Tessera
Folgen

Nika

@nikavia.bsky.social

1056 Posts546 Follower100 Folgt
Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last wk.

The UN's logic here applies equally to the blanket ban on trans women from all "gender-affected" sports under the supreme court's rewrite of the equality act. The nuanced, evidence-based framework they advocate is what we had pre-FWS, and which the court demolished.

Mallory Moore@sexabolition.blog · last wk.

spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBas... The United Nations Special Procedures rapporteurs and working group on cultural rights and right to the highest attainable standard of physical health have reached out to the International Olympic Committee to condemn exclusion of intersex and trans athletes.

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Well, isn't that interesting? Regardless of financial security, Labour's support amongst social conservatives is in the single figures. It's almost as if their rabid transphobia is driving away decent human beings in droves while bringing in basically no votes at all. Who'd have guessed?

Steve Akehurst@steveakehurst.bsky.social · 3mo ago

As others (@owenwntr.bsky.social, MiC etc) have noted, social attitudes cut by financial security is quite a neat prism. Financially insecure social liberals going Green, financially insecure conservatives Reform. Lab & LD left with financially secure liberals. Con higher with secure cons.

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · 10mo ago

This is a) terrible, and b) hugely better than the UK. Not sure what the % is over here - @hleehurley.com probably has a rough idea, at least - but we would kill for fully 30% of all stories about trans rights quoting trans people. And 30% is abysmal! It ought to be 100%!

Michaël Jarjour@jarjour.myatproto.social · 10mo ago

A new study shows what we know: Journalism is failing on trans rights coverage. 70% of stories about Trump’s executive orders affecting trans people didn’t quote trans people. They’re talking ABOUT trans people not with them. Story / study here: www.transjournalists.org/tja-bmsg-exe...

Graph that shows that trans people and their representatives were quoted infrequently: 70% of articles did not feature even a single trans person.
Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · 11mo ago

This is more than just denial of reality; it's an accusation. It's claiming that trans adults are lying about their own childhoods, in order to trick children into transitioning. It's why glinner loves the "groomer" lie. It's a blood libel intended to portray us as a threat that needs to be stopped.

Lee Hurley@hleehurley.com · 11mo ago

It's worth noting that he is in court for harassing a trans child. He turned up to court saying his alleged victim does not exist.

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · 11mo ago

"I am not competent to continue a prescription provided by a specialist, order 1-2 blood tests a year, and compare some numbers to reference ranges" is the kind of admission that should lead to a GP being struck off for gross incompetence. And yet!

Helen 🏳️‍⚧️✊🏻💕@mimmymum.bsky.social · 11mo ago

Charities and medical professionals have warned of a “staggering increase” in GPs denying gender affirming care, even when it is requested by a specialist clinic. Doctors are claiming they are either not competent to provide the service or they are not contractually obliged 😖

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

Some good news for trans people for once. Reid is the UN Independent Expert on protection from violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. He was one of the UN experts who criticised the supreme court ruling and urged parliament to act to protect trans rights.

Senthorun S. Raj@senthorun.bsky.social · last yr.

“The UN Human Rights Council voted on Monday to renew the mandate of an LGBT rights expert, a move welcomed by advocates amid the absence of the United States, a former key supporter that is now rolling back such protections.” Good to see the UN HRC renew independent monitoring of LGBT rights. 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍🌈

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

Even if it were true that reducing suicidal ideation did not reduce actual suicides, having experienced suicidal ideation, I can confirm that it fucking sucks! Reducing it is still very obviously a strongly positive outcome in and of itself.

Michael Hobbes@michaelhobbes.bsky.social · last yr.

The "misinformation" in question here is that gender-affirming care reduces suicides among youth. It merely reduces depression, anxiety, self-harm and suicidal ideation. www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...

The Liberal Misinformation Bubble About Youth Gender Medicine How the left ended up disbelieving the science By Helen Lewis
Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

IOW, the government thinks it's right and proper that trans people be excluded from "hospitals, refuges and sports clubs", and intend to make sure that stays the case. But don't worry, everyone, they hear our concerns! They're just not going to address them in any substantive way. Fuck Labour.

The Government welcomes the Supreme Court’s clarification of the meaning of sex for the purposes of the Equality Act, and the confidence and clarity it provides for women and service providers such as hospitals, refuges and sports clubs regarding single-sex services. Single-sex services based on biological sex are protected in law and will always be protected by this Government.
Equality Amplified@equalityamplified.org.uk · last yr.

We've received a response following our letter addressed to MP Bridget Phillipson, the Labour Minister for Women and Equalities, demanding accountability, clarity, and respect for trans rights following the Supreme Court judgment. Read it here: www.equalityamplified.org.uk/lobbying-and...

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

This is an excellent article, but I disagree with the excerpt below. In my reading, the supreme court's decision has done far more damage to the Gender Recognition Act than many people have realised, rendering it fundamentally unfit for purpose. CAVEAT: not a lawyer, this is just my opinion. [1/n]

The Supreme Court ruled on one issue: the definition of the words 'man' and 'woman' in the Equality Act. They decided that man meant biological man and women meant biological woman. In other words, a trans man is a woman and a trans woman is a man. But this is only the case for that one piece of legislation. In every other piece of legislation, a trans man is still a man and a trans woman is still a woman. This is because the Gender Recognition Act states that someone with a gender recognition certificate has changed their sex "for all purposes".
Ian Dunt@iandunt.bsky.social · last yr.

Judgement Day for the EHRC: How the equality watchdog turned into a toxic culture war campaign group iandunt.substack.com/p/judgement-...

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

Excellent statement. I particularly liked the fact that they were willing to clearly call out the ruling as transphobic, as well as highlighting the part allowing us to be excluded from both men's and women's spaces simultaneously. And, of course, referencing the ever-fantastic @jessothomson.co.uk

Duncan Hothersall@dhothersall.bsky.social · last yr.

"Women are not physically inferior versions of men, and our function is not one of broodmares. We repudiate the equation of women with reproductive function as profoundly misogynistic." UCU women members not messing about in their response to the Supreme Court ruling. www.ucu.org.uk/media/15028/...

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

Perhaps that august body could protect its own standing by not throwing people's rights in the bin to suit its own prejudices. Respect for the court is important, when the court is worthy of that respect. It has breached that social contract, and politicians and legal people should make that clear.

Post nicht verfügbar.
Lee Hurley@hleehurley.com · last yr.

Trans people have been excluded from every single step. From Cass. From the Supreme Court. From the EHRC. From politics. From the media. And still, trans people will be blamed when this explodes in everyone's faces despite trans people warning, for years, that this is what would happen.

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

Is...is this a thing? Because to my non-lawyer eyes it reads like the kind of transparently sophistic horseshit a debate club nerd throws out when asked to defend an untenable position and is hoping to at least score some points for cleverness. It reads like "the card says Moops" cranked up to 11.

103. We also reject the submission that the carve out in section 9(3) only operates in respect of future legislation and not legislation, such as the SDA 1975, which was already enacted at the date when the GRA 2004 was enacted. Ms Irvine submitted that the GRA 2004 itself made exhaustive provision for how the rule was to apply to existing statutes. We do not accept that; section 9(3) refers to "any other enactment" and those words have a clear meaning.
Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

The government explicitly addressed this point during the committee stage. The speaker here is David Lammy, and the word "gender" was clipped off the end of the last sentence. Too many laws to name all of them, and they were of the opinion that the existing text was clear. More fool them, I guess.

The basic principle of the Bill in clause 9 is that the issue of a gender recognition certificate will mean that a person's gender will become, for all purposes, the acquired ''gender''. For example, an applicant who was born male would in law become a woman. There are many places in law where the word ''sex'' is used rather than gender. Clearly, it would be ludicrous if a person were treated as being a female whenever the law referred to gender, but male whenever it referred to sex. The Joint Committee on Human Rights highlighted the potential for uncertainty as to what a transsexual person would be considered to be in law. In response to that, the Government inserted an explicit mention of sex as well as gender in clause 9. Amendments Nos. 14 and 15 would remove that reference and could then lead to a situation that the Joint Committee feared—that is, a person being treated as male for some purposes and female for others, depending on whether the law refers to ''gender'' or ''sex''. Amendment No. 18 proposes to take care of that problem in relation to sex discrimination law. However, the law includes references to sex in many other places; there are literally thousands of other references. For example, in reply to the points raised by the hon. Member for Daventry, some provisions require certain tribunals, such as social security appeal tribunals and disability appeal tribunals, to have at least one member of the same sex as the claimant. A number of provisions also require a person to disclose his or her sex or to give information in relation to another person's sex—for example, section 92 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and section 11 of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984.
Emily Shepherd 💚@emi.ly · last yr.

Do we know why the government chose not to action the Joint Committee's second suggestion in this quote? Ie, to expressly name the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 in the text of the legislation. That would be interesting to dig into.

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · last yr.

More frequent?! PIP reassessments are already every two years, which is a colossally stressful waste of time and energy for most claimants. Assessments also cost money, so this isn't likely to make savings, except by making the process even more miserable and driving people away. Fuck Labour.

Pippa Crerar@pippacrerar.bsky.social · last yr.

2/ More frequent reassessments of PIP claimants, although most severely disabled will never have to be reassessed & will be eligible for an extra allowance. 3/ Basic rate of UC for those looking for - or in - work, will rise but cut for those judged as unfit for work (as incentive to seek work).

Nika@nikavia.bsky.social · 2y ago

That last screenshot is...just...I'm losing my fucking mind here. "No doubt this hospital is held to a lower standard - but this is largely because they so frequently kill their own patients". THAT'S WORSE, YOU CLOWN.

a man says okay but that 's worse in front of a woman

Alt: Chidi from The Good Place saying "Okay. But that's worse" to Eleanor.

media.tenor.com

Michael Hobbes@michaelhobbes.bsky.social · 2y ago

If I were a writer for a prestigious national magazine I would include more evidence for my thesis than against it, but that's just me www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc...

Rose Schmits@roseschmits.bsky.social · 2y ago

Oh so now a woman has been done the injustice of being called trans suddenly there is mainstream pushback against gender policing in sport ey now its undeniably affecting ~Real People~