The only alternative to the SC ruling is to the detriment of women & their rights. At LD conference you said women needed ‘reassurance’ about allowing males in their spaces. We don’t need reassurance or patronising. We’re not 5. We want dignity, privacy, safety and fairness. We want our rights back

Show Post

Your advocacy on behalf of trans activist organisations pushing 'over-reach' or 'male entitlement' is clearly asymmetrically sympathetic to males at the expense of females. Aka 21st century patriarchy where males are valued more highly than females & accrue more power & empathy. Very disappointing.

Show Post

The Supreme Court highlighted in particular the detriments to female people (lesbians & transmen) of a 'certificated sex' interpretation of the law. Lesbians would have to include male lesbians in same sex attracted services & associations. TM would lose right to pregnancy & maternity protections.

Show Post

As a feminist academic I'd urge you to follow a feminist analysis & distinguish between males (TW) & females (TM) with trans identities. TM generally did not access male sport/prisons/ refuges etc given fairness & safety issues. This reveals the asymmetric rights claims made on behalf of males.

Show Post

Baroness Falkner EHRC Chair was absolutely outstanding. The Supreme Court judgement & EHRC Interim Update provide absolute clarity. No males (regardless of identity) in female single sex services & sports. Women's and lesbian's rights matter too. Please remember that given your position.

Show Post