#transgenderuk — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #transgenderuk, aggregated by home.social.
-
CW: CW: State Sanctioned Transphobia : UK Politics
State-sanctioned segregation in EHRC code "misstates the law", says new court challenge
=============================TL;DR: A new judicial review sets out that the EHRC Code of Practice, which recommends the segregation of Trans+ people, "misstates the law" and ignores a recent High Court ruling which says common sense should be the guiding factor in determining bathroom use.
The EHRC code of practice fundamentally "misstates the law", says a new pre-action protocol for a judicial review. The action seeks to challenge the EHRC’s recommendation to segregate Trans+ people from single sex spaces, which began in England, Wales and Scotland on August 5th.
The court action was announced just hours after the 'bathroom ban', as it is being internationally viewed, came into place. The judicial review is being brought by a Trans+ person and a Trans+ inclusive organisation, with the support of advocacy group the Good Law Project.
It argues that the Equality Act was written in consideration of "fact-specific proportionality and reasonableness questions", and that this common sense approach is supposed to allow organisations of all kinds to create services based on the needs of their users. It therefore sets out that blanket bans on Trans+ inclusive services were never intended by the law, and the EHRC's interpretation of this is wrong.
The case goes further and argues that, if the guidance is found to be lawful, it therefore breaches international human rights laws, and needs to be fixed with further legislation.
Good Law Project’s trans rights lead, Jess O’Thomson, said, "It’s difficult to believe just how far backwards our government has gone on trans human rights. This Labour government pushed through its transphobic guidance in the face of opposition from many MPs, including nearly a hundred of its own backbenchers. It’s not just immensely harmful. We think it’s unlawful, and completely against human rights."
Where could the EHRC code be misstating the law?
The review argues that the code is wrong on three bases. It sets out that the code's assumption that creating or running Trans+ inclusive services would "very likely" discriminate against women is incorrect. Instead, the review argues that these services would be created on the basis of gender identity, not sex, and therefore do not constitute sex discrimination. Furthermore, the case says the code fails to mention the positive action defence clause within the Equality Act, which could be used to justify a Trans+ inclusive service.
The argument from gender critical campaigners that has been adopted into the code argues that if a Trans+ woman was to use a women's service, then men would be able to claim sex discrimination. The judicial review contests this, setting out that the Equality Act relies on the principles of proportionality tests, and this too would not stand.
In this vein, the case argues that the code’s advice that only offering mixed-sex services would be directly discriminatory towards women is also incorrect because unisex services treat all people, men and women, the same - and therefore, doesn't create the basis for a direct discrimination claim.
This was what the High Court ruled in February, when looking at the EHRC's interim guidance. It ultimately decided the EHRC interim guidance did not force Trans+ people to use single-sex facilities in line with their birth sex, nor did it make it unlawful for service providers to provide trans-inclusive facilities like men's and women's changing rooms. It also said that allowing a Trans+ woman to use women's toilets does not discriminate against cis men, as some gender-critical campaigners have argued.
In that ruling, Judge Swift set out that people who provide facilities to the public "should comply with the law but also be guided by common sense and benevolence rather than allow themselves to be blinkered by unyielding ideologies." However, the ruling did so whilst dismissing the Good Law Project's attempt to overturn the interim guidance.
Human rights backstop argument
The case also features a second layer of arguments. If the court finds the code to be lawful, it sets out that this means the current legislation breaches human rights laws.
It argues that if the recommendation for segregation is what the law intended, then the law itself breaches the European Convention of Human Rights and needs to be rewritten.
It argues the code would breach Article 8, the right to privacy, because the code forcibly outs people. It also says it could breach Article 11, freedom of association, as it prevents groups from being Trans+ inclusive.
Analysis: Know your rights, and pee in peace
The adoption of this code is a horrific, grim turn for human rights in the UK. Looking at news coverage from elsewhere in the world, the UK is being described as banning Trans+ people from public bathrooms in the broadest sense, with pundits around the world unable to grapple with the incoherent practicalities of the code. In that light, many are seeing the code as an apartheid action not dissimilar from the racist ones that gripped far too much of the world until only a few decades ago.
But a critical takeaway from guides like those by TransActual is that this is a code for service providers to consider in ensuring they don't break the law. It is not something for any individual to use to police others – or themselves.
It's concerning that service providers can – in some situations, usually when spurred by complaints – ask people to confirm their sex assigned at birth. But you can decide whether or not to declare this, and you are under no obligation to provide proof. You can, however, remind the service provider that not offering access to a facility in a way that protects your safety and dignity breaches your rights – and could leave them liable to a court challenge.
There have been calls from many activists to resist the code by continuing to live your day-to-day life as usual. It's inherently queer advice. But on top of that, this code is not a done deal. It’s still facing multiple court challenges – and the fight against it is far from over.
Share this
This is a stark and scary moment.
Segregation has already begun - with signs appearing across even spaces that might feel like progressive bastions - pointing Trans+ people to gender nuetral bathrooms.
Despite claims 'sex questioning' will be rare, forms of gender policing have been on the rise since anti-trans movements gained a foothold in the public sphere.
QueerAF
-
CW: CW: State Sanctioned Transphobia : UK Politics
State-sanctioned segregation in EHRC code "misstates the law", says new court challenge
=============================TL;DR: A new judicial review sets out that the EHRC Code of Practice, which recommends the segregation of Trans+ people, "misstates the law" and ignores a recent High Court ruling which says common sense should be the guiding factor in determining bathroom use.
The EHRC code of practice fundamentally "misstates the law", says a new pre-action protocol for a judicial review. The action seeks to challenge the EHRC’s recommendation to segregate Trans+ people from single sex spaces, which began in England, Wales and Scotland on August 5th.
The court action was announced just hours after the 'bathroom ban', as it is being internationally viewed, came into place. The judicial review is being brought by a Trans+ person and a Trans+ inclusive organisation, with the support of advocacy group the Good Law Project.
It argues that the Equality Act was written in consideration of "fact-specific proportionality and reasonableness questions", and that this common sense approach is supposed to allow organisations of all kinds to create services based on the needs of their users. It therefore sets out that blanket bans on Trans+ inclusive services were never intended by the law, and the EHRC's interpretation of this is wrong.
The case goes further and argues that, if the guidance is found to be lawful, it therefore breaches international human rights laws, and needs to be fixed with further legislation.
Good Law Project’s trans rights lead, Jess O’Thomson, said, "It’s difficult to believe just how far backwards our government has gone on trans human rights. This Labour government pushed through its transphobic guidance in the face of opposition from many MPs, including nearly a hundred of its own backbenchers. It’s not just immensely harmful. We think it’s unlawful, and completely against human rights."
Where could the EHRC code be misstating the law?
The review argues that the code is wrong on three bases. It sets out that the code's assumption that creating or running Trans+ inclusive services would "very likely" discriminate against women is incorrect. Instead, the review argues that these services would be created on the basis of gender identity, not sex, and therefore do not constitute sex discrimination. Furthermore, the case says the code fails to mention the positive action defence clause within the Equality Act, which could be used to justify a Trans+ inclusive service.
The argument from gender critical campaigners that has been adopted into the code argues that if a Trans+ woman was to use a women's service, then men would be able to claim sex discrimination. The judicial review contests this, setting out that the Equality Act relies on the principles of proportionality tests, and this too would not stand.
In this vein, the case argues that the code’s advice that only offering mixed-sex services would be directly discriminatory towards women is also incorrect because unisex services treat all people, men and women, the same - and therefore, doesn't create the basis for a direct discrimination claim.
This was what the High Court ruled in February, when looking at the EHRC's interim guidance. It ultimately decided the EHRC interim guidance did not force Trans+ people to use single-sex facilities in line with their birth sex, nor did it make it unlawful for service providers to provide trans-inclusive facilities like men's and women's changing rooms. It also said that allowing a Trans+ woman to use women's toilets does not discriminate against cis men, as some gender-critical campaigners have argued.
In that ruling, Judge Swift set out that people who provide facilities to the public "should comply with the law but also be guided by common sense and benevolence rather than allow themselves to be blinkered by unyielding ideologies." However, the ruling did so whilst dismissing the Good Law Project's attempt to overturn the interim guidance.
Human rights backstop argument
The case also features a second layer of arguments. If the court finds the code to be lawful, it sets out that this means the current legislation breaches human rights laws.
It argues that if the recommendation for segregation is what the law intended, then the law itself breaches the European Convention of Human Rights and needs to be rewritten.
It argues the code would breach Article 8, the right to privacy, because the code forcibly outs people. It also says it could breach Article 11, freedom of association, as it prevents groups from being Trans+ inclusive.
Analysis: Know your rights, and pee in peace
The adoption of this code is a horrific, grim turn for human rights in the UK. Looking at news coverage from elsewhere in the world, the UK is being described as banning Trans+ people from public bathrooms in the broadest sense, with pundits around the world unable to grapple with the incoherent practicalities of the code. In that light, many are seeing the code as an apartheid action not dissimilar from the racist ones that gripped far too much of the world until only a few decades ago.
But a critical takeaway from guides like those by TransActual is that this is a code for service providers to consider in ensuring they don't break the law. It is not something for any individual to use to police others – or themselves.
It's concerning that service providers can – in some situations, usually when spurred by complaints – ask people to confirm their sex assigned at birth. But you can decide whether or not to declare this, and you are under no obligation to provide proof. You can, however, remind the service provider that not offering access to a facility in a way that protects your safety and dignity breaches your rights – and could leave them liable to a court challenge.
There have been calls from many activists to resist the code by continuing to live your day-to-day life as usual. It's inherently queer advice. But on top of that, this code is not a done deal. It’s still facing multiple court challenges – and the fight against it is far from over.
Share this
This is a stark and scary moment.
Segregation has already begun - with signs appearing across even spaces that might feel like progressive bastions - pointing Trans+ people to gender nuetral bathrooms.
Despite claims 'sex questioning' will be rare, forms of gender policing have been on the rise since anti-trans movements gained a foothold in the public sphere.
QueerAF
-
CW: CW: Transphobia : UK Politics
This morning I woke up to a modicum of better news for once, as it would appear that fhe media, including queer media, has misreported the recent BMA Review into the Cass Report amd is, in fact, highly critical of it. Coming as this does while I am off sick with depression due to the recent eaving through of the EHRC code by Phillipson this offers at least some evidence of the way the media is fudging its reporting to support its anti trans agenda.
As to how much difference this will make in our daily lives? Not much, unless like me you live in a country where trans healthcare is still available, but it is at least another feather in out arrows, ready for fletching. We must take what ammunition we can.
"Exclusive: Reporting about British Medical Association critique of Cass Review was 'factually wrong'
TL;DR: When the British Medical Association's long-awaited review of the Cass Review was published, the media said it had "dropped its opposition" and "vindicated" Cass. But, according to doctors who were on the BMA's review team, that's not what actually happened.
The mainstream media's reporting of the British Medical Association's critique of the Cass Review contained "misinformation" and was "factually wrong", according to members of the doctors union.
When the Cass Review was published in 2024, the doctors union strongly opposed it and called for any implementation of its recommendations to be put on hold while the BMA conducted its own review of the evidence.
However, the government did not heed the BMA and has used the Cass Review to justify banning puberty blockers for trans young people, hormone therapy for 16- and 17-year-olds, and also closing the GIDS youth gender clinic.
On 6 May, the BMA's own review was published. It said that the government's actions went beyond the recommendations of the Cass Review, and that the Review provided no evidential basis for a puberty blocker ban.
It goes on to point out that medical bodies could have continued managing prescriptions without the need for government intervention. In short, the puberty blocker ban was an overreach - QueerAF
But this was not how it was reported by the newspapers.
The Guardian headline claimed the BMA "drops opposition to Cass Review", as did The Times, and even LGBTQIA+ media outlets contained the 'drops opposition' line.
The British Medical Journal headline went further, saying the BMA critique "vindicates" the Cass Review.
But, speaking exclusively to QueerAF, Dr Alex Robertson, co-convenor of the BMA's LGBTQ+ network, said this reporting was both "factually wrong" and contained "misinformation".
“I was disgusted but not surprised by some of the reporting of the report," Robertson said. "It was misleading to the point of misinformation and in some places factually wrong. This is distressing to trans people as well as those of us within the profession who continue to support trans patients.”
Robertson said that the report from the doctors union contained "fairly strong criticisms" of the actions taken by NHS England "in the name of Cass", such as the ban on puberty blockers, on hormone therapy for 16- and 17-year-olds, and the abrupt closure of services like the GIDS gender clinic.
The BMA's review was "intended as a narrow-evidence based review and critique of the Cass review methodology and report" and not the doctors unions' "approach to trans healthcare", they added.
Robertson emphasised that the BMA's position on trans healthcare remains unchanged, and that it continues to have a strong, inclusive policy in support of gender-affirming healthcare for Trans+ patients, as well as supporting Trans+ and gender-diverse doctors.
A doctor who was in the BMA task group that worked on the critique of Cass also told QueerAF that the doctors union remains committed to timely, high quality, evidence-based trans healthcare provision, and that the union's position on trans healthcare is unchanged by the report.
They added that the media reporting also left out vital parts of the BMA review's criticism of the Cass Review.
"One thing I’ve noticed in the media coverage is that what the BMA’s review found about lived experiences involvement in the Cass Review really isn’t being discussed," they told QueerAF.
One such example is that meaningful participation with young people "didn't take place". Another is that the BMA criticised Cass for reframing "peer support" as a "risk".
"Engagement was widely described as late in the process with some groups not feeling it was a genuine listening exercise," they said.
Analysis: Unsurprising, yet still revealing
The way that the mainstream media in the UK reports on Trans+ healthcare has long been rife with misinformation – so it comes as no surprise that facts have again been twisted to support an anti-trans agenda.
In May, Amnesty International UK named both The Guardian and The Times in its report about media coverage of trans lives. Amnesty studied 17,000 articles between 2020 and 2025 about trans people. The report found that media coverage of issues about trans people is excessively high compared to the size of the trans population - QueerAF
The vast majority of the reporting excludes Trans+ perspectives and platforms' anti-trans talking points, the research found.
Had the media talked to doctors from within the BMA about the doctors union's review of Cass, perhaps it would have been able to tell a more accurate story. But then, that would go against the media tradition of excluding trans people and our allies from being able to speak for ourselves."
-
If #Pride is a protest,
and protests are getting increasingly criminalised in the UK,
and the smallest criminal conviction can rule out immigrants from attaining indefinite leave to remain in the UK,
why would any immigrants be at Pride?
-
CW: Transgender slur, Happy Pride…
What a beautiful thing to see on my way to work. And I am asked why I am struggling with… everything.
-
Not sure if it was a good idea for my mental health to start listening to “Her Name Is Alice” by @[email protected] this morning, but I am so thrilled to hear a mother speak with such joy about her daughter. Thank you for writing about her, Caroline. #TransgenderUK #TransRights #Pride
-
Not sure if it was a good idea for my mental health to start listening to “Her Name Is Alice” by @[email protected] this morning, but I am so thrilled to hear a mother speak with such joy about her daughter. Thank you for writing about her, Caroline. #TransgenderUK #TransRights #Pride
-
today’s Slow News Day on @nebula.tv, ‘Update from TERF Island’
https://nebula.tv/videos/slownewsday-britains-new-transphobic-laws-explained
#transRights #transgenderUK #TomNicholas #SlowNewsDay #NebulaTV
-
Today is – if I am not mistaken – the first time I am wearing the dress that I was wearing when I got abused by a transphobe¹ shortly after the UK supreme court’s decision in April ’25 to sanction the othering #transgender people.
I tell myself I am wearing it as an act of defiance in the face of the #EHRC guidance from last week. But I don’t feel very defiant. I feel scared, and vulnerable, and hopeless…
-
> The Discrimination Of Being An Indeterminate Sex
On Thursday last the UK EHRC, which is in theory at least tasked with
improving equalities and human rights, released its guidance to Parliament
regarding trans citizens access to single sex spaces, and it is fair to
say the guidance is devastating.
But first a little history. Back in the early 2000s in a case brought
before the ECtHR it was ruled that the UK was in breach of human rights
law, in that the UK defacto rendered trans citizens an indeterminate
third gender. This ruling resulted in the GRA 2004 and the EA 2010
resulting in trans people being legally recognised as our acquired
gender, within certain bounds. This existed for a decade until it was
in essence overturned by the Supreme Court ruling in April 2025 which
ruled that under the EA 2010, sex meant "biological sex" without
establishing what this means. This created further confusion because,
under the EA 2010 it was already possible to discriminate against
trans people, albeit with a high bar, on a case by case basis and
in order to achieve a legitimate aim. In short, it was always possible
for women's groups to exclude trans women albeit within certain
bounds.
This guidance now mandates that trans women only use men's facilities
and trans men use women's facilities, unless they look too feminine
or masculine in which case they may not, in which case some undefined
"third space" must be used. This puts trans people at risk and also
forcibly outing us, which is itself against the law. As for the risk,
it is highly likely that any such space would become known as "tranny
toilets" with all the risk of violence that entails.
A more chilling possibility is that such guidance would make it effectively
impossible for any trans person in the future to medically transition.
This is due to the highly pathologised nature of trans medicine whereby
a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, which does not exist in ICD11, is
required for medical transition and a key part of this is demonstrating
living within acquired gender, including the use of appropriate gendered
spaces. This guidance will make that last part impossible and illegal.
The practical result of this will be to drive trans people from public
life. How for example can we go to the pub with our friends if we
are unable to use the toilet?
This must be protested and fought against as the impact will not end
with trans people, indeed, already we are seeing cis women being impacted
if they do not look feminine enough. To this end protests are due to
be held across the UK with some already having been held.
This is regressive, and must not stand.
#GPEW #Greens #TransgenderUK -
> The Discrimination Of Being An Indeterminate Sex
On Thursday last the UK EHRC, which is in theory at least tasked with
improving equalities and human rights, released its guidance to Parliament
regarding trans citizens access to single sex spaces, and it is fair to
say the guidance is devastating.
But first a little history. Back in the early 2000s in a case brought
before the ECtHR it was ruled that the UK was in breach of human rights
law, in that the UK defacto rendered trans citizens an indeterminate
third gender. This ruling resulted in the GRA 2004 and the EA 2010
resulting in trans people being legally recognised as our acquired
gender, within certain bounds. This existed for a decade until it was
in essence overturned by the Supreme Court ruling in April 2025 which
ruled that under the EA 2010, sex meant "biological sex" without
establishing what this means. This created further confusion because,
under the EA 2010 it was already possible to discriminate against
trans people, albeit with a high bar, on a case by case basis and
in order to achieve a legitimate aim. In short, it was always possible
for women's groups to exclude trans women albeit within certain
bounds.
This guidance now mandates that trans women only use men's facilities
and trans men use women's facilities, unless they look too feminine
or masculine in which case they may not, in which case some undefined
"third space" must be used. This puts trans people at risk and also
forcibly outing us, which is itself against the law. As for the risk,
it is highly likely that any such space would become known as "tranny
toilets" with all the risk of violence that entails.
A more chilling possibility is that such guidance would make it effectively
impossible for any trans person in the future to medically transition.
This is due to the highly pathologised nature of trans medicine whereby
a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, which does not exist in ICD11, is
required for medical transition and a key part of this is demonstrating
living within acquired gender, including the use of appropriate gendered
spaces. This guidance will make that last part impossible and illegal.
The practical result of this will be to drive trans people from public
life. How for example can we go to the pub with our friends if we
are unable to use the toilet?
This must be protested and fought against as the impact will not end
with trans people, indeed, already we are seeing cis women being impacted
if they do not look feminine enough. To this end protests are due to
be held across the UK with some already having been held.
This is regressive, and must not stand.
#GPEW #Greens #TransgenderUK -
CW: re: UKPol, trans stuff
BTW Labour have so far done EXACTLY what tgey said they were going to do in their election campaign, namely, at least make it impossible to transition, if not even BE openly trans.
-
CW: CW: Anti trans violence : UK Politics
Good grief, how wrong this is! To paraphrase the law, if I fear harm, then that is enough to qualify as assault in criminal law, and given Glinners direct statement, if I were ever in the vicinity of Glinner or those who agree with him, it would NOT be unreasonable for me or any trans woman to genuinely fear physical assault.
That such a thing therefore is simply classed as difference of opinion is extremely troubling and I can only hope that if Glinner or his ilk were to substitute 'trans' for ''black' and 'female' for 'white' this would be given much more serious consideration for tye violent rhetoric it clearly is.
"https://www.attitude.co.uk/news/met-police-apologises-to-graham-linehan-heathrow-arrest-522932/"
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2rn250ddjo
A very sad day for transgender people in the UK. Marginalised further and made to feel less valued and wanted in society. 🏳️⚧️ 😢 🤬
#TransgenderUK #GirlGuiding #LGBTQIA #TransM2F #UK #Transphobia
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2rn250ddjo
A very sad day for transgender people in the UK. Marginalised further and made to feel less valued and wanted in society. 🏳️⚧️ 😢 🤬
#TransgenderUK #GirlGuiding #LGBTQIA #TransM2F #UK #Transphobia
-
CW: CW: Trans Exclusion : UK Pol
This is desoerately upsetting news albeit given the change in leadership since I was in, perhaps not surprising.
We know that the law does not demand this, so this is either ideological on the part of the leadership, or fear of litigation by the Organisation. Given that Good Law Project have offered to fight litigation for them, the latter seems unlikely.
The saddest part is that at Group level they WANT to be fully inclusive, and yet are being forbidden from remaining so.
This seems therefore to be ideological at senior leadership level.
"Girlguiding says trans members must leave by 6 September - Attitude
https://www.attitude.co.uk/news/girlguiding-says-trans-members-must-leave-6-september-517756/
> The extends follows a decision announced in December 2025, when Girlguiding said trans girls would no longer be able to join as new members."
-
Went into a corner shop to get myself a sandwich the other day, and saw a Daily Mail on the news stand with this headline: "LABOUR OPENS DOOR TO TRANS CHILDREN IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS"
I thought, well, that's pretty optimistic of them, but we can hope!
-
Went into a corner shop to get myself a sandwich the other day, and saw a Daily Mail on the news stand with this headline: "LABOUR OPENS DOOR TO TRANS CHILDREN IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS"
I thought, well, that's pretty optimistic of them, but we can hope!
-
👏👏👏👏👏
Judge blocks bid to stop trans women using Hampstead pond
Gender-critical charity says the fight goes on after high court challenge fails in the latest battle over single-sex spaces
#Trans
#Transgender
#TransgenderUK
#TransRightsAreHumanRights
#TransgenderRightsAreHumanRights -
👏👏👏👏👏
Judge blocks bid to stop trans women using Hampstead pond
Gender-critical charity says the fight goes on after high court challenge fails in the latest battle over single-sex spaces
#Trans
#Transgender
#TransgenderUK
#TransRightsAreHumanRights
#TransgenderRightsAreHumanRights -
TL/DR
So, let's start the New Year as we mean to continue it, with a TERF Minister from the Red Fascists saying that trans people must bot be used as a political punching bag, while using us as a political punching bag!
"UK equalities minister Bridget Phillipson has said trans people should not be “used as a political punchbag”, while also reaffirming her support for trans people being excluded from single-sex spaces."
Well, this is a completely stupid statement as single sex spaces already have protection in the EHRC 2010, so let's drill down into her ideology driven TERFery and and her dogwhistle statements and equating "trans people" with "trans women", and how trans exclusionary laws will result in the legal persecution of an entire class of people.
“I used to run a women’s refuge and I know how important it is that women have spaces that are women-only spaces,” Phillipson said.
“Feminists and campaigners fought for a very, very long time to establish that principle and it is an important principle, but it’s there for a good reason because it’s about safety for women and about having the space and the time to really heal after trauma."This is false equivalence, equating trans women with cis male violence, this is also already protected in the EHRC 2010 with shelters being already allowed to bar trans women on a case by case basis and in order to achieve a legitimate aim. The same is true for ANY single sex space. Furthermore, many womens shelters have been accommodating trans women for decades and without issue, and wish to continue doing so with others always having been cis women only.
“But I don’t see that as being in conflict with making sure you can treat trans people with dignity and respect as well."
It is quite simple, if the EHRC is changed to define access to single sex spaces as defined by "biological sex", and that this is defined as sex assigned at birth and immutable, both of which are biologically incorrect Iisofar as trans and intersex people are concerned at the very least, then you will be stripping us of our protections from discrimination in law. For example, if a trans woman cannot use womens toilets when out in public and also is unable to use mens toilets due to danger or her "presentation" as a woman, and so called third spaces are not available as is very much the case, then you have in legal fact discriminated against trans women. Also, if you mandate "third spaces" they will by default become know as "t slur toilets" in the public mind, which will have the effect of putting all trans people at increased risk of violent assault. It will be Jim Crow 2.0.
"She went on to add: “But in recent times trans people have been used as a political punchbag in order to make an argument. We’ve got to kind of take a step back from this and do it responsibly.”
Well, your statements are part of the problem and we have not just been used as a political punching bag in recent times, but for decades if not millenia. Similar rhetoric was prevelant in Rome in respect of the Galli Priests of Cybele.
"However, the EHRC added added in “some circumstances” trans people could also be barred from spaces based on their “biological sex”. It was later clarified these “circumstances” related to where “reasonable objection” could be taken to a trans person’s presence, such as in female spaces, when “the gender reassignment process has given [a trans man] a masculine appearance or attributes”.
If anyone objects to a trans persons presence for any reason, that is bigotry pure and simple. If you were to object to my presence with you in a womens toilets simply because I am trans, how is thst different to onjecting to the presence of a black woman simply because she is black? And yes, your much vaunted white feminism DID object to the presence of women in their spaces a century ago for no other reason than their being black. Your objection to us is not a trans issue, it is a CIS ISSUE and one that YOU need to deal with, not us.
"During her appearance on the podcast, Phillipson claimed the “majority” of the British public want single-sex spaces to exclude trans people.
“I think that’s where the majority of the British people are on this topic is that they accept there are times when you do need women-only provision,” she said."Yes, statistically speaking you may be correct now due to the manufacured moral panic which is being politically driven, but why should the trans population, at 0,5% of the wider population suffer from the tyranny of the majority for no other reason than your so called reasonable objection to our existing in public?
“But at the same time we’re a compassionate nation, common sense in their approach. We don’t abuse or target trans people because of who they are, that’s not … in keeping with what people would believe."
If you put a wholesale bar in place, in Statute, to trans people having any access to single sex spaces, then no, you are by definiton not a compassionate nation but one which is in fact persecution trans people, and legitimising this in law. And the last time thst happened started 100 years ago, in a town less than 25 years away from me as the crow flies.
If you continue down this path, it will end in bloodshed and murder. We know this as history already has shown us this.
https://www.thepinknews.com/2026/01/02/bridget-phillipson-trans-single-sex-spaces-ehrc-podcast/
-
Until earlier this year, #transgender women were allowed to play recreational women’s #cricket in England and Wales. Following that supreme court ruling, the England and Wales Cricket Board decided to ban us from women’s cricket. But here’s the funniest thing: #trans men are eligible to play women’s cricket!
CW: Contains bigoted language
-
I’ve started the process to change my name on all of my documents and stuff. Wish me luck everyone!
I think the process has to look like this:
- Change driving licence
- Change benefits
- Change bank accounts
- Change passport once I have a letter from a doctor to change my gender marker
- From there I can start the timer on getting a gender recognition certificate
-
I’ve started the process to change my name on all of my documents and stuff. Wish me luck everyone!
I think the process has to look like this:
- Change driving licence
- Change benefits
- Change bank accounts
- Change passport once I have a letter from a doctor to change my gender marker
- From there I can start the timer on getting a gender recognition certificate
-
Just got a friend to call up the Tavistock gender clinic to ask for a transferral to Transcend, the new-ish gender clinic in the Merseyside. The Tavistock seemed open to doing it and asked her to send them an email, which she did and we eagerly await the results of.
If this works then it seems like a good path for anyone else in the local area since Transcend has a much shorter waitlist than the older clinics.
#transgender #transgenderUK #TransUK #trans #liverpool #merseyside #Transcend
-
To any trans folks from #liverpool , #merseyside and nearby this might be extremely important news: Transcend is now taking referrals directly from GPs!
It'd probably be worth any trans folks who can get referred to do so because while Transcend still isn't perfect, or even good, they've shown themselves to have shorter waiting lists and are at least somewhat less hostile to service users.
-
BBC being totally normal: they're using the Reform councillor's pronouns in the article, but the transgender one is repeatedly referred to as Councillor Belcher only.
-
CW: CW: TERF : Transphobia : ScotPol
One to boycott! All I would say to Hobbycraft is that no one persons gender identity is another persons opinion to endlessly debate and therefore anti trans hate is no more an opinion demanding of recognition than racism is.
"Hobbycraft apologises to woman claiming she was thrown out of store for objecting to ‘No Terfs’ badge
"[We] have apologised and launched an immediate internal investigation," says a representative from the retail brand"
#Trans #Transgender #TransgenderUK
https://www.attitude.co.uk/news/uk/hobbycraft-dundee-apologises-customer-no-terfs-badge-501585/
-
CW: CW: Trans : Galbraith
From that wizarding series alone, here is a list of actors to boycott already:
Hugh Laurie as Albus Dumbledore
Michelle Gomez as Professor McGonagall
Matthew Macfadyen as Lord Voldemort
Riz Ahmed as Professor Snape
Keira Knightley as Professor Umbridge
Mark Addy as Hagrid
Kit Harington as Professor Lockhart
Iwan Rheon as Professor Lupin
Ruth Wilson as Bellatrix Lestrange
Cush Jumbo as the narrator
Ambika Mod as Nymphadora Tonks
Leo Woodall as Bill Weasley
Simon Pegg as Arthur Weasley
James McAvoy as Mad-Eye Moody
Gemma Whelan as Professor Sprout
Bill Nighy as Professor Slughorn
David Holmes as Stan Shunpike
Saoirse-Monica Jackson as Professor Trelawney
Ṣọpẹ́ Dìrísù as Sirius Black
Mackenzie Crook as Kreacher
Anna Maxwell Martin as Rita Skeeter
Stephen Mangan as Nearly Headless Nick
Tracy-Ann Oberman as Madam Hooch
Matt Berry as Sir Cadogan
Alex Hassell as Lucius Malfoy
Daniel Mays as Dobby
Sara and Avni Deshmukh as The Patil Twins
Frankie Treadaway/Jaxon Knopf as Harry Potter
Max Lester/Rhys Mulligan as Ron Weasley
Arabella Stanton/Nina Barker-Francis as Hermione Granger
Millie Gubby as Luna Lovegood
Jude Farrant/Maximus Evans as Draco Malfoy
Jake Sigsworth/Archie Mountain as Neville Longbottom
#Trans #Transgender #TransgenderUK
https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/10/23/harry-potter-audiobook-cast-jk-rowling-trans/
-
Hadn’t realised that I had been breaking the law by pissing in the ladies’ bog at work. Oops.
From now on, it’ll be a long, time-wasting march to the nearest gender-neutral facility for me, every time I need a wee.
-
“A tale of two five-letter words”, on @blog.achintyarao.in:
-
Cover girls, my partner and me.
Interview: https://thebristolcable.org/2025/09/in-love-and-in-limbo/
#Bristol #TheBristolCable #Queer #LGBTQ #Transgender #TransgenderUK #TransJoy
-
@ChrisMayLA6 as are every person. This slogan is being used as an anti trans statement s is not as innocent as you make out. Take a look at the protests in Edinburgh over the delay of the Scottish Government implementing that stupid Court ruling on gender. #trans #transgenderUK
-
CW: CW: UKPol
Correct me if I am wrong, but surely the bogs at your average festival are portaloos, which by definition are not exactly "gendered spaces"?
But to regurgitate transphobic dogwhistles from the EHRC non statutory "guidance" while calling yourself an inclusive festival feels, well, wrong. 2/10 must do better.
#Trans #Trangender #TransgenderUK #DownloadFestival
https://www.attitude.co.uk/culture/music/download-festival-trans-toilet-policy-484417/
-
CW: CW: Trans. : UKPol
"The University of Warwick’s website currently states that “The Trans Code of Conduct is currently under review.”
Okay Warwick, is there a corresponding Cis Code of Conduct, regarding how cisgender people are expected to behave, including in single sex spaces?
Also, if cisgender people can occupy single sex spaces that match their gender, but only with other cisgender people, will you be providing single sex spaces for trans people which also correspond to our genders and which will only be available for trans students, BUT NOTABLY, in order to keep everyone safe from being outed upon using them, do not overtly show facilities as being solely for trans or cis people?
#Trans #Transgender #TransgenderUK
https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/05/14/university-of-warwick-trans-student-policy/
-
CW: CW: Trans : Mention of TERFs : UKPol
"She said: “One of the areas that I practice in is religious discrimination and some people from certain religions are very keen on the sex differences and maintaining (the) and the way you accommodate those needs are by providing additional privacy for those people who need it, not forcing particular groups into that additional privacy… then (people who don’t want to encounter a trans person) can use the additional private facilities.”
This is an interesting way to look at the situation we are seeing today, however, do see one potential problem with this, in that such provision would out the users as being transphobic bigots. Mind you, an easy way to NOT out yourself as a TERF would be to not use provisions expressly provided for TERFs, which in turn would mean that they would use the same toilets etc. as the rest of us, and perhaps show them that their "legitimate concerns" was just plain bigotry and hate.
#Trans #Transgender #TransgenderUK
https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/05/13/robin-moira-white-bbc-womans-hour-trans-supreme-court-bbc/
-
Next Saturday at 1PM there will be another trans rights protest at the Victoria monument in Liverpool
-
Next Saturday at 1PM there will be another trans rights protest at the Victoria monument in Liverpool
-
CW: UKpol, transgender
Did the Supreme Court not think to ask those who wrote the Equality Act what they meant?
"A former civil servant ... Melanie Field, who oversaw [the Equality Act's] drafting and passage through Westminster in 2010, said the legislation was meant to give transgender people with gender recognition certificates (GRCs) the same legal status as biological men or women."
#UKSupremeCourt #TransgenderUK #EqualityAct #GenderRecognition #UKpol #UKlaw
-
CW: UKpol, transgender
Did the Supreme Court not think to ask those who wrote the Equality Act what they meant?
"A former civil servant ... Melanie Field, who oversaw [the Equality Act's] drafting and passage through Westminster in 2010, said the legislation was meant to give transgender people with gender recognition certificates (GRCs) the same legal status as biological men or women."
#UKSupremeCourt #TransgenderUK #EqualityAct #GenderRecognition #UKpol #UKlaw
-
UK Health And Social Care Minister (Labour) Asks The Conservatives To Apologise For Not Becoming Transphobic Sooner https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/04/17/labour-minister-says-tories-should-apologise-for-pro-trans-stance-under-theresa-may/ #ukpoli #trans #transgender #transgenderUK
-
CW: Medical, blood
Just had another blood test to check my oesteogen levels, all going well I'll be able to have my levels adjusted and start progesterone. I would have been able to do so earlier but the last blood test I had was somehow contaminated :/
-
Don't feel like a man or woman? Feel like... just a person?
Questioning and just want some space? Or do you feel distinctly ungenderable today?Support Ryan in their legal case for the UK Government to stop assigning genders to people who aren't into it! Let us correct the gd paperwork already.
Yes, I'm kink-shaming policy right now! Treat people like people, gdi.
It's nice to just exist as an individual person.I'll wander around, do daily tasks, or fill forms that affirm my right to live life -- wildly enough! -- left tf alone.
I don't think a train company really gives a crap if I wear a dress or a cravat.
Just... having a grand old time, existing in a way that is apparently queer: 'as an human'. That's it.I don't think marketing teams shit themselves over an 'X', 'I', or 'U' outside the two letters you were told to assume were possible.
Oh yeah, and intersex people exist too. Some are cis.Donate if you can! Share either way! Thank you! aaaaaaaa!
#VeRantDa #VeRamble #trans #transgender #transgenderUK #TransgenderCrowdFund #TransUK #nonbinary #enby #enbies #nonbinarity #NonbinaryHRT #NonbinaryArtist #NonBinaryPositivity #law #RuleofLaw #LawChange #constitutional_law #legal #LegalTips #legality #case #lawsuit #lawsuits
-
https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/non-binary-recognition/pledge/?amount=25.00
#VeRantDa #VeRamble #trans #transgender #transgenderUK #TransgenderCrowdFund #TransUK #nonbinary #enby #enbies #nonbinarity #NonbinaryHRT #NonbinaryArtist #NonBinaryPositivity #law #RuleofLaw #LawChange #constitutional_law #legal #LegalTips #legality #case #lawsuit #lawsuits
-
What is Hormone Replacement Therapy? (Download and archive this video.)
A hormone is a chemical messenger made by your body to send signals to some or all body cells. Some hormones are made in other bodies or through chemical processes, like other medications.
HRT is a medical treatment for certain conditions, including menopause for some people, or precocious puberty for others.
(Mostly) Older men and women also use it to affirm their gender experiences.HRT has certain side effects on your body. You may find these desirable or unpleasant.
Any medical intervention can have therapeutic effects and side effects. Different people experience different outcomes.Do you want or need to biohack your hormone levels to affect your body?
Please learn more from your GP, family doctor, primary care provider, or another trusted clinician with access to your personal medical records.Some of the waiting lists can be quite long, or involve more steps than you may expect. So ask early, please!
copy of links in video description: https://lgbtqia.space/@MxVerda/113876807351799423
https://nebula.tv/videos/lilyalexandre-diy-hormone-therapy-everything-i-can-legally-tell-you/
from the vid: gender affirming care is suicide prevention. It's also preventative care against diseases of despair.
#trans #TransUK #transgender #transgenderUK #TransgenderCrowdFund #LGBT #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA #LGBTQIA2S #medicine #medical #MedicalCare #MutualAid #information #info #detail #details #curiosity #intro #introduction #introductions #NHS #gender #gendered #genders #identity #autonomy #MedicalAutonomy #support #help #idea #ideas #medicines #AccessToMedicines #hormones #treatment #tx #diagnosis #dx #symptoms #sx #prescription #rx #patient #px #transHealth #TransHealthCare
-
Well, I've made some discoveries that might help my little tranarchy project: first is that it's actually fairly easy and financially doable (albeit not 'cheap') to product transdermal estrogen that could be distributed.
Also I've come up with a name: Fin. First because trans shark. Second because we're bringing the "fin" to transphobia.
-
I want to put together a much needed no-compromises trans activism group in the UK because unfortunately there is no body at present that's unconditionally standing up for our rights. Ideally we'd be able to fill these purposes and more:
- Provide free access to HRT for people who need it funded by regular donations. Similiarly we should provide a centralised stock of HRT to get people through gaps in prescriptions or availability of DIY HRT.
- Organise protests and civil resistence to oppose transphobia, take a defiant stand against it and raise awareness of trans issues. I'm talking protests, stickering, marches and more.
- Provide 1:1 peer support for those who need it as well as community support groups.
- Respond to the worsening political and social situation as changes occcur.
The real question is how does one do this? I'll be here scratching my head trying to figure it out. Please if you can help in any way let me know! Boosting would help a lot too!
#transgender #trans #TransUK #transgenderUK #uk #transrights #anarchism #ukpol
-
CW: Transphobia, organised hate, UK, TERFs
Via @tsn:
UK TERF groups are marking Women & Girls In Sport Week by... organising pile-ons and harassment against women and girls in sport.
https://transsafety.network/posts/anti-trans-sports-witch-hunt/
(Personal note: TSN are an important journalistic resource and if you can support them either financially or as a trans person with time, I implore you to do so)
#trans #transgender #transgenderUK #sport #WomenInSport #LGBTQ
-
I am trans, and... Perspectives on transgender identity, with Lenni and Jules.
https://youtu.be/VG9AYDWtvlE?si=NOTqibasb23WkkKq
#transgender #transgenderpride #transgenderUK #transrights #transrightsarehumanrights
-
CW: Transgender UK, bad news, Cass review
According to one of the employees at CMagic the publication of the Cass review will cause a delay to the green lighting of the various pilot GICs (Cmagic, Genderplus, etc...). This is because, as we already knew, there is about to be an investigation into the various adult clinics similar to the Cass review. The consequence of this is that the various pilot gender identity clinics won't be able to take direct referrals as was expected to happen very soon since as a pilot clinic they aren't authorized to do so. Instead they'll only be able to take on referrals from the existing GICs, which is what has already been happening. They will remain pilot clinics for the time being. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news everybody.
-
Having my first hormone test tomorrow, I had to fight to get it but I'm finally there. Wish me luck ^ ^