Bod
@bodmass.bsky.social
Lefty greeny sort. Doing Chelsea, Milton Keynes, History, politics, science & women's rights.
Discrimination laws state what is permitted discrimination.
Everything else is unlawful discrimination.
Everything else is unlawful discrimination.
December 3, 2025 at 9:03 PM
Discrimination laws state what is permitted discrimination.
Everything else is unlawful discrimination.
Everything else is unlawful discrimination.
If there is no discrimination due to the absence of a trans identity within that either
December 3, 2025 at 8:52 PM
If there is no discrimination due to the absence of a trans identity within that either
So why do you want to remove legal civil rights from women?
December 3, 2025 at 6:42 PM
So why do you want to remove legal civil rights from women?
Where does this 'legal right' to discriminate against only those men who don't have a trans identity come from?
Can you point it out in the Equality Act or SC judgement?
Can you point it out in the Equality Act or SC judgement?
December 3, 2025 at 1:38 PM
Where does this 'legal right' to discriminate against only those men who don't have a trans identity come from?
Can you point it out in the Equality Act or SC judgement?
Can you point it out in the Equality Act or SC judgement?
Why don't you set up a local jam making group for all if its so important?
December 3, 2025 at 1:33 PM
Why don't you set up a local jam making group for all if its so important?
Yes they could ballot not to use the single sex exemptions.
They clearly don't want to 🤷
They clearly don't want to 🤷
December 3, 2025 at 1:29 PM
Yes they could ballot not to use the single sex exemptions.
They clearly don't want to 🤷
They clearly don't want to 🤷
And what would be the legal definitions used? Gender teassignment under the equality act?
That would allow any man who merely says he is intending to become a transwoman.
Who couldn't say that?
That would allow any man who merely says he is intending to become a transwoman.
Who couldn't say that?
December 3, 2025 at 1:28 PM
And what would be the legal definitions used? Gender teassignment under the equality act?
That would allow any man who merely says he is intending to become a transwoman.
Who couldn't say that?
That would allow any man who merely says he is intending to become a transwoman.
Who couldn't say that?
But you don't know what lawful grounds to keep using the single sex exemption whilst allowing members of the other sex in, nor for discrimination against non trans identified men?
There are clearly none.
The pre action letters have already been sent, the ball is rolling, this isn't a hypothetical.
There are clearly none.
The pre action letters have already been sent, the ball is rolling, this isn't a hypothetical.
December 3, 2025 at 1:26 PM
But you don't know what lawful grounds to keep using the single sex exemption whilst allowing members of the other sex in, nor for discrimination against non trans identified men?
There are clearly none.
The pre action letters have already been sent, the ball is rolling, this isn't a hypothetical.
There are clearly none.
The pre action letters have already been sent, the ball is rolling, this isn't a hypothetical.
It will require full membership for *all* men to be lawful under the ruling.
As the OP says, that's up to them.
Send they don't want that though 🤷
As the OP says, that's up to them.
Send they don't want that though 🤷
December 3, 2025 at 1:13 PM
It will require full membership for *all* men to be lawful under the ruling.
As the OP says, that's up to them.
Send they don't want that though 🤷
As the OP says, that's up to them.
Send they don't want that though 🤷
They can go unisex, rewrite their constitution, name and charitable purpose at any time they want.
December 3, 2025 at 1:08 PM
They can go unisex, rewrite their constitution, name and charitable purpose at any time they want.
They can choose to be unisex and change their constitution, name & purposes.
Guess they don't want to 🤷
Guess they don't want to 🤷
December 3, 2025 at 1:07 PM
They can choose to be unisex and change their constitution, name & purposes.
Guess they don't want to 🤷
Guess they don't want to 🤷
Yes. They can openly vote to allow all males in & change their name and purposes or not.
Guess they don't want to 🤷
Guess they don't want to 🤷
December 3, 2025 at 1:05 PM
Yes. They can openly vote to allow all males in & change their name and purposes or not.
Guess they don't want to 🤷
Guess they don't want to 🤷
And why would they want to go against thier manifesto commitment, exactly?
December 3, 2025 at 12:53 PM
And why would they want to go against thier manifesto commitment, exactly?
It's not a multiplex and never was.
The cinema was a ugly big block behind this building
The cinema was a ugly big block behind this building
November 30, 2025 at 2:02 PM
It's not a multiplex and never was.
The cinema was a ugly big block behind this building
The cinema was a ugly big block behind this building
Socialists have campaigned for the rights of the female class to be free from male class oppression for over a century.
That's why they created laws for single sex services after all.
That's why they created laws for single sex services after all.
November 28, 2025 at 7:05 PM
Socialists have campaigned for the rights of the female class to be free from male class oppression for over a century.
That's why they created laws for single sex services after all.
That's why they created laws for single sex services after all.
But you'll still do as it says because it's the law and you can't force staff to break the law just because you choose not to have a vote about it.
November 28, 2025 at 12:09 PM
But you'll still do as it says because it's the law and you can't force staff to break the law just because you choose not to have a vote about it.
With Cole Palmer in-between them 😍😍
November 27, 2025 at 6:30 AM
With Cole Palmer in-between them 😍😍
Ah - But the complainants where mostly from the BBC pride group who must be obeyed.
November 19, 2025 at 1:42 PM
Ah - But the complainants where mostly from the BBC pride group who must be obeyed.
I mean they wanted gay only groups to be illegal under the equality act.
November 18, 2025 at 4:58 PM
I mean they wanted gay only groups to be illegal under the equality act.
Let's not forget that Amnesty has been arguing at the supreme court that it should be illegal for gay only associations to exist in the UK.
November 18, 2025 at 11:50 AM
Let's not forget that Amnesty has been arguing at the supreme court that it should be illegal for gay only associations to exist in the UK.
GRA isn't the mechanism
November 16, 2025 at 3:23 PM
GRA isn't the mechanism
They live their sex as whatever their sex is normally.
Am error in genital development is not the same thing as an entire body wide error.
The majority will still develop otherwise as male or female in all other respects.
Am error in genital development is not the same thing as an entire body wide error.
The majority will still develop otherwise as male or female in all other respects.
November 16, 2025 at 2:24 PM
They live their sex as whatever their sex is normally.
Am error in genital development is not the same thing as an entire body wide error.
The majority will still develop otherwise as male or female in all other respects.
Am error in genital development is not the same thing as an entire body wide error.
The majority will still develop otherwise as male or female in all other respects.
I can only speak for the UK where surgery is no longer considered and those with DSDs have had a legal mechanism for changing their legal sex for decades
November 16, 2025 at 2:22 PM
I can only speak for the UK where surgery is no longer considered and those with DSDs have had a legal mechanism for changing their legal sex for decades