Anyastasya (She / Her) 🏳️⚧️
@darkrangervatari.bsky.social
Disabled and living with severe mental illnesses. Auditory hallucinations suck. Ableists can fuck off.
and needless to say that any solution, i.e a 'third' space, does not in any way, legal or societally 'respect' Rose's gender identity. It provides a solution to the perceived problem of Roses's mere presence by suggesting forcing her into a third 'dignified' space is correct. Obviously it is farce.
January 17, 2026 at 3:33 PM
and needless to say that any solution, i.e a 'third' space, does not in any way, legal or societally 'respect' Rose's gender identity. It provides a solution to the perceived problem of Roses's mere presence by suggesting forcing her into a third 'dignified' space is correct. Obviously it is farce.
This is a key part of the judgement. The judge is suggesting that the 'solution' to the mere presence of a trans person is a third 'dignified' space away from others, and that would 'solve' the issue at hand. He is LITERALLY stating that trans exclusion and segregation away from others is correct.
January 17, 2026 at 3:28 PM
This is a key part of the judgement. The judge is suggesting that the 'solution' to the mere presence of a trans person is a third 'dignified' space away from others, and that would 'solve' the issue at hand. He is LITERALLY stating that trans exclusion and segregation away from others is correct.
"That finding alone directly contradicts claims that the judgment mandates blanket exclusion or segregation of trans people."
No it does not, in fact his 'solution' is the exact opposite of that, he is suggesting that it is 'dignified' for Rose to be forced into a 'third' space away from others.
No it does not, in fact his 'solution' is the exact opposite of that, he is suggesting that it is 'dignified' for Rose to be forced into a 'third' space away from others.
January 17, 2026 at 3:25 PM
"That finding alone directly contradicts claims that the judgment mandates blanket exclusion or segregation of trans people."
No it does not, in fact his 'solution' is the exact opposite of that, he is suggesting that it is 'dignified' for Rose to be forced into a 'third' space away from others.
No it does not, in fact his 'solution' is the exact opposite of that, he is suggesting that it is 'dignified' for Rose to be forced into a 'third' space away from others.
You are not acknowledging what the Judge is saying in this part of the judgement. He is literally saying that a solution to Rose's mere presence is a seperate location, a 'third' space away from 'cis' spaces and that 'lesser' solution is dignified. Segregation in all but words.
January 17, 2026 at 3:24 PM
You are not acknowledging what the Judge is saying in this part of the judgement. He is literally saying that a solution to Rose's mere presence is a seperate location, a 'third' space away from 'cis' spaces and that 'lesser' solution is dignified. Segregation in all but words.
/proportionate to achieving a legimate aim. The judge states that putting Rose into a 3rd space away from others is 'dignified'. It is not, it contravenes her Article 8 rights under the ECHR, as per Goodwin. The judge is pushing trans exclusion and segregation and suggesting it is proportionate.
January 17, 2026 at 2:44 PM
/proportionate to achieving a legimate aim. The judge states that putting Rose into a 3rd space away from others is 'dignified'. It is not, it contravenes her Article 8 rights under the ECHR, as per Goodwin. The judge is pushing trans exclusion and segregation and suggesting it is proportionate.
Your interpretation is erroneous. The judge is literally saying that a 'lesser solution' is a 'third space' away from others, stating that seperating Rose out and away from 'cis' loo/changing room, is a 'solution'. There is a clear legal meaning here that forcing Rose into a third space is warranted
January 17, 2026 at 2:42 PM
Your interpretation is erroneous. The judge is literally saying that a 'lesser solution' is a 'third space' away from others, stating that seperating Rose out and away from 'cis' loo/changing room, is a 'solution'. There is a clear legal meaning here that forcing Rose into a third space is warranted
Bullshit, they want to 'eradicate' us from society, which means we won't be able to live or function in society. The CEO of Sex Matters views us 'as a problem to a sane world'. Transphobes and GC weirdos don't even think trans people are real and our lives exist. Yes, yes they do want us dead. Fool.
January 17, 2026 at 1:37 PM
Bullshit, they want to 'eradicate' us from society, which means we won't be able to live or function in society. The CEO of Sex Matters views us 'as a problem to a sane world'. Transphobes and GC weirdos don't even think trans people are real and our lives exist. Yes, yes they do want us dead. Fool.
Employers may even conclude that they should fire/offload any trans employee, again because of potential legal exposure. This is dire for our lives. This is going to be used almost immediately to discriminate against any trans person with a job or trying to get a job.
January 16, 2026 at 10:02 PM
Employers may even conclude that they should fire/offload any trans employee, again because of potential legal exposure. This is dire for our lives. This is going to be used almost immediately to discriminate against any trans person with a job or trying to get a job.
The end result is going to be that most employers are going to view employing either a trans person or offering a job offer to a trans person or whomever they view as 'trans' are going to simply say 'no, not worth it' taking the view that employing trans people is a legal minefield. This is dire.
January 16, 2026 at 10:01 PM
The end result is going to be that most employers are going to view employing either a trans person or offering a job offer to a trans person or whomever they view as 'trans' are going to simply say 'no, not worth it' taking the view that employing trans people is a legal minefield. This is dire.