Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜

Welsh woman. ♀️

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@stellacreasy I’m also concerned about those who would force women and girls to share spaces where they may be naked or undressing with men.

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@DannyBeales I commend you for your determination to ensure men have unfettered access to spaces allocated to women and girls. I look forward to the day you regard the privacy, safety and dignity of women and girls as worthy of even a modicum of concern.

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@NadiaWhittomeMP That’s a big no from me. But then I’m rather attached to my right to single sex spaces

[Spencer @chris_cross1498]

My MP has signed the EDM, this is my letter to her…

I am writing as a constituent regarding your decision to sign Nadia Whittome’s Early Day Motion (EDM 240) calling for Parliament to disapprove the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) draft Code of Practice on Services, Public Functions and Associations.

I am going to assume that you understand that this is statutory guidance and that rejecting it does not change the underlying law, as confirmed by the UK Supreme Court. If my assumption is correct, you must therefore believe that the EHRC’s guidance does not accurately reflect the law. Could you please explain to me which specific parts of the guidance you consider incorrect or unlawful, and why?

Furthermore, the EHRC is an independent statutory regulator, completely separate from the government of the day. Its sole duty in drafting this Code of Practice is to act as an objective referee—translating the Equality Act and recent Supreme Court rulings into clear, practical instructions for service providers. By using an Early Day Motion to try to block an independent body's guidance, you are engaging in an unprecedented overreach. You are effectively attempting a political veto of a regulator’s objective statement of what the law actually is. If Parliament does not like the reality of the law, the correct constitutional path is to propose new primary legislation to amend the Equality Act, not to politically interfere with an independent commission's statutory duty to explain it.

The biological reality is that trans-identifying men (trans women) remain male, regardless of hormones or cosmetic surgeries. Statistically, the vast majority do not undergo any surgical transition at all and are attracted exclusively to women. I firmly believe that individuals should have the absolute freedom to express themselves, wear whatever clothes they choose, wear make-up, and live their lives free from harassment or hassle. However, as a biological subset of men, they absolutely belong in male single-sex spaces, and they are entirely welcome there. There is no reason for them to be excluded from their own sex demographic.

By prioritising the feelings of a small group over clear sex-based protections, the position that a subset of men should use female single-sex spaces tramples on the rights, privacy, safety, and dignity of women and girls—who make up over 51% of the population.

As an effeminate gay man in my mid-50s, I have spent decades using male single-sex spaces (toilets, changing rooms, etc.) and have never once experienced any kind of bad or threatening incident in them. If you or others believe male single-sex spaces are not safe for trans women, the logical and fair response would be to campaign for men to behave better in those spaces and for better enforcement of existing rules against harassment or violence.

I look forward to you providing me with a specific, detailed explanation as to exactly why you believe this guidance does not accurately reflect the law. If you are unable to demonstrate where the EHRC has legally erred, then I expect you to do the right thing as our representative and remove your name from this Early Day Motion.

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

When imprisoned suffragettes were being forced fed, it was other women that were pinning them down. There will always be some women who would negate the rights and dignity of other women in favour of the opinions and privileges of men.

[Emily Darlington MP @emily4MK]

My statement on the Motion of Regret regarding the EHRC Code of Practice.

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@jacobharrisuk But more than happy to strike a blow against the freedoms and dignity of women and girls. This Government must stand its ground against those who refuse to acknowledge the rights and freedoms of over half the population

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@JamesEsses Congratulations to you and your family. The birth of a child is the most wonderful experience - I wish you all the very best x

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

Women deserve love and equality - shame there’s so many women that don’t agree, especially those women in the Labour Party who prize male demands and opinions so much more than woman’s.

[Emily Thornberry @EmilyThornberry]

I've joined more than 120 colleagues in signing this EDM to reject the EHRC Code of Practice.

Trans people deserve love and equality. I’m worried these new rules won't achieve that.

We need a proper debate in Parliament on them, and what they mean for our trans constituents.

[SEEN in Journalism @JournalismSEEN]

‘Darren Rigby, who sent hoax death threats to schools is jailed’

All girls’ schools were specifically targeted. Rigby ‘threatened to carry out deadly attacks supposedly in response to the treatment of ‘transwomen’’. None of this features in the coverage across outlets, despite the evidence emerging in email evidence and in court, neither does it feature in the Merseyside Police report.

‘I’m going to kill every girl and woman staff member I come across’

‘I'm going to shoot and stab all your girls’

It’s a crime of extreme misogyny in the cause of ‘fighting trans oppression’ but any mention of ‘trans’ has been erased by the police, PA and all news outlets. In addition the BBC report hides the fact that it was a crime against women and girls.

https://t.co/mEtjqOXI7D

https://t.co/MjqUMeGDGa

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@swklibdems @VMMChamberlain Let us know when you decide to give a damn about women and girls.

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@nickwallis Any chance you could sell tickets to a livestream?

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@MinnOrchia @Grizzlegutweed1 @RichardDawkins No

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

Damn fine letter from the Baroness

[Emma Harriet Nicholson @Baroness_Nichol]

A big Trades Union seems ignorant on Employment Law

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

@helenstaniland @TheBartonnz @jpmorgan Congratulations! You’re going to love it. Xx

[Maureen @MaureenWRC]

@KDansky speaks & writes for women’s sex-based rights in 🇺🇸.

She was mass-reported by “trans-rights activists” yesterday and is now locked out of her account.

@elonmusk please fix this 🙏🏻

Reposts appreciated!

[Naomi Cunningham @LoudBonnet]

This. If it was about wanting somewhere safe and private to pee, third spaces would be fine. It’s not. It’s about claiming territory, validation, and winning.

Dominating, intimidating and humiliating women is the point.

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

Well said. Just wish there had been a deluge of opinions like this from those with a platform 10 years ago.

[Trevor Phillips @TrevorPTweets]

My thoughts on the @EHRC guidance laid yesterday; this is not about non-existent "rights". It is about the safety of women - mothers, sisters, wives, daughters. We men need to hear their voices. Virginia Woolf : "Though we see the same world, we see it through different eyes".

My intro on @TimesRadio yesterday:

Where I live there are two different routes to and from the tube station. One, let’s call it Acacia Avenue, is quiet and residential. The other, London Road, is a busy major route with lots of traffic. At all times of the day, I automatically head for Acacia Road. It’s just much nicer.

The women in my family, on the other hand, will never willingly make that walk after dark. They live with an anxiety that most men find it hard to imagine, and frankly, rarely think about unprompted.

Last year 739,000 women were sexually assaulted in Britain. Virtually all such assaults - nine out of ten - are perpetrated by men. One in four women have been attacked at some time in their lives. Acacia Avenue is exactly the sort of place in which most women fear that they become vulnerable, and they are right.

As the author Virginia Woolf once wrote " Though we see the same world, we see it through different eyes".

I think this is the right context in which to understand the furore over the guidance being laid today by the government, over the meaning of the words man and woman when it comes to providing services and facilities in workplaces.

Many men think this is about a rather arcane dispute about who gets to use what loo. For their mothers, sisters, wives and daughters, it isn’t.

In a previous life, as Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, I had a hand in writing this country’s equality laws, in particular the 2010 Equality Act. It never occurred to any of us that there could be any confusion or dispute over the meaning of the words man and woman. But it has taken a decade of campaigning, a Supreme Court judgement and now hundreds of pages of guidance to settle the issue.

This is not about so called trans rights, which are completely unaffected by this guidance, since no-one has ever had the right to walk into a changing room reserved for teenage girls.

What it does mean is that women and girls are guaranteed the protection they deserve, and that their safety, which we spent half a decade drafting law to ensure, is protected.

But the whole business illuminates some serious issues in our politics.

First that many of our institutions, in spite of the fact that they always knew what the right thing to do was, decided to ignore the fears of their women customers and employees, under pressure from noisy pressure groups. Instead, the people who were supposed to be the grown ups behaved as though the law said what campaigners wanted it to say, rather than what it actually said. They settled for what they hoped would be a quiet life.

In a democracy, there’s little point in Parliament deciding anything if the law is then made an ass by activists intimidating bosses in companies, schools, universities and the media into doing something different.

Second, at the heart of the campaign to undermine the Equality Act is an idea that we specifically rejected in 2010, so called self-identification. That is to say, that it should be up to the individual to decide whether they have what’s called a protected characteristic - are you male or female, are you black or white. The problem is that self-ID would destroy the operation of any law against discrimination.

Look, it would almost certainly have been to my advantage as a young man to self-identify as a handsome, white public schoolboy. None of those things is true of me. And at various points I am pretty sure it’s been to my disadvantage. It is certainly statistically likely to have been to my disadvantage.

But according to the logic of those who say that self-ID should be the rule and that anyone should be able to decide for themselves whether they are male or female, black or white or Asian, were I to complain about racial discrimination, it would be difficult for anyone prove that I’d been discriminated against because of my race since anybody to whom I’d lost out could just tell the courts that they too were black.

I know that sounds like Alice in Wonderland but you can google the case where a chap, both of whose parents are white, insisted he should get money from the Arts Council because he so identified with the black struggle that he considered himself black, and everyone should accept his point of view. In the United States and Brazil exactly such outlandish claims have been made and people rewarded to the disadvantage of people actually born into minority families.

I have even been told about firms who, when reporting their gender pay gaps have put men who just happen to like wearing dresses at weekends - nothing wrong with that, let me be clear - into the female column and told their women employees that they really haven’t got anything to moan about because statistically they are paid equally, and they should get back in their box.

So today’s guidance isn’t just another tiresome chapter in culture wars. It is , I hope, a halt to the efforts to undermine one of the most important pieces of legislation on the statute book, by people who, for their own reasons, would prefer us to be living in the 1950s world of Mad Men.

[Sandra♀️💚 ♡ 💜 @SandraHan62]

Great speech

[Maeve Halligan @MaeveHalligan]

"No, I don't subscribe to this 'kindness' - I'll tell the truth instead."

I spoke at the Cambridge Union last night about LGBs, children's safety and women's rights. Full video here:

[Maeve Halligan @MaeveHalligan]

"No, I don't subscribe to this 'kindness' - I'll tell the truth instead."

I spoke at the Cambridge Union last night about LGBs, children's safety and women's rights. Full video here: