Sharon ☘️🤍🤦🏽‍♀️

Health worker. Mother. GAA/LGFA. Pronouns No/Thank/You WORIADS Proud MERF 🧙‍♀️ #XX♀️🇮🇪

[Sharon ☘️🤍🤦🏽‍♀️ @SharonCooperGC]

Hello GC Twitter!
A few weeks ago I bought a Heretic patch from @JessDeWahls. I already owned a copy of #GBLAF by @millihill
Today I set up this Twitter account because I’m tired of all the gender woowoo, the lies, the gaslighting, the bullying.
#NewProfilePic #Adulthumanfemale

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

@SamA111202 @ConservativeDeb The reason I'm using the words 'boy' and 'girl' is because the subject under discussion is menstruation. Your ideology pretends that there are two kinds of girls, one of which has a penis and can never menstruate. I disagree with your ideology.

[Barbara Rich @BarbaraRich_law]

This is the primary document (with key extract in screenshot) which informed the decision about the ponds taken by the City of London Corporation on 4 June. The public meeting was followed by a private session of advice and discussion on litigation risk

https://t.co/EHAGQZE6q9

[Sall Grover @salltweets]

“Suddenly”
The case has been in court for 4.5 years.
Women’s spaces are on the basis of sex. Currently, a man who claims to be a woman on the basis of “gender identity” is able to override a woman only space on the basis of sex… I mean… 🤷‍♀️

Don’t gaslight me.

[Tina M ♿️ @serenstar4]

Bell, Im transsexual, Im not remotely marginalised or harmed by the law of EA2010 & thus EHRC guidance, Im the most pandered to demographic. Ive freedom, dignity, safety & equality. You advocate for unlawfully removing women's rights to accommodate Trans ID M. You betray women.

[Liberal Voice for Women @LibVoice4Women]

Great thread on mumsnet about the Early Day Motion that some MPs have signed in a seeming effort to stop the new EHRC guidance for service providers being approved. Many posters are writing to their MPs and the thread includes this cracking letter: https://t.co/vCzotb7gbn

[MrMenno 🇳🇱🏳️‍🌈🎶 @MrMennoTweets]

Well this is quite something 🤯

An actual MP telling me, a male homosexual, I’m “attacking” an oppressed group for not believing that men can be lesbians and women can be gay men

Samantha, there is nothing ‘strange’ about simply acknowledging what homosexuality is and isn’t. In fact it is imperative we do so to protect our rights

Para 204 of the Supreme Court ruling makes it very clear that the protected characteristic of sexual orientation is based on sex

Para 206 makes it very clear that this PC, and thus homosexuality, is rendered meaningless when not recognised as being based on sex

If you recognise that gays and lesbians and bisexuals are an oppressed group who still face adversity, how can we stand up for ourselves if simply acknowledging what homosexuality is gets us framed as “attackers”?

How can we even begin to tackle the modern version of adversity that seeks to reframe homosexuality to include those of the opposite sex? That has seen lesbians having to go to court in the UK and Australia simply to maintain the legal recognition of homosexuality (or in the case of Australia find a way to claw it back)? That has seen a lesbian brought to tears at a tribunal when asked why males can’t be lesbians?

How on earth can you take issue with me saying that men can’t be lesbians???

And how can you claim to be aware of the historic fight for gay rights while not having any awareness (or lacking the courage to acknowledge it) of how for at least the last decade these have been under threat from ‘gender’?

Don’t pretend to know our struggle if you can’t even say what a homosexual is

I mean… seriously!

[Sarah Phillimore @SVPhillimore]

Zero. Because that’s how the crowdfunding model works. All the money goes directly to my solicitors, minus the Crowdjustice fee of 7pence for each pound.

Once that money is gone, I will represent myself as a litigant in person unless Roddy Dunlop KC is able and willing to accept my direct access instructions.

If I win and am awarded costs, any not claimed by my solicitors will go back into Crowdjustice funds and I understand they donate to the Access to Justice Foundation. If I lose, I cannot touch this money, I will need to sell my house to pay Maugham’s costs which will likely be in region of £200k.

Donors don’t get refunds. If you donate your money is lost to you forever. What I hope you will get is at the very least information and entertainment along the way about a cause which I assume is dear to your heart.

If you have scepticism or dislike for my position or my character, or the crowdfunding model, as it seems this gentleman does, or you assume that as a barrister I should have ready access to my own funding, then your remedy is simple - don’t donate.

But to those who have, my eternally grateful thanks.

[Róisín Michaux @RoisinMichaux]

I had an intake meeting today at a paediatric gender clinic. I've been on the waiting since February 2025.

FtM daughter, 14, autistic, socially anxious, depressed, cutting herself, takes showers in the dark due to self-loathing, lesbian. Trauma from her youth. Quit school, won't leave her bedroom even to come to the gender clinic. Can't even cope with meeting over Zoom. All day online in queer communities. She just wants T and that will make everything better.

Puberty blockers will help with the dysphoria, I was told, until she gets T at 16. Appointment booked for July to meet with a psychologist to build her trans "story", then psychiatrist for the meds for the comorbidities, then puberty blockers. It's not a test to see if she's really trans, it's just formalities. She won't come if she thinks she won't get the hormones, I told him. Don't worry about that. Dad doesn't agree with transition, so don't bring him to the meeting.

It's the clinic that Irish kids are being sent to since the Tavistock stopped seeing children. They follow WPATH SOC8.

[Jill Foster @JournalistJill]

Roisin has faked having a 14yo autistic, lesbian daughter to see how a ‘gender clinic’ would treat her.
This is the sort of journalism Panorama or Despatches should be doing but I won’t hold my breath.

[Bev Jackson @BevJacksonAuth]

@datadriven_tdoc He is not a girl. He will never be a woman. It is cruel to validate his delusion - cruel to him and cruel to all the girls who are disadvantaged by his participation in events intended for female athletes. Lying to people is not “kind”.

[Cyclefree @Cyclefree2]

@TransLucent_Org Point 5 is quite wrong. Point 4 is also wrong. There is no ECtHR case law mandating that trans people must be given access to spaces reserved for the opposite sex. Points 2 & 3 are also wrong.

Finally, the Code does not change the law. So signing it achieves nothing.

[Akua Reindorf KC @akuareindorf]

Please explain how your stated wish to “ensure all members of the LGBTQ+ community, are able to participate fully in public life as their authentic selves” is consistent with laws which prevent lesbians from associating without heterosexual men?

[Akua Reindorf KC @akuareindorf]

.@BellRibeiroAddy, please could you explain whether:

- you consider the guidance to be unlawful, and if so how; or

- you consider the law to be wrong, and if so how blocking the guidance will affect it and/or secure any other objective?

Also >

[Colette Colfer @ColetteColfer]

There’s something very wrong in the political system when you email a politician outlining concerns about the impact of gender identity on women’s sports, single sex spaces, and distressed young women who are medicalised and harmed by ‘taking T’, and the politician’s response says thanks for your communication but I disagree with you, Trans people should have equal rights. To be clear - at no point did I suggest trans people should not have equal rights. So - I replied saying absolutely trans people should have equal rights and then reiterated my original points but there’s no reply. It’s like an iron door is closed, like to question or raise concerns is to expose Superman to kryptonite and so this cannot be allowed.

[Kate Barker-Mawjee @KateBMwriting]

@johnofsurrey As someone who has swum in the women’s pond often, I can tell you it’s tiny. It feels busy if there are 10 swimmers in it. And most of the swimmers are regulars. The idea that the 38,000 people are swimmers, as they claimed, is absurd. The consultation was hijacked by activists.

[Fender Davecaster @DaveOurPlanet]

Hampstead Ponds is an interesting illustrating of the extent of the demands of trans activists.
There was already a mixed pond. Trans people could use it in safety & without having to 'out' themselves. But it wasn't enough. Why not?

[Jo Bartosch @jo_bartosch]

Using the loo appropriate to your sex is not being forced out of public life.

[Naomi Cunningham @LoudBonnet]

@stellacreasy @Jebadoo2 @akuareindorf @EHRC The question you still haven't answered is whether you think it's not right because it mis-states the law, or because you think the law is "not right".

Which is it, please? Answering that doesn't require a long discussion about how it ended up that way.

[Akua Reindorf KC @akuareindorf]

To reassure @OakesMarianne: the Code is abt the whole Equality Act as it applies to services, public functions & associations across 9 protected characteristics & many causes of action. Prob 10% is on single sex spaces

Sad really that nobody gives two hoots about the rest of it

[ukvillafan @ukvillafan]

HOW THE LAW WORKS: A THICKO’S GUIDE (UK EDITION)

1. The people elect MPs to sit in Parliament.

2. Parliament passes legislation.

3. Courts sometimes have to explain what a law means.

4. The Supreme Court is the last word on any legal disputes about the meaning of legislation.

5. Legislation often sets up independent bodies to produce guidance, codes and other material to help understand legislation.

6. Guidance and codes of practice are not law and do not override legislation. Courts can (and must) take a statutory Code into account if it’s relevant, but it still isn’t the law itself. If the law and a code are in conflict, the law prevails.

7. The EHRC Code of Practice has to be ‘laid before Parliament’ for it to come into effect. Once ‘laid’, the ‘coming into effect’ is automatic (i.e. no positive vote is necessary) after 40 days UNLESS Parliament disapproves it. This requires the lodging of a formal motion by enough MPs.

8. Disapproving a code of practice does not, and legally cannot, change the underlying law. It merely delays the implementation of the code.

9. For Parliament to ‘override’ the Supreme Court’s interpretation here, Parliament would have to pass new primary legislation repealing or amending all or part of the Equality Act.

10. Before embarking on passing new legislation on something so fundamental, it is customary (though sadly not compulsory) for such a plan to form part of a pre-general-election manifesto.