Brian

@fieldhce17 @Heccles94 Why do you want to force trans men into women's facilities? Who does that help?

@Heccles94 Definitely- and everyone in the right place! What you men don’t get is that women- most women- do not want our single-sex spaces being taken away by men, who then have lots of male spaces while women have none. Not just toilets after all…

The vast majority of Britons want toilets to be used for peeing and pooing and not bigotry.

@Baggywhacker @DaomiLove If you're saying one alleged case in more than 20 years is enough to restrict the rights of an entire group of people, then I can't wait to hear what restrictions you propose for the group that's responsible for more than 90% of attacks on women (Hint, that's not trans people)

@DaomiLove "There is NO evidence!!!🤪🤪" You'll never find evidence of anything, if you refuse to look for it...🤦

Trans women have been using the ladies loos for two decades in the UK. There is NO evidence to suggest women are at a greater risk because of it. This is a made-up problem caused by some rich bigots. Excluding trans peoples from single sex spaces will not make c!s women safer.

@not_that_CK There was a consultation, as i pointed out earlier. There was plenty of news coverage too. And in every election since, the voters haven't been inclined to put the people who object to this legislation into govt. All perfectly transparent, no matter how much you dislike it.

@LifeOfBOS @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 Changing a massive social policy without consulting the people nor declaring it on your platform and giving them a vote on it IS doing it by stealth. "Following procedure" is wonk bullshit and you know it. I can't believe you think that flies?

I voted for this in good faith. I believed it mean't that, same sex attracted people were free to marry people of the same sex. Never did I understand it as a law which allows people to legally identify as the opposite of the sex they are. Neither did most people who voted.

@LifeOfBOS @maccadoo8 @MargaretScanl20 Women are female .If that basic fact eludes you ,I’m not interested in your paragraph of waffle. You are just a common misogynist .

@not_that_CK @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 If you have actual evidence that supports the suggestion that normal legislative process wasn't followed here, then present it. But remember that you not liking how this was done, or that it was done at all, is not proof that it was done by stealth or slipped in.

@LifeOfBOS @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 You haven't actually shown that. You've asserted that the fact that legislators were talking amongst themselves about it means it was broadly known. The fact that almost no-one knew "Kardasian" was housed in the women's estate, lawfully, suggests otherwise.

@KitchenSceptic @maccadoo8 @MargaretScanl20 I bet you feel better not having to pretend to be someone who just had 'reasonable concerns' over how this law was passed. Now you can just show everyone exactly how virulently anti-trans you are. (Not that your timeline made it a secret or anything, but you know what I mean)

@LifeOfBOS @maccadoo8 @MargaretScanl20 What kind of eejit replaces sex with gender beliefs in law?Only an activist.

@maccadoo8 @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 It did pass. After high profile court cases, more parliamentary scrutiny than normal, and a lot of media attention. Stop pretending that your problem is how this was done, and just admit that you didn't want it done at all. Be honest about how you feel about trans people.

@KitchenSceptic @LifeOfBOS @MargaretScanl20 Absolutely, they knew it wouldn't pass, they did it anyway.

@KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 That's what gender recognition laws do. It sounds like your problem is that you don't like that that these laws exist in the first place not that they were "slipped in". Next time, be honest and just say that. It'll help everyone quickly realise that you won't listen to facts.

@LifeOfBOS @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 No one knew that a man with a gender identity “woman” was considered female for all purposes.Who the hell would agree to that ?

@not_that_CK @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 I'm not your personal researcher. I've shown that claims that this was "slipped in" are without basis, and so far no one has been able to rebut that. You may not like how this legislation was passed, but that's a personal (and biased) opinion, not proof it was done by stealth.

@LifeOfBOS @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 Does that include, pre 2015, a committment to the project of the GRA so that voters were well informed that this was a policy that would be implemented in the next parlimentary session?

@lespauljunior3 @LucyHunterB @heraldscotland And yet, despite me never interacting with him before, he chose to respond with a rant to a comment he wasn't tagged in on in the first place, and ran away and hid behind a block before I even saw it. That is of course his perogative; as it's mine to highlight his behaviour.

@LifeOfBOS @LucyHunterB @heraldscotland A case of hiding in plain sight… wingsoverscotland.com

"For Women Scotland rhetorically claims to be 'working to protect and strengthen women and children's rights', but in practice, its campaigns and legal actions focus largely on opposing trans inclusion. "I scoured their website and statements in mainstream media and found no evidence of any campaign, statement, press release, or public condemnation specifically addressing online abuse, misogynistic trolling, threats, or harassment of women politicians in Scotland. "Talk about invisible women – their silence is telling." 𝘐𝘔𝘈𝘎𝘌: 𝘑𝘢𝘯𝘦 𝘉𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘰𝘸/𝘗𝘈 𝘈𝘳𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘷𝘦/𝘗𝘈 𝘐𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘴

@not_that_CK @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 Ibid x.com/i/status/20581…

@LifeOfBOS @KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 Which parties mentioned it in their manifestos, public statements, stump speeches, TV spots? Transparent governance isn't conducted in wonk sessions behind closed doors. It was stealth legislation. Otherwise most Irish people would have known about. They didn't.

@Murnettie @dailybritainonx Read the committee report I referenced above. At that stage, this legislation was in the 2011 programme for government, the subject of public consultation, and two days of public hearings. A quick Google search shows plenty of media coverage too after that point too.

@LifeOfBOS @dailybritainonx Read the Denton report? They deliberately didn’t publicise it

#OnThisDay2015: Ireland voted to legalise same-sex marriage, becoming the first country in the world to do so by popular vote.

@KitchenSceptic @MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 Here's the GRA's history before the referendum was announced: Court case in 2007 Working grp in 2010 Heads of bill & cmtee hearings 2013 Cmtee report in 2014 New heads of bill June 2014 Full bill Dec 2014 It went around the houses for years. But you think it was "slipped in" 🙄

@MargaretScanl20 @maccadoo8 Slipped in under cover of the referendum as I said.

@mixoparthenos1 @dailybritainonx These are some of the main campaigners against marriage equality in that vote. All white, nearly all Christians, and many with a history of opposing any recognition of same sex relationships. LGBT+ people in Ireland know who wants to take away our rights. It's not Muslims.

@dailybritainonx Now they’re welcome Muslims by the boat load, the very people who totally oppose same sex relationships of any kind. The Irish don’t have a reputation for being a bit dense for no reason at all.

@Murnettie @dailybritainonx Court case in 2007. Working group in 2010. Heads of bill in 2013. Committee hearings Oct 2013 & report in 2014. Revised heads of bill June 2014. Draft legislation Dec 2014. Gender recognition laws went around the houses for literal years. But yeah, sure it was "snuck through" 🙄

@dailybritainonx And the sneaky bastards snuck self id through very quietly

@lespauljunior3 @LucyHunterB @heraldscotland He had the time and energy to respond to a comment he wasn't tagged in on with nothing but a rant, and then hit the block button before I'd even seen it. So yeah, this is very much a run away and hide kind of guy.

@LifeOfBOS @LucyHunterB @heraldscotland I don’t think anyone that knows wings would consider him a ‘run and hide’ kind of chap. He just hasn’t got the time, patience or energy for some people.

@mpd77 @EBaronCartoons How is it fair and reasonable to force trans men to use women's facilities and services?

@LifeOfBOS @EBaronCartoons That's true. By having single-sex spaces we are discriminating. The Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination on the basis of 9 'protected characteristics'. But, there is an exception for sex where it's fair and reasonable. That's what allows for single-sex spaces and services.

Saturday's Guardian cartoon #transrights #EHRC #LGBTQ

@MICHAELWELBECK Yes, I'm sure you tell yourself all kinds of things to justify your bigotry. In any case, you clearly don't have anything of merit to say, and I've better things to do. So I'm going to get off the merry go round here.

@LifeOfBOS Certainly more interested in supporting my wife & 2 daughters, my female athlete friends than caring about your faux GI opinions 😎

🚨NEW | Greens reject EHRC's anti-trans "guidance". Green MP Sian Berry said guidance "will mean trans people are barred from services", adding: "it is now up to Parliament to reject this document". Green MPs will vote against the "guidance". Polanski reposted her statement.

@MICHAELWELBECK Saying that you're only interested in attacking trans people isn't an insult; it's a fact. If our exchange didn't demonstrate that, the rest of your timeline certainly does.

@LifeOfBOS lol. You can insult me as much as you want but the facts remain the same 😎

@MICHAELWELBECK Your concern for the rights of anyone is about as convincing as your concern for women's safety. And in case I'm being too subtle, I'm saying you don't care about women's safety except as a way to attack trans people.

@LifeOfBOS The point is that though trans correctly have rights, they don't have the right to trump women's rights or anyone else's!