Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
@cool2btrans.bsky.social
Inspirational speaking, event hosting, presenting & trans awareness training with heart, humour & humanity. National Diversity Awards Positive Role Model for LGBT 2025. British Diversity Awards Hero of the Year.
All links: https://linktr.ee/cool2btrans
All links: https://linktr.ee/cool2btrans
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
I guess this is one way for a former human rights lawyer to be elected, become head of government, and then wish everyone a happy international human rights day.
😐😑🙄🫠
😐😑🙄🫠
December 10, 2025 at 1:31 PM
I guess this is one way for a former human rights lawyer to be elected, become head of government, and then wish everyone a happy international human rights day.
😐😑🙄🫠
😐😑🙄🫠
Two UK Judges have just said that it is NOT illegal for trans people to use same-sex spaces that match their gender identity.
This video is AN ESSENTIAL WATCH FOR HR PROFESSIONALS AND ALL SERVICE PROVIDERS who wish to stay out of the courtroom.
youtu.be/aJ9i2w_BXz0
This video is AN ESSENTIAL WATCH FOR HR PROFESSIONALS AND ALL SERVICE PROVIDERS who wish to stay out of the courtroom.
youtu.be/aJ9i2w_BXz0
2 Judges say: It's NOT illegal for trans people to use same sex spaces
YouTube video by Cool2BTrans
youtu.be
December 12, 2025 at 3:43 PM
Two UK Judges have just said that it is NOT illegal for trans people to use same-sex spaces that match their gender identity.
This video is AN ESSENTIAL WATCH FOR HR PROFESSIONALS AND ALL SERVICE PROVIDERS who wish to stay out of the courtroom.
youtu.be/aJ9i2w_BXz0
This video is AN ESSENTIAL WATCH FOR HR PROFESSIONALS AND ALL SERVICE PROVIDERS who wish to stay out of the courtroom.
youtu.be/aJ9i2w_BXz0
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Expected.
Appeals can be gifts. Forces the GC to move out of their comfort zone into a court where the only question is: “what does the law actually require?”
Used properly, we can lock in some very useful appellate-level holdings that will haunt them in every future “bathroom ban” scare story.
Appeals can be gifts. Forces the GC to move out of their comfort zone into a court where the only question is: “what does the law actually require?”
Used properly, we can lock in some very useful appellate-level holdings that will haunt them in every future “bathroom ban” scare story.
December 11, 2025 at 6:15 PM
Expected.
Appeals can be gifts. Forces the GC to move out of their comfort zone into a court where the only question is: “what does the law actually require?”
Used properly, we can lock in some very useful appellate-level holdings that will haunt them in every future “bathroom ban” scare story.
Appeals can be gifts. Forces the GC to move out of their comfort zone into a court where the only question is: “what does the law actually require?”
Used properly, we can lock in some very useful appellate-level holdings that will haunt them in every future “bathroom ban” scare story.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
A new “Know Your Rights” guide for trans and non-binary people has been published by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL), in collaboration with ShoutOut and Transgender Equality Network Ireland (TENI).
www.iccl.ie/news/icc...
#transgender #trans #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA
www.iccl.ie/news/icc...
#transgender #trans #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA
ICCL publishes Ireland’s first ever “Know Your Rights” guide for trans and non-binary people - Irish Council for Civil Liberties
The guide sets out in plain English the rights of trans and non-binary adults and young people, with information on areas including legal gender recognition, family life, healthcare, and equality, safety and protection in daily life,
www.iccl.ie
December 11, 2025 at 10:59 PM
A new “Know Your Rights” guide for trans and non-binary people has been published by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL), in collaboration with ShoutOut and Transgender Equality Network Ireland (TENI).
www.iccl.ie/news/icc...
#transgender #trans #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA
www.iccl.ie/news/icc...
#transgender #trans #LGBTQ #LGBTQIA
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
4/ It was also ruled that aggressively challenging trans women using female facilities is harassment. Anti-trans campaigners' baseless claims that trans women pose a greater risk to women in changing areas or toilets than that posed by cis women were also rejected.
December 11, 2025 at 10:12 AM
4/ It was also ruled that aggressively challenging trans women using female facilities is harassment. Anti-trans campaigners' baseless claims that trans women pose a greater risk to women in changing areas or toilets than that posed by cis women were also rejected.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
3/ This isn’t about who can shout their culture war opinions the loudest. The law has always been clear: it is not inherently unlawful for a trans woman to be permitted to use female facilities at work. Employers must think carefully about how they balance everyone’s rights.
December 11, 2025 at 10:12 AM
3/ This isn’t about who can shout their culture war opinions the loudest. The law has always been clear: it is not inherently unlawful for a trans woman to be permitted to use female facilities at work. Employers must think carefully about how they balance everyone’s rights.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
2/ The former Chair of the EHRC can grind her axe in the press all she likes, but these rulings drive a coach and horses through her unworkable, unfair, and potentially unlawful guidance. They also show the Secretary of State is absolutely right to seek her own legal advice.
December 11, 2025 at 10:12 AM
2/ The former Chair of the EHRC can grind her axe in the press all she likes, but these rulings drive a coach and horses through her unworkable, unfair, and potentially unlawful guidance. They also show the Secretary of State is absolutely right to seek her own legal advice.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
1/ You wouldn’t know it from the coverage, but two recent employment tribunal rulings have vindicated those of us who have said from the start that the Supreme Court judgment did not require the automatic exclusion of trans people from single-sex toilets and changing rooms. 🧵
December 11, 2025 at 10:12 AM
1/ You wouldn’t know it from the coverage, but two recent employment tribunal rulings have vindicated those of us who have said from the start that the Supreme Court judgment did not require the automatic exclusion of trans people from single-sex toilets and changing rooms. 🧵
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Further information on how to get involved
December 10, 2025 at 4:14 PM
Further information on how to get involved
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Baroness Falkner questions “veracity” of a judge’s judgment.
In a possibly unique statement the immediate former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission Baroness Falkner is reported by the BBC as having questioned the ‘veracity’ of the Judgment of the Judge in Peggie v Fife and Upton.
In a possibly unique statement the immediate former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission Baroness Falkner is reported by the BBC as having questioned the ‘veracity’ of the Judgment of the Judge in Peggie v Fife and Upton.
December 10, 2025 at 9:38 PM
Baroness Falkner questions “veracity” of a judge’s judgment.
In a possibly unique statement the immediate former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission Baroness Falkner is reported by the BBC as having questioned the ‘veracity’ of the Judgment of the Judge in Peggie v Fife and Upton.
In a possibly unique statement the immediate former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission Baroness Falkner is reported by the BBC as having questioned the ‘veracity’ of the Judgment of the Judge in Peggie v Fife and Upton.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
The opportunity cost of all the wasted effort that was required to leave the EU, only to find it absolutely didn’t address any of the nation’s ills, when that could’ve been spent fixing real issues, & the cost it will take to one day rejoin. People should be in gaol; instead some are running for PM.
December 9, 2025 at 10:24 PM
The opportunity cost of all the wasted effort that was required to leave the EU, only to find it absolutely didn’t address any of the nation’s ills, when that could’ve been spent fixing real issues, & the cost it will take to one day rejoin. People should be in gaol; instead some are running for PM.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Absolutely amazing chart from @peterkellner.bsky.social's piece in @thenewworldmag.bsky.social today:
www.thenewworld.co.uk/peter-kellne...
www.thenewworld.co.uk/peter-kellne...
December 9, 2025 at 9:58 PM
Absolutely amazing chart from @peterkellner.bsky.social's piece in @thenewworldmag.bsky.social today:
www.thenewworld.co.uk/peter-kellne...
www.thenewworld.co.uk/peter-kellne...
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
The ET states that excluding trans people from both male and female changing rooms "is clearly liable to amount to indirect discrimination, which is likely to be very hard indeed to justify as proportionate" [811].
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
The ET states that excluding trans people from both male and female changing rooms "is clearly liable to amount to indirect discrimination, which is likely to be very hard indeed to justify as proportionate" [811].
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
The ET also points out that certain comments in FWS assume that trans women might be able to use female-only facilities [804-804].
They also comment that they think the principle established in Croft is still valid, and was not overturned by FWS or the GRA. Which is what we argued before the HC.
They also comment that they think the principle established in Croft is still valid, and was not overturned by FWS or the GRA. Which is what we argued before the HC.
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
The ET also points out that certain comments in FWS assume that trans women might be able to use female-only facilities [804-804].
They also comment that they think the principle established in Croft is still valid, and was not overturned by FWS or the GRA. Which is what we argued before the HC.
They also comment that they think the principle established in Croft is still valid, and was not overturned by FWS or the GRA. Which is what we argued before the HC.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
The ET also addresses the nonsense implications that would result from a strictly biologically sex-segregated world, where women can no longer bring their male children into the women's loos with them, and where cleaning staff cannot go into changing rooms. They say this would not be "workable".
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
The ET also addresses the nonsense implications that would result from a strictly biologically sex-segregated world, where women can no longer bring their male children into the women's loos with them, and where cleaning staff cannot go into changing rooms. They say this would not be "workable".
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Huge! The ET then goes on to analyse at [798] just how significantly trans people's rights would be impacted if this were the case.
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
Huge! The ET then goes on to analyse at [798] just how significantly trans people's rights would be impacted if this were the case.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
"If [...] 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, & may also be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets of their biological sex, that in our view certainly does impact on their rights..."
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
"If [...] 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, & may also be excluded from the changing rooms or toilets of their biological sex, that in our view certainly does impact on their rights..."
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
In fact, the ET said what Peggie was arguing was incompatible with the decision in FWS, where the SC emphasised that their interpretation of sex under the Act would *not* disadvantage trans people.
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
In fact, the ET said what Peggie was arguing was incompatible with the decision in FWS, where the SC emphasised that their interpretation of sex under the Act would *not* disadvantage trans people.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Pretty clear! The ET says that the Supreme Court "did not seek to address that question" which was "unsurprising, as it was not the question before it" [790].
Furthermore, the ET said that neither the SC or EA say that certain protected characteristics take precedence over any other [791-795]
Furthermore, the ET said that neither the SC or EA say that certain protected characteristics take precedence over any other [791-795]
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
Pretty clear! The ET says that the Supreme Court "did not seek to address that question" which was "unsurprising, as it was not the question before it" [790].
Furthermore, the ET said that neither the SC or EA say that certain protected characteristics take precedence over any other [791-795]
Furthermore, the ET said that neither the SC or EA say that certain protected characteristics take precedence over any other [791-795]
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
[789] "The question [...] is whether the application of [FWS] must mean that [...] a [trans woman is] required to be excluded from the female changing room, such that the permission given by [her employer] to do so was necessarily unlawful [...] We have concluded that the answer is in the negative."
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
[789] "The question [...] is whether the application of [FWS] must mean that [...] a [trans woman is] required to be excluded from the female changing room, such that the permission given by [her employer] to do so was necessarily unlawful [...] We have concluded that the answer is in the negative."
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Of course ET decisions are not binding. But this is the second ET judgment we have had in recent days which suggests that anti-trans campaigners have been grossly misstating the law in this area.
The ET states it plainly - FWS does not require a trans bathroom ban.
The ET states it plainly - FWS does not require a trans bathroom ban.
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
Of course ET decisions are not binding. But this is the second ET judgment we have had in recent days which suggests that anti-trans campaigners have been grossly misstating the law in this area.
The ET states it plainly - FWS does not require a trans bathroom ban.
The ET states it plainly - FWS does not require a trans bathroom ban.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
I'm going to try and not get too much into the weeds of the substance of the judgment, though it is very critical of particular aspects of Peggie's conduct. I will leave that to others.
My focus here is the broader picture: what did the ET have to say about the implications of FWS?
My focus here is the broader picture: what did the ET have to say about the implications of FWS?
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
I'm going to try and not get too much into the weeds of the substance of the judgment, though it is very critical of particular aspects of Peggie's conduct. I will leave that to others.
My focus here is the broader picture: what did the ET have to say about the implications of FWS?
My focus here is the broader picture: what did the ET have to say about the implications of FWS?
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
Mini thread on the ET decision in Peggie
Top line: It says exactly what we have been saying for months. The decision of the Supreme Court was not to turn the Equality Act 2010 into a nationwide bathroom ban - regardless of how anti-trans organisations have sought to misrepresent the law.
🧵👇
Top line: It says exactly what we have been saying for months. The decision of the Supreme Court was not to turn the Equality Act 2010 into a nationwide bathroom ban - regardless of how anti-trans organisations have sought to misrepresent the law.
🧵👇
December 8, 2025 at 3:21 PM
Mini thread on the ET decision in Peggie
Top line: It says exactly what we have been saying for months. The decision of the Supreme Court was not to turn the Equality Act 2010 into a nationwide bathroom ban - regardless of how anti-trans organisations have sought to misrepresent the law.
🧵👇
Top line: It says exactly what we have been saying for months. The decision of the Supreme Court was not to turn the Equality Act 2010 into a nationwide bathroom ban - regardless of how anti-trans organisations have sought to misrepresent the law.
🧵👇
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
How much has she now cost NHS Fife? approx £320k recorded back in August. All because she couldn't deal with another human being being in the same changing area as her? It's absolutely wild. Up to 10 nurses could've worked for a year for the costs. Dr Upton just wanted to do her job and save lives.
December 8, 2025 at 2:56 PM
How much has she now cost NHS Fife? approx £320k recorded back in August. All because she couldn't deal with another human being being in the same changing area as her? It's absolutely wild. Up to 10 nurses could've worked for a year for the costs. Dr Upton just wanted to do her job and save lives.
Reposted by Katie Neeves - Cool2BTrans - Trans Ambassador
"[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
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
December 8, 2025 at 1:48 PM
"[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
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