanski on how Keir Starmer could have changed the April 2025 UK Supreme Court ruling to protect trans rights

[AccordingToWhom]

Zack Polanski revealed how Keir Starmer could have acted to protect trans rights after April 2025 UK Supreme Court ruling

https://www.attitude.co.uk/news/zack-polanski-keir-starmer-april-uk-supreme-court-ruling-trans-513465/

God I hate him. Not a measured, intellectual response I know, but God I hate him.

I feel like Starmer’s not going to start taking legal advice from Mr Hypnotits.

It’s fuck all to do with trans rights Zack. Wouldn’t it be nice if someone could tell us what rights they don’t have compared to everybody else.

That's Russell Tovey off my Christmas card list too!

He really gives me the impression that he isn't a believer but wants to be the big hero by pretending he does

Polanski is a twat. but he is right that the government could have just changed the equality act through primary legislation, it would have taken ages and probably failed, but, they could have done it.

How he could have destroyed women and gay rights in law? To provide a small group of men with a lot of major issues with supremacy in law?

Yes, what a brilliant idea that would be.

No wonder the obfuscation of language is crucial to all this mess.

I certainly hope not!

He is such a creep. And he may be right in that Starmer would have to get legislation passed in order to overturn the ruling, but Starmer is a fence-sitter at the best of times. There's no way he'd try force through anything that unpopular with the public.
Would love to see Polanski try it though. Past time he realised that Britain isn't a dictatorship, just yet.

It's hardly a massive revelation, is it? Parliament can make laws, so Starmer could make a law (or at least submit a bill and try to get it passed).

This isn't changing the ruling, it's just parliament operating as normal. If he thinks he's made a clever discovery he's in the wrong job.

Stupid man.

I think he is a true believer. He's got that whole self righteous, RSOH, never questions himself vibe and he uses all the usual talking points.

😂

Mr Hypnotits…. I’m literally crying with laughter at that!

🤣

I agree he is a true believer. But like many of them I'm not sure sure he actually knows what he's a true believer in - beyond The Right Beliefs. No grasp of, or even interest in, the details.

Also this would have meant taking visible ownership of the issue and they're wise enough not to do that. They've spent the past couple of decades shrugging their shoulders whenever questions responsibility have been raised.

Oh for sure. It would have put so much light on it in fact that we'd probably be out the other side by now rather than in this limbo we find ourselves in now.

Thanks Zack for reminding me not to vote Green. I will be telling any doorsteppers why.

Part of me feels every time he opens his mouth about all this, he wrecks the Greens chances a little more?
He's opening the doors to every journalist having fun by asking him how women can have a penis. The numbers of trans murderers and sex offenders is increasing so while he insists that they have the right to observe girls and women undressing etc, it will be so easy to demonstrate how dangerous and anti social his limited thinking is (and that's without mentioning his decriminalising drugs, open borders narratives).

He's going to provide much entertainment while joining poor old Ed Davey on the clown bench it seems.

He's opening the doors to every journalist having fun by asking him how women can have a penis. He could maybe hypnotise them one @MrsOvertonsWindow

😂Maybe that'll be his new grift when this one comes to an end?

He didnt say how the law could be changed, just that it could.

Starmer would have to remove sex as a protected characteristic, or change it to mean a newly defined gender.

Who gives birth, goes through the menopause, is subject to misogyny? How are these people protected if they dont have a name. He talks about being gay, does he really want the definition to be based on gender not sex?

Zack couldnt reword the law if his life depended on it.

Yes Zack theoretical politics is not the same as doing things in practice though.

I'm sure Starmer didn't try to change the law because he knew damn well he wouldn't be able to pass such a law and if he did it would ensure a reform victory.

Now Zack is going to find reality a bit of a bitch if he does become PM. All those pesky people disagreeing with him?

It isn't a surprise for a conman who made a living out of pretending the fantasy is different to reality.

Unfortunately I don't think reality matters to his woo woo away with the fairy supporters.

Just shout Gaza a lot for votes that'll do the trick for international diplomacy and stopping genocide.

I love the idea of the guy with a background in theatre and tit hypnotism (titnotism?) schooling the Queen’s Council and former Director of Public Prosecutions in the law 🤣

Titnotism. 🤣😂🤣😂🤣

Unfair. Maybe he was in an episode of Crown Court.