Roz Kaveney
rozkaveney.bsky.social
Roz Kaveney
@rozkaveney.bsky.social
Elderly trans novelist and poet living in London.
This is alas! important.
November 26, 2025 at 4:39 PM
Anti-gravity?

So for some reason she is conflating us with Elphaba?
November 23, 2025 at 10:05 AM
Good point I hadn't thought of...
November 20, 2025 at 11:19 AM
My guess would be a cabal of Falkner and Forstater. Wes can't be seen stabbing a potential leadership rival like Bridget Phillipson in the back when others will do it for him.
November 20, 2025 at 9:39 AM
ASBOS for the antisocial behaviour of being publicly trans.
November 20, 2025 at 9:13 AM
The only logical answer to that - and I bet it will get proposed soon - is to force trans people to wear some identifiable insignia so that we, and only we, can be excluded.

Because #theycantalwaystell
November 20, 2025 at 9:10 AM
The whole essence of Starmer is to outflank Fascism by capitulating to it. But this is deranged.

Back when people like Stock first talked of toilet bans, they said that cis women getting penalised for how they looked would be collateral damage. Now that collateral damage might get legal force.
November 20, 2025 at 9:10 AM
The chances are that this will work. After all, the corruption of the EHRC was a project of the last government largely executed by the current leader of the Tories. Sex Matters appear to operate out of Tufton Street, home of Establishment Christian Nationalism.
November 20, 2025 at 9:10 AM
It was decisions taken by Truss and Badenoch that packed the Commission with transphobes - specifically the members of the Johnson Cabinet closest to the US Right. They both used screwing us as their path to the top.
November 9, 2025 at 1:07 PM
Even in 2010, explicit transphobia was an extreme position.
November 9, 2025 at 1:03 PM
It's significant that two of the most eminent senior judges - Hale and Sumption - who normally agree about very little -
warned against interpreting the FWS judgement in an overreaching way, something Starmer and Falkner instantly chose to ignore.
November 9, 2025 at 1:00 PM
I did make a fuss about the dignity issue and was told by either Trevor Phillips or John Wadham - someone else may remember - that changing the phrase might upset the Daily Mail.

But OTOH we should have made more of a fuss.
November 9, 2025 at 11:56 AM
Well, no, because it never occurred to anyone that a future Supreme Court would choose to ignore Goodwin Vs UK or everything said in Parliament about the effect of the GRA.

We were naive about the good faith of future judges.
November 9, 2025 at 11:56 AM
There were robust arguments about the Bill's assumption that all pregnant people were cis women, but only because it was felt that this impacted the dignity of pregnant trans men and non-binary folk, not because it was seen as introducing cisnormative biological determinism or weakening trans rights
November 9, 2025 at 11:14 AM
It's worth pointing out, yet again, that there were consultations in 2010 about the Equality Bill between the EHRC and representatives of the trans community, and the idea that it would ever be used to screw us over was not part of the discussion even when the Baird amendment was belatedly added.
November 9, 2025 at 11:14 AM
OTOH there are a number of highly qualified trans lawyers who don't have my well-known and moderately scandalous past. Do I want a colossal target painted on my back in my old age and the Times and Telegraph writing editorials critiquing my love poetry?
November 5, 2025 at 9:32 PM
Where the Shadows lie...
October 29, 2025 at 12:21 PM
Isn't there a further story that Campbell published a story that got some details right, had his collar felt by the FBI and pointed out that any proceedings against him would be spotted as significant by any subscribers who were Abwehr agents?
October 29, 2025 at 9:53 AM
Apparently Arthur C. Clarke's A FALL OF MOON DUST.
October 28, 2025 at 8:08 PM