J K Rowling has nailed it - re Starmer and the trans issue

Bridie22

P.S. Thanks to JK Rowling and all the brave women who helped this ruling to finally become law, you are all awesome.

Brave women who … !
Stupid women aggravating a minor issue more like! Brave women are women who threw themselves in front of horses to get us the vote!
So much smoke for a match!

Which posters on here are you cheering someone saying fuck off to.

KellsBells123456

Fuck off. I’m a trans woman and it’s disgusting. My daughter loved Harry Potter. We’ve been to Universal Studios 5 times. It’s ironic she’s become the Voldemort in my story. Well done playing the villain who attacks those who are vulnerable, special, and yes…women !

Hear hear. It’s a sad thing that is happening to you and yours.

I do not understand all this furore about Trans peoples. They are a tiny % of our population. Most of you have probably never come across a man/woman who cross dresses, or some man ( or woman ) who has gender dysphoria ? Or not at any length of time probably. Certainly there are only 3 sexes ( male, woman and hermaphrodite ) the latter never mentioned? Why not? The trans peoples are just like us human beings but with a mental and or physical quirk that forces them to be who they are. Why can’t everyone leave them be. The majority are gentle souls who cannot live in what they see as the wrong body. Most accept that Lesbians and Gays exist and live amongst us, why not Trans peoples too? All this fuss about toilets! Certainly there has been the odd criminal element amongst them, but that’s rare in comparison to ‘normal ‘ males or females who commit crimes. I have met many men and women of various persuasions in my lifetime, and at 80 next year I would probably prefer to chat to a trans person in a toilet than some of the disgustingly behaved ‘normal’ young people!
JK Rowling books are great, her stance on this topic less so in my opinion! As for confirming into law what is common sense … and changing his opinion to go along with the push of the day… Starmer does not have my respect. Leave them alone!
As said I am 80 next year and a white heterosexual with 2 sons.

Massive respect for JKR and am not surprised by KS. He wants everyone to like him, he is not brave, when he was a remainer he stood for brexit. You can’t have it all ways. He’s very ambitious with no soul. He would side with the devil if he thought that’s what everybody wanted. He treated Rosie Duffield appallingly and do you remember how ‘women in labour’ weren’t even allowed a stand at conference? This goes for his handmaidens too. They all thought they were on the ‘right side of history’ however much they knew it was nonsense, they wanted to be with the kids with the trendiest with those women with all the threats, because they were men.
And all the wailing by the trans activists on MSM. Can you remember such time given to women when they lost the rights to their own spaces because of their sex? No because no fuss was made. That’s the trouble with most women we just can’t believe that men would push it so that any man who wished to say he was a woman was. By then brave women from mumsnet had to rise up. The trans ideologists spoilt themselves by being greedy, now they will have to back right off.

Galaxy - Good for you. This lunacy has ruined the collection of patient data in the uk just for starters. All fot 0.54% of the population most of whom seem to be rabid fetishists. Neither do I want naked men in the street or prancing around half naked in front of children. So mush is wrong and corrupt with it.

Just waiting for him to apologise to Rosie Duffield but he won’t. Such a coward. JK and others were all so brave.

According to dd, who has friends in senior positions in e.g. the big banks, it is pretty much compulsory to state your pronouns at the end of every communication, internal or external.

It was in a number of organisations; I objected two years ago to a letter concerning the local Library when the author stated her personal pronouns, and insisted on the library staff doing likewise.
It is true that 'different interpretations' have been enforced by those in positions of authority, who issued instructions on their own initiative without bothering to check the statements in the Equality Act. Those who challenged it were reprimanded or worse,as in the cases of Sandie Peggie and others; when investigated, none of these' policies' quoted existed. This waiting for guidance is completely unnecessary; just more obfuscation. The information has been there for fifteen years and should be applied immediately.
On the matter of lavatories I was thinking of the places I visit, pubs, restaurants, cafes, library, arts centre, theatres, cinemas, village hall, museum, schools, gym, swimming baths, dentist, doctor, supermarkets and all have either one individual loo or several, some doubling as disabled, baby changing rooms or simply better access, no stairs, wider doors, more space.
Smaller shops, train/bus stations I am not sure.

You haven't read the ruling have you Jane.

But it won't last because the 'law' will change again, as it did for gay people when they decided that being gay is lawful.

I wonder how many of the people commenting on this thread actually know anyone who is trans? I happen to know several trans and non-binary people, to varying degrees and via different routes. NONE of them are trans women. Historically, trans women outnumbered trans men, but in younger generations the opposite is true. And yet trans men hardly seem to be mentioned in discussions about trans issues.
The supreme court ruling about biological sex applies equally to men and women. This means that trans women are excluded from women-only spaces, but trans men are not. Do women want trans men in our women-only spaces? How do we know whether they are really trans men, and not biological men? I say this, not to discriminate against trans men, but to show how daft the current debate is. I haven’t noticed much outrage about trans men using men-only spaces, or competing in men’s sports, yet presumably they will no longer be allowed to do so.

Do we really need so many separately-gendered facilities? Other countries manage without. For example, in Copenhagen the public loos (with cubicles) are communal, and larger ones include urinals round a corner. Isn’t this a more sensible use of space? When there are options for privacy, what’s the problem?

Humans want to put things in boxes, when in reality people are not that simple. There is enormous variation, with a wide spectrum across each of multitudinous attributes, including height, colour, introversion/extroversion, intelligence, word/number skills, as well as sex and gender. Please can we just treat people as people, with the dignity and respect they deserve, instead of singling out minority groups as useful targets for dog-whistle politics.
Incidentally, I am a woman, by both biological sex and gender, and more “Mary Beard” type than “Katie Perry” type. Is that another box?

Re Starmer, I think he's probably a decent man, but he's also a lawyer and has to accept the law. Note, however, that the Supreme Court's comments that it was the intention of the Equality Act that "women" ment "biological women" has been contradicted by the civil servant responsible for putting the act through - she says the intention was to include trans women with a gender recognition certificate.

Loads of people have now said what they thought but didn't feel they could say it before.

Now here's a thought: maybe loads of people stayed schtum because they knew that they'd lose their careers, their jobs, their business contracts if they didn't comply. See the post above at 15.26 as to why that might be. Theatres were threatened with TRA demonstrations to close venues down if they dared to host someone who had been cancelled. The past 10 - 15 years have been akin to America's McCarthyism years for women. You're right: we're tired.

Damned if he said anything and damned that he sat on the fence.

Loads of people have now said what they thought but didn't feel they could say it before.

Seriously this is tired....

eazybee

^While the GRA allows for changing the recorded sex to female or male, it doesn't explicitly mention pronouns or how someone chooses to be addressed. The act focuses on legal recognition and the right to live in one's acquired gender, not on dictating how individuals should be addressed^

The Equality Act 2010 does not compel individuals to use someone's preferred pronouns, but it does prohibit discrimination based on gender reassignment. Employers can encourage the use of preferred pronouns but cannot mandate it, and staff are not legally obligated to disclose their pronouns.
From the Equality Act 2010 site, FAQ
No need for additional guidance; it is stated quite clearly in the Act, just been ignored for the past 15 years.

According to dd, who has friends in senior positions in e.g. the big banks, it is pretty much compulsory to state your pronouns at the end of every communication, internal or external.
From what I hear, HR depts. are keen on jumping on those who don’t/won’t conform.
Maybe that will change now.

I was sure, as I have a trans friend, Shirls5200 that many would and will feel as your daughter does and it does concern me greatly.

I have tried to over these threads ask "what about" 'quiet wanting to live your life". I hope that the guidance coming will help your daughter although tbh I dont know how it will be done. Facilities that don't force that choice, perhaps, above all.

I sincerely hope that Mermaids will remain a supportive organisation for families and young people.

I must admit I'd never heard of Nicola Murray and what she did.

I'm genuinely sorry that your daughter is so upset Shirls5200 but feel that your anger should be directed at the men who have abused transgender women by insisting that obvious males infiltrated women's spaces. Public toilets are only one small part of the problem that women have faced; rape crisis centres, prison cells, women's safe houses, changing rooms and women's sports. It's true, and acknowledged, that people like your daughter just want to live their chosen life in peace and quiet, causing problems for no one. Regrettably, a huge number of men abused the privileges that people like your daughter, and all natal women, no longer feel safe using. It's not us you should be angry with.

Never mind KS, listened to John Swinney today failing to answers questions on what defines a woman as a woman. Just appears to fail to acknowledge what the Supreme Court ruling means.

I think it needs addressing simply because of the confusions and hostilities around it for individuals and organisations. In theory it's there in writing, yes, but the different interpretations exist in practice.

Well no thankfully so far we have avoided compelled speech.

I am si disappointed by this thread and some of the hatred and vitriol being displayed. As mum to a trans woman who is now sitting at home distressed beyond measure because she feels unable to go out and socialise with her friends as she’s no longer allowed to go to the ladies, she must go to the gents and risk being abused or worse. This is not a victory for women’s rights, what about the many many women who may look less than feminine, they are also now going to be challenged when simply wanting to go for a wee. One of the anti trans activists Nicola Murray has been found guilty of the worst type of child abuse, and my daughter is crying at home because people like Nicola Murray are accusing her of wanting to abuse women in toilets, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. Do you really think she would have chosen to be transgender, of course not, I sincerely hope none of your families end up feeling body/gender dysmorphia, heaven help them if they do, it took enormous courage for her to come out as transgender and now she feels as though her life is worthless, well done, I hope you re proud. Yes I m angry, there have been transgender women around for years using women’s toilets with no problems, thus has been a recently manufactured issue, probably to cover up something else and had set back women’s rights enormously, not to mention the fact that there may now be transgender men wanting to use the ladies as they were born female or even men pretending they are transgender in order to access ladies toilets, it’s been nothing short of cruel to a vulnerable minority group in the UK shame on you all

While the GRA allows for changing the recorded sex to female or male, it doesn't explicitly mention pronouns or how someone chooses to be addressed. The act focuses on legal recognition and the right to live in one's acquired gender, not on dictating how individuals should be addressed

The Equality Act 2010 does not compel individuals to use someone's preferred pronouns, but it does prohibit discrimination based on gender reassignment. Employers can encourage the use of preferred pronouns but cannot mandate it, and staff are not legally obligated to disclose their pronouns.
From the Equality Act 2010 site, FAQ
No need for additional guidance; it is stated quite clearly in the Act, just been ignored for the past 15 years.

Exactly Witzend they started off as a great support and resource for LGB but just seemed to lose sight of their original purpose and became a huge bullying machine that issued more and more extreme dictats. I'm wondering if Mermaids will be next.

From what I’ve gathered previously, Stonewall was in need of a fresh source of income, since their former raison d’etre, supporting gay people, was no longer nearly so badly needed.

So charging all sort of businesses/organisations (inc. the big banks, NHS etc.) for Stonewall’s training, in how to approach the trans issue - pronouns and erasing obviously female words such as ‘mother’ (call ‘them’ a birthing person instead), not to mention ‘woman’ itself, unless preceded by trans or ‘cis’ - seemed like an excellent and lucrative idea. .

Looking back on the history we find many changed minds. Teresa May in 2017 advocated very strongly for self ID at a time when it looked like the GRA would allow people to have certain guidelines and it might "work". Now Badenoch is taking a completely opposing position.

How could T May have predicted any more than anyone in the Labour Party what extremes would come about?

I genuinely think that Starmer from when he took over the leadership had hoped interests could be balanced until it became overwhelmingly obvious it wasn't going to work after all the confusions and horrible hostilities and extremes and thats why he welcomes the act - but with an awareness just how complicated things will be interns of guidance and implementation.

Stonewall are on their uppers valdavi, running out of money, losing half their staff because the BBC, the Cabinet Office and Royal College of Psychiatrists have also pulled out of its workplace. They're unravelling fast and, despite threatening to take the new ruling to ECHR, they simply don't have the money to fund it.

So articulate KellsBells 🖐