@novicewatcher.bsky.social
When you‘re released you get refused rape counselling because you’re male again.
Transphobia has nothing to do with biology or consistency, and everything to do with making trans people’s lives as hellish as possible.
Transphobia has nothing to do with biology or consistency, and everything to do with making trans people’s lives as hellish as possible.
December 27, 2025 at 8:40 AM
When you‘re released you get refused rape counselling because you’re male again.
Transphobia has nothing to do with biology or consistency, and everything to do with making trans people’s lives as hellish as possible.
Transphobia has nothing to do with biology or consistency, and everything to do with making trans people’s lives as hellish as possible.
Well it’s Catch 22. You can be arrested for indecent exposure for being female, then strip-searched by male cops for being male. But they’ll get turned on by it because you’re female. Then you get locked in a men’s prison because you’re male, but V-coded and sexually assaulted because you’re female.
December 27, 2025 at 8:40 AM
Well it’s Catch 22. You can be arrested for indecent exposure for being female, then strip-searched by male cops for being male. But they’ll get turned on by it because you’re female. Then you get locked in a men’s prison because you’re male, but V-coded and sexually assaulted because you’re female.
Keir Starmer will welcome the clarity and say that deportations must happen with dignity and respect.
December 26, 2025 at 6:53 PM
Keir Starmer will welcome the clarity and say that deportations must happen with dignity and respect.
In the forthcoming “For White England” case, the Supreme Court will define race as “biological race, assigned at birth”. The EHRC will then put out an “interim update” saying it is now the law to send all dark-skinned people back where they came from.
December 26, 2025 at 6:53 PM
In the forthcoming “For White England” case, the Supreme Court will define race as “biological race, assigned at birth”. The EHRC will then put out an “interim update” saying it is now the law to send all dark-skinned people back where they came from.
… But is also kinda glad about her life being saved and all that, then it likely would be in her best interests to have the transfusion.
December 24, 2025 at 12:47 PM
… But is also kinda glad about her life being saved and all that, then it likely would be in her best interests to have the transfusion.
Well a very pertinent question here is “How much did she want to refuse this transfusion?” If it will destroy her mentally and make her kill herself in shame then she shouldn’t have it.
If she was refusing to stay a good JW and keep in her family and church and avoid going to hell by consenting …
If she was refusing to stay a good JW and keep in her family and church and avoid going to hell by consenting …
December 24, 2025 at 12:47 PM
Well a very pertinent question here is “How much did she want to refuse this transfusion?” If it will destroy her mentally and make her kill herself in shame then she shouldn’t have it.
If she was refusing to stay a good JW and keep in her family and church and avoid going to hell by consenting …
If she was refusing to stay a good JW and keep in her family and church and avoid going to hell by consenting …
I still have to remind myself that the Beeb’s favourite Doctor had a sex change.
Or was that a biological timelord identifying as a timelady, then detransitioning?
I think we should be told.
Or was that a biological timelord identifying as a timelady, then detransitioning?
I think we should be told.
December 22, 2025 at 10:50 AM
I still have to remind myself that the Beeb’s favourite Doctor had a sex change.
Or was that a biological timelord identifying as a timelady, then detransitioning?
I think we should be told.
Or was that a biological timelord identifying as a timelady, then detransitioning?
I think we should be told.
That little boy was attacking the courtiers’ free speech. Lawsuit !!!!
December 22, 2025 at 10:45 AM
That little boy was attacking the courtiers’ free speech. Lawsuit !!!!
B..b..b..b…but they were rooooood to me … (sob sob sob).
My hurt feelings deserve a £ million band-aid, funded by my Scottish sugar mummy.
That nasty nurse got to grift, so I should too !!!
My hurt feelings deserve a £ million band-aid, funded by my Scottish sugar mummy.
That nasty nurse got to grift, so I should too !!!
December 22, 2025 at 10:41 AM
B..b..b..b…but they were rooooood to me … (sob sob sob).
My hurt feelings deserve a £ million band-aid, funded by my Scottish sugar mummy.
That nasty nurse got to grift, so I should too !!!
My hurt feelings deserve a £ million band-aid, funded by my Scottish sugar mummy.
That nasty nurse got to grift, so I should too !!!
Auntie Terf doesn‘t even *pretend* to be impartial these days. Their hateful hit job from 2021 (the one that got 20,000 complaints) is still online, and they’ve only got worse since.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22We%2...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22We%2...
"We're being pressured into sex by some trans women" - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
December 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM
Auntie Terf doesn‘t even *pretend* to be impartial these days. Their hateful hit job from 2021 (the one that got 20,000 complaints) is still online, and they’ve only got worse since.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22We%2...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%22We%2...
Great to see the ”independent” electoral commission on its knees, sucking up to an Honorable Member.
Probably because it’s not independent any more …
www.spotlightcorruption.org/report/democ...
Probably because it’s not independent any more …
www.spotlightcorruption.org/report/democ...
Democracy in danger: why the government must restore the Electoral Commission’s full independence - Spotlight on Corruption
A fully independent Electoral Commission is critical to ensuring the integrity of UK elections, and maintaining public confidence that elections are run fairly.
www.spotlightcorruption.org
December 22, 2025 at 10:24 AM
Great to see the ”independent” electoral commission on its knees, sucking up to an Honorable Member.
Probably because it’s not independent any more …
www.spotlightcorruption.org/report/democ...
Probably because it’s not independent any more …
www.spotlightcorruption.org/report/democ...
Rather they are requiring swimmer gender to match the gender label of the pond.
One thing I *would* question is whether the ponds operate based on lived gender, self-identified gender, or gender presentation at the time of using the pond, and whether the policy has changed with time.
One thing I *would* question is whether the ponds operate based on lived gender, self-identified gender, or gender presentation at the time of using the pond, and whether the policy has changed with time.
December 17, 2025 at 10:55 PM
Rather they are requiring swimmer gender to match the gender label of the pond.
One thing I *would* question is whether the ponds operate based on lived gender, self-identified gender, or gender presentation at the time of using the pond, and whether the policy has changed with time.
One thing I *would* question is whether the ponds operate based on lived gender, self-identified gender, or gender presentation at the time of using the pond, and whether the policy has changed with time.
Again a really dumb argument because the ponds have been operating on a trans-inclusive basis long before the passage of the Equality Act and Sch 3. SM’s case has to be that they have been operating illegally for at least fifty years (because they didn’t comply with the 1975 SDA exemptions either).
December 17, 2025 at 10:36 PM
Again a really dumb argument because the ponds have been operating on a trans-inclusive basis long before the passage of the Equality Act and Sch 3. SM’s case has to be that they have been operating illegally for at least fifty years (because they didn’t comply with the 1975 SDA exemptions either).
Looking at *all* these comparators disentangles the causal variables of sex assigned at birth, lived gender and gender label on the pond. And it shows that the ponds can’t be operating using sex at birth as the material causal variable so can’t be discriminating directly by “sex“ as defined by FWS.
December 17, 2025 at 10:34 PM
Looking at *all* these comparators disentangles the causal variables of sex assigned at birth, lived gender and gender label on the pond. And it shows that the ponds can’t be operating using sex at birth as the material causal variable so can’t be discriminating directly by “sex“ as defined by FWS.
Well again the choice of comparator is crucial. SM need the comparator for a cis woman excluded from the Men’s Pond to be a cis man included at the Men’s Pond.
Rather than a cis man excluded from the Women’s Pond or a trans man included at the Men’s Pond.
Rather than a cis man excluded from the Women’s Pond or a trans man included at the Men’s Pond.
December 17, 2025 at 10:34 PM
Well again the choice of comparator is crucial. SM need the comparator for a cis woman excluded from the Men’s Pond to be a cis man included at the Men’s Pond.
Rather than a cis man excluded from the Women’s Pond or a trans man included at the Men’s Pond.
Rather than a cis man excluded from the Women’s Pond or a trans man included at the Men’s Pond.
If the goal is to get this back before the SC, then going to the High Court first cuts out a couple of layers.
December 17, 2025 at 8:34 PM
If the goal is to get this back before the SC, then going to the High Court first cuts out a couple of layers.
Each is used predominantly by one sex but with a little bit of need from the other, so that meets the conditions for 26(2).
And once again, para 30 is ignored. The Men’s and Ladies’ ponds could each also be viewed as para 30 services.
And once again, para 30 is ignored. The Men’s and Ladies’ ponds could each also be viewed as para 30 services.
December 17, 2025 at 8:17 PM
Each is used predominantly by one sex but with a little bit of need from the other, so that meets the conditions for 26(2).
And once again, para 30 is ignored. The Men’s and Ladies’ ponds could each also be viewed as para 30 services.
And once again, para 30 is ignored. The Men’s and Ladies’ ponds could each also be viewed as para 30 services.
The attempt to cast the ponds as three distinct services (rather than one service with separate treatment by sex) seems to be the sticking point here. But even if they run that analysis it doesn’t work. The Men’s and Ladies’ ponds can each be viewed as para 26(2) services.
December 17, 2025 at 8:17 PM
The attempt to cast the ponds as three distinct services (rather than one service with separate treatment by sex) seems to be the sticking point here. But even if they run that analysis it doesn’t work. The Men’s and Ladies’ ponds can each be viewed as para 26(2) services.
**Sorry Schedule 3, para 26
December 17, 2025 at 8:09 PM
**Sorry Schedule 3, para 26
That’s a service provided separately (and differently) by sex, so qualifies as a para 26 service.
December 17, 2025 at 8:08 PM
That’s a service provided separately (and differently) by sex, so qualifies as a para 26 service.
Service for AMAB : “Use the mixed pond or the Men’s Pond, unless you’re trans, then use the mixed pond or the ladies’ pond”
Service for AFAB: “Use the mixed pond or the Ladies’ Pond, unless you’re trans then use the mixed pond or the men’s pond”
Service for AFAB: “Use the mixed pond or the Ladies’ Pond, unless you’re trans then use the mixed pond or the men’s pond”
December 17, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Service for AMAB : “Use the mixed pond or the Men’s Pond, unless you’re trans, then use the mixed pond or the ladies’ pond”
Service for AFAB: “Use the mixed pond or the Ladies’ Pond, unless you’re trans then use the mixed pond or the men’s pond”
Service for AFAB: “Use the mixed pond or the Ladies’ Pond, unless you’re trans then use the mixed pond or the men’s pond”
It’s remarkably silly. As well as advancing a “you’re discriminating against both sexes at once” case, they’re also trying to claim Section 3, para 26 can’t be invoked. Which is a *much* dumber claim than arguing that para 27 can’t be invoked.
December 17, 2025 at 8:08 PM
It’s remarkably silly. As well as advancing a “you’re discriminating against both sexes at once” case, they’re also trying to claim Section 3, para 26 can’t be invoked. Which is a *much* dumber claim than arguing that para 27 can’t be invoked.
The GCs also use their media attack dogs to maul any organisation, celebrity or judge which stands in their way.
When criminal gangs do this sort of thing, we call them the mafia; when political movements do it, we call them fascists.
When criminal gangs do this sort of thing, we call them the mafia; when political movements do it, we call them fascists.
December 17, 2025 at 7:58 PM
The GCs also use their media attack dogs to maul any organisation, celebrity or judge which stands in their way.
When criminal gangs do this sort of thing, we call them the mafia; when political movements do it, we call them fascists.
When criminal gangs do this sort of thing, we call them the mafia; when political movements do it, we call them fascists.
Since the GCs have seemingly bottomless funds and appeal relentlessly when they lose, businesses etc are more afraid of the GC faction. That’s what’s going on here.
Asymmetric lawfare.
Asymmetric lawfare.
December 17, 2025 at 7:54 PM
Since the GCs have seemingly bottomless funds and appeal relentlessly when they lose, businesses etc are more afraid of the GC faction. That’s what’s going on here.
Asymmetric lawfare.
Asymmetric lawfare.
But the bigots also argue that unisex provision is (indirectly) discriminatory against women, so they’ll sue over that too.
The message every business, charity and government function is getting right now is “Whatever we do, someone can sue us; which lawsuit are we more afraid of?”
The message every business, charity and government function is getting right now is “Whatever we do, someone can sue us; which lawsuit are we more afraid of?”
December 17, 2025 at 7:54 PM
But the bigots also argue that unisex provision is (indirectly) discriminatory against women, so they’ll sue over that too.
The message every business, charity and government function is getting right now is “Whatever we do, someone can sue us; which lawsuit are we more afraid of?”
The message every business, charity and government function is getting right now is “Whatever we do, someone can sue us; which lawsuit are we more afraid of?”