BLACK13
LightNews LightNews
banner
black13.bsky.social
BLACK13
@black13.bsky.social
250 followers 360 following 630 posts
Reader, gamer, dreamer, trans
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by BLACK13
reactiveashley.bsky.social
The Times, Telegraph, Mail, and other newspapers have been more accurate than the BBC in their reporting of the Sandie Peggie case. This raises the question of why the BBC appears to take such an intensely ideological and transphobic stance, far beyond commercial motives.
December 9, 2025 at 5:39 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
kirsty-mctear.bsky.social
DISGUSTING BBC…

According to the BBC, describing a trans-woman as “a biological male who identifies as a woman”, is intended to be clear and explanatory and easily understood by a wide audience.

Looks like the slur is an official policy then doesn’t it.

#TRANSAPARTHEID #TRANSERASURE #TRANSRIGHTS
December 9, 2025 at 2:26 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
marcusjdl.bsky.social
You’d never know this was what was decided as part of that tribunal ruling…
But Ms Peggie's claims of discrimination and victimisation by NHS Fife did not succeed and were dismissed. • The tribunal also dismissed the claims which were made against Dr Upton.
December 9, 2025 at 8:27 AM
Reposted by BLACK13
hern.bsky.social
Two ways to read this. One is “she lost on every substantive claim, completely failed in her attempts to ban trans staff from the workplace, and won mild procedural victories against her employers handling of her case”.
The other way is, I guess, “point one is longer so it must be more important”
December 8, 2025 at 4:10 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
goodlawproject.org
Remember: the EHRC's Interim Guidance, and we understand the draft statutory guidance too, recommended a trans bathroom ban. Two tribunals have now disagreed.
goodlawproject.org Jolyon Maugham KC @goodlawproject.org · 1d
This is the second decision - both first instance - since the appalling For (Some) Women Scotland decision to find that there is no trans bathroom ban. www.gov.uk/employment-t...
B M Kelly v Leonardo UK Ltd: 8001497/2024
Employment Tribunal decision.
www.gov.uk
December 8, 2025 at 3:57 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
dhothersall.bsky.social
Staggering to watch pretty much every news outlet in the country report that Sandy Peggie has won her tribunal case despite her losing on almost every count, and despite the ruling stating that the Supreme Court FWS judgement does *not* require trans women to be excluded from women's spaces.
December 8, 2025 at 1:54 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
ameresolicitor.bsky.social
All the claims against Dr. Beth Upton failed.

She’s entirely vindicated and her evidence was found more reliable.

Let’s see if a single paper actually represents that fairly…
December 8, 2025 at 3:03 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
foxdie.bsky.social
The dogshit BBC reporting is calling the EHRC code of practice the "European human rights code".

Complete rookie error, shows absolutely 0 knowledge of appropriate area of law.

Impartiality obviously means you have to not be familiar with the subject before you speak!
Screenshot from BBC article on the NHS fife case. It reads Part of their case was that Dr Upton was following the European Human Rights code of practice at the time - which said people should use facilities matching their acquired gender.
December 8, 2025 at 3:08 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
goodlawproject.org
I can't help but remember that "it" is also the word used by the man who murdered poor Brianna Ghey in a transphobic attack.

These people don't have "reasonable concerns" - they are revolting bigots.
632. A wider aspect of evidence we considered concerned an attack on her position in cross examination to the effect that she was generally transphobic, which she denied both when giving evidence initially and on recall (which is addressed further below). Some of the messages she sent are indicative of views which could be described as trans-phobic. In one dated 10 January 2024 the claimant described the second respondent as “it”. In an earlier part of the same message there is reference to the second respondent having a shadow (being in our view a reference to the appearance of stubble on the face) and a “pathetic voice”. These are disparaging remarks in relation to the second respondent in our view, because of the second respondent being a trans woman. 633. In another the second respondent is described as a “weirdo”, which the claimant sought to explain as someone acting weirdly, but which we did not accept as being what she had intended by use of that word. These remarks we consider to be consistent with other evidence of her making comments the second respondent was liable to find offensive that went beyond the simple expression of a gender critical belief, but amounted to personal attacks on the second respondent.
December 8, 2025 at 2:46 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
goodlawproject.org
Oooft. Sandie Peggie shared highly offensive messages and was then "untruthful" in giving evidence to the Tribunal.

This is the 'hero' Gender Critical campaigners have chosen.
631. The third aspect was her evidence given when recalled in relation to a message she had passed on to her group of friends which related to floods in Pakistan in the most highly offensive terms. She initially described the messages as “dark humour”. Her evidence later was that the message had been sent to provoke a reaction, in broad summary. We did not consider that latter evidence to be credible given the content of the message sent and her initial evidence about it. In our view it was an untruthful attempt to downplay what she had done, which she recognised as having included very offensive material. We consider that it was clear beyond serious argument that the author or authors of the original message considered the remarks humorous, and that the claimant had also considered them humorous which was why she had passed them on. That was supported in our view by her reference to dark humour
December 8, 2025 at 2:34 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
goodlawproject.org
This is a real disaster for those - pretty much the entirety of the British media - advancing a maximalist reading of the For (Some) Women Scotland decision.
796. Thirdly, the claimant’s contention was in our view not consistent with the court’s comment that “we have concluded that a biological sex interpretation would not have the effect of disadvantaging or removing important protection under the EA 2010 from trans people (whether with or without a GRC).” 797. After that comment the court explained that a person with gender reassignment as a protected characteristic could pursue a claim of direct or indirect discrimination, or of harassment, if the circumstances so warranted. There was no qualification to it to the effect that that was not applicable in, for example, the context of a single sex space under Part 5 of the Act. If their decision had been that all trans persons must be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets for the sex they identify with because it was not the sex assigned at birth, and may also be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets of their biological sex, that in our view certainly does impact on their rights under section 7. 798. Were the claimant’s contention to be correct that would have the effect of materially reducing the extent to which that protected characteristic could be relied on by trans persons, to their disadvantage. What was desired by the trans person when living their life may not be permitted in a large number of practical instances, and would not have been consistent with the view expressed by Lady Hale in Work and Pensions, and the line of authority in relation to human rights. Such a construction in our view would also not be consistent with the interpretation of the Equal Treatment Directive from the CJEU and its predecessor as referred to above, which remains as assimilated law, and would not be consistent with a purposive interpretation still required. The development of the law in relation to what is now the protected characteristic of gender reassignment is set out above. At the very least we would have expected these considerations to have been addressed speci…
December 8, 2025 at 2:24 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
goodlawproject.org
Decision in the Sandie Peggie case.

She was not directly or indirectly discriminated against, her claim of victimisation fails entirely, her claim of harassment fails largely and her claim against Beth Upton fails entirely. www.judiciary.uk/judgments/sa...
Sandie Peggie -v- Fife Health Board and another (judgment and summary) - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
Case number: 4104864/2024 Employment Tribunal, Scotland 8 December 2025 Before: Employment Judge A KempTribunal Member L BrownTribunal Member C Russell Between: Mrs Sandie Peggie -v- Fife Health Board...
www.judiciary.uk
December 8, 2025 at 1:33 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
kirsty-mctear.bsky.social
But the wierdo “Gender Criticals” don‘t want to talk about this…

PLEASE SHARE WIDELY, Especially to transphobes.

www.planetrans.org/2025/04/anti....
Anti-Trans Activist Nicola Murray Found Guilty of Child Abuse
Nicola Murray who benefited monetarily from Scotland's "Let Women Speak" was found guilty of child abuse and listed as a child predator.
www.planetrans.org
December 8, 2025 at 7:34 AM
Reposted by BLACK13
markhamillofficial.bsky.social
Spot on, Mr. Rather. 🎯 💯
December 7, 2025 at 4:21 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
natacha.bsky.social
PSA…
December 7, 2025 at 11:56 AM
Reposted by BLACK13
reactiveashley.bsky.social
😕
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...
Girlguiding volunteers brutally quit after 'heartbreaking' trans kids ruling
Girlguiding faces a volunteer exodus as members resign over the ban on trans girls and young women. Members say the exclusion betrays the charity’s core ethos of inclusivity
www.mirror.co.uk
December 6, 2025 at 4:35 PM
black13.bsky.social
It's getting ridiculous now trans women banned from a Dead by Daylight tournament, what fucking advantage do they have?
December 6, 2025 at 10:08 AM
Reposted by BLACK13
calumalexanderwatt.bsky.social
Drawing is easy.

Coming to terms with the results is the hard part.
December 5, 2025 at 11:50 AM
Reposted by BLACK13
foxdie.bsky.social
Please ask in parliament why Wes Streeting is continuing to consult with a group who openly promote conversion therapy and don't raise safeguarding concerns around blcokogm access to childlike or putting irritants in their teenagers make up!

transsafety.network/posts/wes-st...
Wes Streeting continues to ignore safeguarding concerns about parents group linked to abusive practices
Trans Safety Network has seen evidence Wes Streeting and the DHSC solicited feedback on a “puberty blocker risk form” from Bayswater Support Group and other anti-trans groups in September 2025, 6 mont...
transsafety.network
December 5, 2025 at 7:44 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
kirstimiller30.bsky.social
A sport that chooses exclusion as the default have the burden of proof. They have to have the science to show a TW has unfair disparities in strength, speed, endurance &/or physique depending on the sport. The @UCI_cycling just lost a case because they couldn't prove this.
December 6, 2025 at 4:15 AM
Reposted by BLACK13
peterstefanovic.bsky.social
This is no way to treat our veterans Prime Minister.

It’s now over two months since the PM agreed on BBCBreakfast to meet with the nuclear test veterans (having kept them waiting more than a year to discuss the justice & compensation Labour committed to in opposition)

youtu.be/hSQNLn2Ocr8?...
Video emerges of Deputy PM,Defence Secretary & other Ministers BACKING compensation for Nuclear Vets
YouTube video by Peter Stefanovic
youtu.be
December 5, 2025 at 9:35 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
heatherherbert.uk
GB News pays damages to Islamic Relief over false allegations share.google/y92pPzkEkyM1...
GB News pays damages to Islamic Relief over false allegations
share.google
December 5, 2025 at 10:02 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
darkeden21.bsky.social
Imagine the UK courts being as committed to Justice as the Australian courts lol

There are people who are harassing trans women here in the UK who are being funded for it, not fined for it.
December 5, 2025 at 11:42 AM
Reposted by BLACK13
natacha.bsky.social
This! WI and GG..
December 5, 2025 at 9:09 PM
Reposted by BLACK13
natacha.bsky.social
Ever since cis people have carried out "research" about trans people this research has been a disproportionately unethical.

IMO The "Pathways" study should be opposed at every turn.

A prejudicial state mandating unethical research on a minority group has happened before. It didn't end well.
December 5, 2025 at 1:35 PM