Notices by fak (fak@toot.community)

This is what every woman, intersex and non-binary person was worried about with this case. While the judgment might attempt to restrict this 'woman = AFAB' definition to the reading of the Equality Act (which is bad enough) hate groups such as Women For Scotland and Sex Matters are going to use this ruling to try and push such a restrictive and exclusionary definition across all forms of legislation https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvgq9ejql39t?post=asset%3A20bf2e47-c0fa-4878-bf66-2534245e475c#post all because of their transphobia towards trans women being on boards.

It's completely unenforceable. This ruling has decided that sex = biological sex = sex assigned at birth = what is on your birth certificate. Except birth certificates can be changed, so what sort of proof will be accepted if you want to claim discrimination as a result of your sex? What sort of proof will be accepted to access spaces? There is none. They might try and prevent birth certificates from being changed (too late, btw) and then everyone has to carry one? Screw sex, stick to gender.

"There is going to be an ongoing fight," she says.

"Now we have a really concrete basis for going forward."

Time to change the law to explicitly include trans women, trans men, intersex and non binary people so that nobody can be discriminated against, and everyone gets access to getting their needs met (healthcare, housing, employment, etc.)

#TransRightsAreHumanRights

Discrimination is always based on perceived gender - people don't know what was put on your first birth certificate when they decide to discriminate based on gender. It's always been perceived gender (including being outside a gender binary). Trans people also get additional discrimination for being trans (just as with race), but it all starts with gender (which is socially constructed, just like race) and that should be reflected in the law. Not this bullshit. Trans women should be protected

against misogynistic discrimination just the same as cis women. If you are being discriminated against because you are being perceived as female (or vice versa), the law shouldn't care whether or not the medical profession present at your birth put you in box A or box B. The Equality Act used to be explicit about that. Following this ruling I am not so sure it will be. This allows people to discriminate because they want to, it fixes no existing problems and only causes more.

I don't need to know if you are trans or cis. I need to know how you want to be referred to (name and pronouns) and that's it.

It's not that hard, let people live their lives being true to themselves. If someone oversteps into harassment, assault, discrimination - then that is what you address, the behaviour.

Not that long ago I thought the world was moving forwards, but bigots keep trying to drag us backwards. They are wrong and they are not going to win long-term.

@glynmoody they don't seem to have a problem with other 'Tory legacy' policies #LINO #RedTories

@ChrisMayLA6 under a certain age (around 2-3) children don't recognise and understand the words 'no' and 'not' in a sentence, so you do need to work around that until they do.

@NoraReed a waterproof hoodie, look at that fabric!

@goatsarah @greygirl27 ah yes, 'both sides'. One side harassing and abusing the very small number of trans runners who happen to be fast enough to be the fastest in their age category at a few (but nowhere near all) events (whilst the vast majority of these records are not held by trans runners). Sell transphobic t-shirts and harass volunteers. The other side: existing and running whilst trans (and in accordance with parkrun's rules).

@jeffowski @TruthSandwich oh. Him. Again. 🙄