Correct if I’m wrong, but I’ve read that the SC judgement wouldn’t have happened if we were still on the EU, as element of their rules on certificated sex would have applied?

Yep plus the ministers arguments in that case, and Labours rhetoric rollback… they’re a bunch of cowards, but they’re clearly too scared to implement full and frank bigotry.

If they’re a bit scared of us and there are legal cases in our favour, that’s all to the good!

I also want to express my love for Dr Beth Upton. That woman truly has more courage than any of us.

The GCs have been overplaying their hand - and we’re seeing across a few areas of public life even at the zenith of their power they’re coming unstuck with it.

They were very good for years and just pushing hard enough - now they seem drunk with power and it’s backfiring

All I’ll say after the 2 most recent tribunal cases, if I were gender critical i would *not* want Naomi Cunningham to represent me at an employment tribunal.

And I would be asking my lawyer to keep the facts and not misgender anyone if I *personally* don’t really believe in trans identity

It seems the days of Ruth Davidson are long behind them!

Also while we’re on this matter and apologies… Baroness Falkner and the EHRC made multiple interventions on this case, including telling Scottish Ministers that following the SC ruling it shouldn’t even be continuing as changing room policy was wrong.

So I think another apology is due here too

There was never clarity and there still is none…. Indeed the equalities minister own legal counsel in a recent judicial review hearing made a completely different argument to what she’d been saying for months.

Are we going to have an honest chat about this now? As I hear “the law is the law”!!

Like that actually conveys the most consequential element of the ruling that most people on all sides would be interested in surely?

"[The Tribunal held that] Mrs Peggie had in some of her remarks impermissibly manifested her gender
critical beliefs"

So there *is* a floor on this thing. They *can't* just say whatever the hell they like under the banner of protected beliefs. That'll come as a shock to some of them, I'm sure

This is why the billionaire arms dealer won their tribunal, they can afford much better HR than the NHS 😭

They arent going to to do a a rational cost benefit analysis in the following moments about Reform vs Labour. These policies have a profound and emotional impact on people and that has to be reckoned with, especially if you want to make a lesser of 2 evils argument.

No one is denying that and I haven’t said otherwise so a bit of a weird response?

My point is if a trans person quite literally won’t go out on a weekend because they have no toilet to use, or a teacher sees a child being dragged out their classroom to be incarcerated or deported…

And it can be tricky at moments to hold those multiple truths at once in an emotional capacity - there’s a feeling of “what can be worse than this”.

I agree with your overall point I’m just a bit concerned by some of the broader “policing” I see around this which is thoroughly unproductive at best