Tessera
Folgen

Mélissa

@melissaess.bsky.social

Queer woman who transitioned, Baby ⛥ 🧙, Toyama-Ryū & Batto Do practitioner, HEMA practitioner 🤺 , Shutterbug 📷, Anarchist 🏴, Queer Knights for Queer Rights, Death b4 Detransition

607 Posts210 Follower160 Folgt
Mélissa@melissaess.bsky.social · 4d ago

What’s getting me through this horrible period in history? Magick- Wicca have had it far worse in history, especially here in the UK. dropping the trans - I am a woman who transitioned, I refuse to circle the trans atlantic indefinitely. Your air mileage may vary… good friends

TACC@tacc.org.uk · 3w ago

Sex Matters says gender-critical voices are being silenced. Yet when Amnesty International UK published research critical of them, they didn't publish a rebuttal; they threatened legal action. Freedom of expression isn't a one-way street. We have responded to Sex Matters' email:

For years, Sex Matters has portrayed itself as a victim of censorship. According to its public messaging, gender-critical voices are supposedly excluded from civil society, silenced by institutions, shut out of debate and denied freedom of expression. Every disagreement is framed as an existential attack on free speech. Yet the moment a major human rights ('non-anti-rights') organisation publishes research that is critical of them, their response is not to publish a rebuttal, commission alternative research, or engage with Amnesty's arguments. Instead, they boast that they were prepared to sue Amnesty International for defamation. The irony is difficult to ignore. This letter repeatedly invokes freedom of expression, dialogue and human rights. It speaks of "constructive dialogue", complains that Amnesty failed to engage with them, and insists that differing views should be respected. Yet the same letter proudly declares that had Amnesty not withdrawn its report, Sex Matters intended to drag one of the world's best-known human rights organisations into court. Apparently, freedom of expression is a universal principle right up until somebody expresses an opinion they don't like. This has become a familiar pattern. When gender-critical organisations are criticised, they frequently respond by claiming persecution. They argue that disagreement amounts to censorship, that criticism amounts to discrimination, and that being called out for their campaigning somehow infringes their human rights. But criticism is not censorship. Being challenged is not being silenced. And having your views scrutinised is not an attack on free speech. Freedom of expression cuts both ways. If Sex Matters believes it has the right to publish reports, lobby government, intervene in court cases, criticise public bodies and campaign against the rights of transgender people, then Amnesty International has the same right to analyse those activities and reach conclusions that Sex Matters dislikes[...]Perhaps the most revealing sentence in the entire letter is the opening reassurance: "You may be relieved to learn that since you have taken the Growing Threat report down we are not planning to sue Amnesty..." It is an extraordinary thing to write. A charity dedicated, in its own words, to defending human rights is effectively saying: remove your criticism of us, and we won't take legal action. If Amnesty's report was wrong, Sex Matters had every opportunity to publish a detailed rebuttal. They could have challenged the methodology, disputed the evidence or explained why they believed Amnesty's conclusions were mistaken. Instead, their opening gambit was to announce that litigation had been on the table. For organisations that so often warn about a "chilling effect" on gender-critical speech, they appear remarkably comfortable creating one for everyone else. The right to freedom of expression is not a one-way street. It does not exist solely to protect the speech that Sex Matters agrees with. It protects the ability of charities, academics, journalists, researchers and human rights organisations to publish findings that powerful advocacy groups may find uncomfortable. If your first instinct when criticised is to reach for defamation law while simultaneously presenting yourself as a champion of free speech, don't be surprised when people question whether your commitment is to freedom of expression at all, or simply to freedom from criticism. Yours sincerely Trans Advocacy and Complaints Collective
Ashleeee 🌊🪭@reactiveashley.cat · 4w ago

1/🧵 The EHRC Code of Practice recommends but does not require that businesses segregate trans folks. My advice to businesses is to ignore the EHRC and do business as usual, to be unapologetically trans-inclusive, and, whenever someone demands exclusion, to direct them to single-occupancy facilities.

Mélissa@melissaess.bsky.social · 4w ago

“The most liberal democracy shares the same principle as the most despotic autocracy: the centralization of power and legitimacy in a structure intended to monopolize the use of force. “

Mélissa@melissaess.bsky.social · 4w ago

Women in the Samurai era lived at constant risk of rape and death/capture and would carry a “Kaiken” in the folds of their clothing. This is the modern equivalent, a “Hoo Knives v4” which is uk legal in that the cutting edge is 71mm and it does not lock. They only made 250, sadly.

Hoo Knives v4, a folding non locking uk legal knife
ClaireHam@claireham.bsky.social · 4w ago

Dear Labour, today you make history by introducing Jim Crow style segregation in the UK at the behest of those who espouse hatred and bigotry. History will remember you for your human rights abuses. You had a choice, you chose to attack the vulnerable. You disgust me. Love A trans woman x

Jojo she/her@jojofe24.bsky.social · 4w ago

This labour government are absolutely the worst government of my lifetime, and if you attempt to argue otherwise youll be autoblocked You can get fucked with your enabeling and apologism for labour out torying the tories Go look in the fucking mirror, youre an embarrassment

Mélissa@melissaess.bsky.social · 4w ago

Between 1933 and 1938, the Nazi regime enacted over 400 antisemitic decrees and statutory guidelines to isolate Jewish people and erase them from public life. Labour enacted statutory guidance seeking to isolate trans people and erase them from public life in just over a third of that time.

Zack Polanski@zackpolanski.bsky.social · last mo.

It's always lovely to see people supporting the LGBT+ community. Someone needs to tell London Labour Assembly Members who all abstained this week on a motion standing up for trans rights and challenging the EHRC. Why abstain on people's human rights and then "celebrate" Pride?

Jojo she/her@jojofe24.bsky.social · last mo.

Christian fundamentalist evangelism is western societies biggest threat They call it project 2025 Its actually christofascism We are not scared enough about this

Jojo she/her@jojofe24.bsky.social · 7mo ago

Heritage foundation have been at the root of this from the beginning, even tho we didnt all know or understand the connections This transphobic moral panic has always been the cause of the religious conservative far right They knew the way to win was faction us up, pit us against each other

Screenshot of blog post "The LGB Alliance have also connections to and worked with the known conservative Christian Heritage Foundation. You can see by the photos I have provided that the heritage foundation – by their own self-description – are about “promoting… conservative traditional American values” – I’m sure we all know what that means"