natnat

The number of men who don't see women as fully human can be measured by their indifference to trans-identified males invading women's spaces. 'What's the harm?' they shrug. 'Who's it hurting?' Women. It's hurting women. And the essence of misogyny is thinking that doesn't count.

People worried about assisted death services should sign this. People who strongly desire assisted death services should also sign this. Everybody should sign this. Petition: Fully fund Specialist Palliative Care provided by hospices petition.parliament.uk/petitions/7664…

Right, elections are over. Is Bridget Phillipson finally, finally going to implement the law on single-sex spaces, and lay the EHRC Code of Practice before Parliament? 🤔

Bingo!

Yes, the people who call themselves 'trans' exist and they deserve exactly the same rights as everyone else, which, fortunately, they already have in the UK. It would rightly be considered discrimination if a person was refused employment, housing or the vote because they identified as trans. 'Trans women are women' is a thought-terminating cliché. Men are not women. That doesn't mean they're not allowed to present themselves however they like, call themselves whatever they like and believe whatever they like about themselves. It means they haven't changed sex. If we replace the objective, observable characteristic of sex with the unfalsifiable concept of gender identify, women and girls lose, among other things, their right to fair and safe sport and women-only spaces, including changing rooms, prison cells and rape crisis services. Women and girls are provably more vulnerable to forms of abuse including sexual assault, harassment and voyeurism in mixed-sex spaces. There is no evidence that trans-identified men don't have exactly the same rates of criminal offending as all other men. Trans people exist. I have no desire for them not to exist; indeed, I wish them safety, happiness and health. However, 'existence' does not, and should not, mean the violation of other people's right to privacy, dignity and freedom of speech, or the reconfiguration of society to indulge a fallacy.

What better way could there be of repudiating accusations of misogyny than recommending an episode where three men instead of two discuss which rights women should be fine giving up - without, of course, mentioning the words 'women's rights.'

That's because I wasn't interested in being used to boost the viewing figures of a pair of exceptionally arrogant men whose understanding of this issue drips with classism and misogyny, @campbellclaret. If you're genuinely interested in a debate I'm at a loss to understand why you're uninterested in interviewing @ForWomenScot, who secured the Supreme Court victory and are therefore THE leading voices on this issue. But perhaps your charming daughter has adequately represented the entire Campbell family's view, by describing them as 'ugly' women, with whom she wouldn't 'want to be in a room'?

Grace Campbell and a man in a dress discussing the women behind last year’s landmark Supreme Court case. “Freaks… ugly, ugly, ugly, with the worst hair and the worst clothes,” they say. As ever, there’s no attempt to engage with the substance of the argument - only sneering at the women who made it. Campbell, the daughter of former Labour strategist Alastair Campbell, comes across here not as insightful or challenging, but simply as someone choosing mockery over debate. And completely unaware that she is colluding with a male who clearly hates women - and likely also despises her too. But will tolerate her while she is supporting his misogyny.

Hi @campbellclaret - in your latest clip - doing the rounds on X - you suggest the women in the first picture are the ones causing toxicity in the gender debate but the individuals in the other three pix are ‘marginalised and put upon’ Do you realise what this makes you?

@campbellclaret this “marginalised put upon community” who have been given leave to terrorise and harass any woman who disagrees with them. Here they are actively making death threats in public. Not arrested. But women have been for objecting to men in women’s toilets. Who’s been marginalised?

Today is 11 months since the Supreme Court Ruling. 11 months of cowardly inaction by @UKLabour @Keir_Starmer and 191 days since the EHRC Guidance @bphillipsonMP has still not implemented. Every day you prevaricate is another day women have to fight for our basic rights. ACT NOW!

I have some ideas how to do that: 1. Only buy level boarding trains. This will save millions. 2. Don’t send mobile roving teams to staffed stations. Every railway staff member must provide assistance. Period. 3. Stop window dressing projects. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

In December 1968, a young mother in Ireland wakes from a four-day coma, her body ravaged by her third pregnancy in less than two years. The twins she delivered are healthy, but May McGee has nearly paid for them with her life... Her doctor's words are blunt. Another pregnancy could kill her. He writes a prescription for a diaphragm and spermicidal jelly, contraceptives she cannot legally obtain in her own country. The only option is to import them from the UK. When the package arrives at Irish customs, it's seized. Officials deliver a chilling warning to the McGees: attempt this again, and face prosecution. May McGee, just 24 years old with four children born in 23 months, is told by her government that her life is less important than a law written in 1935. She refuses to accept it. "I was livid that somebody in government could tell us how to live our lives," she would later recall. "I wasn't going to back down." With support from their doctor and the Irish Family Planning Association, the McGees file a lawsuit. The High Court rejects them in 1972. But they appeal to the Supreme Court, and on December 19, 1973, something remarkable happens. In a 4-1 decision, the court rules that married couples have a constitutional right to privacy in family planning decisions. The moment that crystallized the case came during testimony. When asked how he felt about his wife using contraceptives, Shay McGee answered with devastating simplicity: "I'd prefer to see her using contraceptives than be placing flowers on her grave." Years later, Supreme Court Justice Gerard Hogan would call it the court's "single most important decision" in nearly a century, one that ignited "a social revolution." Yet that revolution moved painfully slowly. Politicians didn't pass legislation allowing even limited access until 1979, and only for married couples with prescriptions. Full unrestricted access to contraception didn't arrive until 1993, twenty years after the McGees won their case. The Sunday after their victory, May and Shay attended Mass in Skerries. From the altar, they were publicly condemned. They walked out and never returned to the church. May McGee never sought recognition for what she had done, but her refusal to back down transformed Irish society and opened doors for generations of women who followed. © Reddit #archaeohistories

They knew Imane Khelif was a man, and they mocked women's pain

@glosswitch @bindelj Pre-ordered!

Paperback edition of Unkind - with new orange cover and lovely quote from @bindelj - is out 6th March! For every perfectly kind woman who nonetheless suspects #BeKind may be a bit of a swizz ...

Your occasional reminder that the following phrases are literally meaningless: - Born in the wrong body. - Gender doesn't align with sex. - Living as a woman. - Sex assigned at birth. - Sex is a spectrum. When someone uses these phrases, stop them and point this out.

A year ago my brother was arrested My brother qualifies as mentally disabled by 2 IQ points The police later agreed he should not have been arrested and dropped all charges. However, he was held for 8 hrs and interviewed without a solicitor. This is how the safeguarding went…

As I've said many times, I've always supported assisted dying, My condition is progressive and my mobility and chronic pain will get worse over time. If I live long enough, there will surely be a time when assisted dying would be a great mercy. But I can't support this bill. It's *far* too high a price to pay for my own end of life comfort. I can't trust our government or - as I'm discovering - *any* government to get this right, to place compassion above saving money and to not let the scope creep. And I don't trust them to protect the most vulnerable people. It's *far* too high a price to pay.

I’m getting really angry. So forgive my rant. But DAMN IT. Will you people leave women alone already?!!! Stop shoving these men into women’s beds, our showers, and any other place we don’t want them!! STOP ALREADY. WE SAID NO!!! LISTEN ALREADY. NO MEANS NO!!!

A husband with depression and a husband with a terminal illness can be the same man An abused wife and a terminally ill wife can be the same woman A mentally ill teenager and a physically sick teenager can be the same young person