Well, those so-called "feminists" are once more at it on @MumsnetTowers#mumsnet trying yet again to claim that nobody at Mumsnet was serious in calling for a return of s28 to schools, this time solely targeting trans kids:
Which is a weird bit of selective blindness. It doesn't take much of a search to find the times that posters, including very prolific posters, to the so-called "Feminism Chat" board have called, in one form or another, for an end to the teaching of trans issues in schools
2/n
I mean, they just can't stop going on about it. . .
3/n
Hell, they're just as fleckle-specked about it than Thatcher was, claiming that teaching this amounts to schools abusing kids
(fleckle-specked: when somebody becomes so dangerously obsessed talking about something they manage to cover their own lips in spittle when ranting)
4/n
I mean, you see all these screen shots, and you can't help thinking that anybody on Mumsnet trying to make the claim that nobody has called for, or is even campaigning, for a return of s28 solely targeting trans children is talking absolute pish. . .
5/n
Because there's plenty of evidence on Mumsnet so-called "Feminism Chat" board that gives lie to the claim that nobody is calling for a return of a s28 law that solely targets trans children. One poster describes educating children about these issues is "a bit like a cult"
6/n
And, inevitably, yet another allegation that parents who actually support their trans kids because they want them to be happy, healthy and not suicidal, are also abusive and "lunatics".
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
And the @MumsnetTowers anti-trans hate group over on "Bigot's Corner" are still busy with their legal illiteracy as they yet again deploy their Freeman-on-the-land arguments, this time with Girl Guiding.
So much deliberate stupidity—so little time, but let's unpack this...
1/n
"Having considered this I feel I can see where the issue is arising."
No, no you can't. No, seriously, you can't. You've made up an issue and have cherry-picked words from the Equality Act to support your arguments, but that's not how the law works.
2/n
"Equality Act 2010 does not suggest that single sex children’s organisations assort individuals as per their gender"
No, EA2010 doesn't suggest anything. It says straight out, unless an org meets the highly stringent exception set out in the EqA, an exception that can...
3/n
Ah, the anti-trans crowd are desperately trying to get #ROGD traction and legitimacy by trying to get it trending on Twitter.
So let's break it down.
#ROGD is pseudo-scientific bunkum that has less credibility than the flat earth theory.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
1/n
But in all seriousness, #ROGD is nothing more than the #transphobic denial of reality, and an attempt to explain away a phenomenon that has parallels running throughout history and is already well understood.
See, here's the thing. As the results of the UK LGBT Survey...
2/n
showed, trans ppl in the UK still face horrific levels of abuse and discrimination in society. And, as with any marginalised group in society that faces that level of threat to their safety and health, anybody who wants to come out as being trans has to make a calculation...
3/n
So, 29 pages of hand-written notes on the legal underpinnings re:Contracting States obligations under the Convention to respect an individual's Article 8 rights to self-declaration of individual sexual identity, how this led to the current GRA2004, and how recent...
1/n
ECHR rulings mean that GRA2004 is now no longer fit for purpose as it likely places the UK in breach of it's treaty duties under the Convention.
Tomorrow: examination of the legal process of self-declaration, models used, international take-up, future-proof compliance with...2/n
upcoming ECHR judgements, and likely future challenges.
And then Monday: examination of the benefits of self-declaration, and how implementing such a system can save the Government a load of wonga by highlighting all the studies that show just how vastly mental health...
3/n
Mmm. this is an interesting one. Bare basics, police refused to offer the job of Constable to a trans woman, claiming that she was legally male, so couldn't conduct more than cursory searches of women, but was visibly female, and so couldn't. . .
carry out more than cursory searches of men, under the terms of PACE.
Conclusion of the tribunal was that this amounted to discrimination and that the officer in question would be able to legally carry out all searches in what is now known as their acquired gender, thereby...2/n
determining that presentation of gender should be used as the guide for determination of sex for use in interpretation of law under such circumstances.
3/3
So, I mentioned yesterday that it felt like the so-called "feminists" on everybody's least favourite board were, in the terms of the analogy, working themselves up to another tantrum spiral.
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @SakuraNoSeirei view original on Twitter
Turns out I was right. And with things like this I hate being right, but, well, at least it's even more exposure about what really goes on at the so-called "Feminism Chat" board on @MumsnetTowers#mumsnet