I'm discharged from my private endo, and my GP will continue to prescribe HRT, which includes progesterone on the NHS. I'm on the GIC waiting list, but I can't see a reason to remain on it.
There were lots of good trans questions. Not one had a response.
Not sure what to say or think. Just terribly disappointed and feel abandoned again.
>"police searches, such as those which expose intimate body parts, should be carried out by police officers and staff of the same biological sex as the detained person" [NPCC]
When women's trust is police is at an all-time low, the NPCC have just made sexual assault by police an obligation.
A trans-woman with vagina is terrified of the police.
This is what Starmer and this Labour government supports.
So when we say the SC got it wrong, there is a supreme court judge who also says they got it wrong.
Lady Hale is not just any former Supreme Judge, she is the former president of the supreme court!
She said she would have ruled against FWS. This is huge!
The criticism is however with the Labour government and the EHRC.
This is not a settled matter and it will not go away.
Background: I'm a pretty young woman who likes team sports, gym, swimming, dancing and especially karaoke with my mates. I'm regularly singing in the pub. I live in an old garrison town full of soldiers and I get hit on by young men every week.
What's the point? What's the issue? I'm transgender. I was assigned male at birth. I'm biologically male. A man by the definition of the Equality Act.
A bit more info for the curious. I have a vagina and I'm accepted as female by everyone in my life. I sound female, my voice is in the feminine pitch. For years I use the female locker room. I shower with other women. It's normal for me. It's not weird or creepy. I am a girl, I always have been. All my ID and my birth certificate is female.
I will continue to play sports and use the female facilities and ignore this government.
Some more information.. I was assaulted in a male locker room by 3 men. I was raped. I've been sexually assaulted by men several times.
I'm fucking terrified of using a men's facilities.
I don't carry a radar key and I refuse to deny disabled people of their specific facilities out of principle.
This Labour Government wants me to use a non existing 3rd space.
They want me to out myself to friends, acquaintances, random people so I self segregate.
I'm basically banned from public life for almost everything.
I have no choice but to break this law every single day. I'm a law-abiding person. This doesn't sit well with me.
I'm in a panic.
I have melt downs regularly.
I'm getting anxiety attacks.
I can't concentrate.
I'm terrified of being sent to the wrong prison.
I've had to call Samaritans.
I'm on medication to help stabilise and regulate.
I'm still playing my team sport. Recently, my sporting body published pictures of me and celebrated me and my team. They don't know the truth about me. Doctors don't know my truth unless I tell them. Lovers don't know my truth either. If they catch me they will send me to a male prison where I will be raped.. hate this country.
I'm posting this because I think this government has let my community down, and no one is hearing me scream. I'm screaming into a void.
TLDR/ If this country wants a transgender toilet ban, then let's have an honest debate in Parliament and do it democratically.
The Gender Recognition Act was passed in 2004 and later the Equality Act 2010. Both were transgender inclusive, and this was Parliament's view and the law for 28 years. Until a few unnelected judges decided parliament, the EHRC, and everyone else was wrong.
The ministers who drafted it explain how it works.
Government departments explain how it works.
Regulators explain how it works. Public bodies explain how it works. Employers explain how it works. For 28 years, society has organised itself around that understanding.
Then, in 2025, a court decides the law means something completely different.
They basically dismantled the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and made it completely worthless.
Courts have an essential role in interpreting legislation.
Parliament has an essential role in making legislation.
When a judicial interpretation has the practical effect of reshaping public policy across the country, the democratic question becomes unavoidable:
Should major social change be driven by judges, or by elected representatives accountable to voters?
158 MPs signed EDM 240 because they recognised that the current situation has created uncertainty, confusion and serious practical consequences.
The Supreme Court has spoken. The courts have done their job.
Now Parliament must do its job.
We call on the next Government, and on whoever becomes Prime Minister, to show political leadership. Stop hiding behind litigation. Stop outsourcing difficult decisions to judges, show leadership and courage.
If the law is unclear, clarify it.
If Parliament's original intention has been misunderstood, restore it.
If change is needed, propose it openly, debate it publicly and vote on it democratically.
That is how a healthy democracy is supposed to work.
Britain deserves elected politicians willing to take responsibility for the laws that govern public life.
Will Andy Burnham address this... or will he be a coward like Starmer was.
Starmer has left a political vacuum void of leadership. He allowed unnelected judges to fill the vacuum while he cowardly ignored the issues. Will Burnham do the same?
If this country wants a transgender toilet ban, then let's have an honest debate in Parliament.
The Scottish Parliament has re-enabled the ability to search for MPs by sex.
But what if the MSP has a GRC? What sex will they use?
It's illegal to out someone with a GRC. This is very clear.
Are organisations adopting single gender spaces based on two protected characteristics in preference to single sex spaces?
154 MPs from across Parliament have now signed the motion calling for the Government to reconsider the EHRC Code of Practice.
There are still no Conservative signatories.
For fifteen years, public bodies, employers, regulators and services operated on a shared understanding of the Equality Act. The Supreme Court has given its interpretation. The courts have done their job.
Now Parliament must do its job.
154 MPs have recognised that the current situation has created uncertainty and serious practical consequences for organisations and the public alike.
If the law is unclear, Parliament should clarify it.
If change is intended, politicians should have the courage to say so openly and take responsibility for it.
Leadership means making difficult decisions, not leaving major social policy to be determined through litigation.
A handful of judges decided that we don't exist. Our lives have been turned upside-down. People have died. Jobs lost. Thrown in prison.
A national toilet ban.
No debate in government. No vote. Just a few unnelected judges decided to re-imagine what the law was.
If this was an honest political process, then parliament would be involved.
This is not democratic.
So what's next
Will they change the GRA 2004. They will continue to fuck us over until we can only piss in the streets and beg.
This may be useful for some of your campaigns/analysis. It takes a while to load.
​
​
​
UNISON's local government conference passed a landmark motion titled 'defending trans, non-binary and gender diverse rights in local government workplaces', with passionate speeches drawing repeated applause from the conference floor and not a single vote cast against the motion.
​
It will be interesting to see what the National Conference says this week.
​
https://unison.org.uk/news/2026/06/unison-commits-defending-trans-rights-and-trans-workers
​
Patients after a bone marrow transplant will ideally have the DNA of the donor in their blood, which can change someone's blood dna from xy to xx. The purpose of the bone marrow transplant is to permanently change the person's blood DNA.
​
This is not a gotcha in reverse. It's nevertheless interesting.
​
In a female donor to male recipient transplant (XX → XY), it is possible for a cheek swab to detect XX DNA, mixed XX/XY DNA, or predominantly donor DNA, depending on the degree of donor-cell engraftment and the sampling method.
​
​
Based on the current timetable:
​
21 May 2026
​
The draft EHRC Code of Practice was laid before Parliament. This started the statutory 40-day parliamentary scrutiny period.
​
21 May to 30 June 2026
​
Parliament can scrutinise the draft.
​
During this period:
​
MPs and peers can raise concerns.
​
Questions can be asked of ministers.
​
Committees can examine the draft.
​
An MP or peer can seek a debate.
​
An MP or peer can table a motion asking their House to reject the code.
​
EDM 240 has no direct legal effect on the process, but it can demonstrate political support for opposition to the code and may encourage MPs or peers to pursue formal parliamentary action.
​
30 June 2026
​
The 40-day scrutiny period expires (assuming the count is 40 calendar days from 21 May).
​
After 30 June 2026
​
If Parliament rejects the code
​
If either House formally votes against the draft during the scrutiny period, the code cannot proceed in its current form. The government and EHRC would need to reconsider their approach.
​
If Parliament does not reject the code
​
The draft survives scrutiny.
​
The government can then make a commencement order bringing the code into force on a future date. There is no requirement for that date to be 1 July. It could be days, weeks, or months later.
​
When does it become law?
​
Not on 30 June.
​
30 June is simply the end of the scrutiny period.
​
The code only becomes operative when the government makes the commencement order and specifies a commencement date. Until then, it remains a draft.
​
What should opponents be looking for now?
​
Before 30 June:
​
Whether any MP or peer tables a formal motion to reject the code.
​
Whether the government schedules any debate.
​
Whether pressure from EDM 240 and other campaigns translates into formal parliamentary action.
​
Those are the key milestones over the next few weeks.
​
​
It's the fastest growing. It's only 10 days old, this is remarkable growth. 👏
Thank you MPs who have signed this.
This should be a headline.
I think im having a fucking nervous breakdown over this Code shit. I'm literally physically ill multiple times a day. I feel dizzy, hear ringing, palpations, vision gets screwed, spaced out, tunnel vision, I pass out or nearly pass out. Then I feel uterly exhausted, and drained and fall asleep. This happens nearly every day, at home, outside, basically anywhere.
I'm writing letters to MPs, trying to get local support and campaigning. Then fucking up, and being misunderstood, and taking shit from twats online.
I don't want to be outed. I'm a fucking sports woman and I'm shitting myself that they will find out my truth at a national event. I'm worrying about my dress, which is really short. I have bad thoughts.. the kind that gets you redit care messages. I'm dealing with grief over lost family members. I'm crying a lot, not sure why. I'm needy I know. I need my friends, but I'm feeling excluded and distant. I'm getting the chest pain when something is emotionally hard when I play my sport because of fear and fear of exclusion. The thought that I can't play anymore is utterly devastating. Im hardly training, missing gym, skipping team training. I'm screaming in a vacuum, and no one hears. I can't sleep. I want to have meaningless sex with a stranger, but I'm scared. I can't dump this on anyone I know in RL, so this is therapy... telling the empty void that this SC shit really hurts. Thank you.
My naiive understanding is that Parliament creates the law, and the courts interpret (and apply) the law.
We elect our MPs on this understanding.
So when they thank the Supreme Court for clarity, it implies that when the Equality Act 2010 was passed by Parliament, that's what they always meant.
So what they are saying is that this trans toilet ban was apparently passed by Parliament way back in 2010.
Maybe I've been in a different dimension, but there is no way in gods earth that this was true.
So what's happening.... political gass lighting on a national scale. Parlimentary responsibilities given up and a fundamental change in our democracy where SC judges now create law.
This is not a tweak in the law. This is a wholesale rework of the meaning of the Equality Act.
I'm so confused by the whole thing