Repeat the course
Stone the crows, Euan [aka Sophie Molly] has written an article. It’s as bad as you’d expect.
Back in April 2025, the UK Supreme Court ruled that, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, the definition of ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ refers to biological sex. This legal clarification, though presented as a matter of statutory interpretation, has had far-reaching and deeply personal consequences for many trans individuals across the country.
Back in April, he means, or in April this year. “Back in April 2025” is clumsy and ridiculous. He is not a clever man.
More substantively, notice his whine about personal consequences for “trans individuals” [what’s wrong with “people”? Doesn’t sound pompous enough?] while he ignores personal consequences for female individuals, who outnumber trans ones by a very very very large margin. In short it’s the usual mistake: “This is bad for trans people and we don’t give a shit about female people.” Back atcha bro.
Since the judgement, a growing number of trans people have reported facing discrimination when trying to access single-sex spaces, particularly toilets and changing rooms.
It’s not “discrimination.” Men are not allowed to use women’s toilets and changing rooms because that would make women unsafe. We don’t let murderers babysit children and we don’t let men barge into women’s toilets.
It’s all too easy to discuss laws in the abstract, but it’s much harder to hear the stories of those now forced to navigate life with increased anxiety, fear and isolation.
You mean women, right? Oh no of course you don’t, you mean men. Again.
I’ll skip over paragraph after paragraph of whining to leave you with this gem:
What might at first glance appear to be a tidy legal ruling has created a mess on the ground.
Oops! Bad shellfish maybe?
Oh, gods, the examples the article lists of ‘trans oppression’ are so… guh.
First, we have Caitlyn at the dance studio that tells Caitlyn to use the single-person women’s toilet in another part of the building, rather than the communal women’s toilet closer to the classroom. This is unacceptable, we are told, not only because it’s so far (the exact distance is not specified), but because that bathroom has inadequate lighting and so Caitlyn had to pee in the dark. (The fact that this place has apparently had a women’s room that has inadequate lighting for some undeclared period of time is never explored by the author.)
Next up is Chloe, who has to abide by the ruling at various correctional and court facilities encountered during her job. Chloe is worried that this will result in being ‘outed’ to more than those who already know–ignoring the high probability that many of those people Chloe encounters during the day are fully aware of this poor waif’s trans status. But don’t worry, outside of work, Chloe is still invading women’s spaces.
Finally, there’s Jennifer, who was denied access to a women’s changing room at a store while buying clothing, and was so distraught that the clothing had to be left behind, unpurchased. Jennifer, too, is going to continue ignoring the ruling and going into women’s spaces though, brave little thing.
So much damned entitlement and narcissism….
The one thing that they all skip past is that it’s a mess of their own making. They are the ones who were barging in to places where they had no right to be.
Yes, for millions of women and girls, the ruling has had far-reaching and deeply personal effects on their safety, dignity, and privacy. It has restored the status quo ante bellum.
.
No kidding. “Single-sex spaces,” with the emphasis on “sex,” = “biological sex,” just as the Equality Act intended. Men should use the men’s toilets and changing rooms. Simple. Clear. Sex =/= “gender identity.”
What “increased anxiety, fear, and isolation”? Objection: assumes facts not in evidence. It is dead easy for any man to “navigate life” without any anxiety, fear, or isolation. TIMs don’t seem to be suffering from anxiety, fear, or isolation. They seem angry, not anxious or fearful. They have this highly touted comuninny that appears whenever they send out the bat signal; they are not isolated.
As far as taking things out of glittering abstractions, and seeing the concrete results, you, T advocates, cared not one whit and refused to hear the stories of women whom you deliberately and callously forced to navigate their lives with increased anxiety, fear, and isolation, not to mention intimidation, harassment, and violence.
@Freemage #1
Thanks for the summary! Wow, what a bunch of whiners.
Caitlyn: how many TIMs does it take to change a light bulb?
Chloe: afraid of being “outed”? Why? WTH are all the days/weeks/months of “visibility” and “remembrance” and “celebration” for, if not to flaunt your trans status in everyone’s faces? Your “gender identity” is not a secret. You make sure that you and your gender identity are front and center in every encounter. There’s nothing wrong with being trans, is there? According to you, it’s ubiquitous and historically revered.
Jennifer: so what? Try on clothes in the men’s dressing room. There should be sufficient privacy for you there. If you choose to leave in a huff instead, that’s on you.
No it hasn’t. This tidy legal ruling has cleaned up the mess that you made.
maddog, re. how many TIMs does it take to change a light bulb?
Just one. To screw it in he holds it in the socket and waits while the world revolves around him.
AoS,
Sometimes I wish this site had a laugh button.
Given that light sockets (among other pieces of hardware) are usually discussed in terms of being male and female, the TiM light-bulb joke should be able to be written in a more targeted form.
Oh, one other note–Caitlyn, from the dance studio, was also identified as being learning-impaired, which arguably could be an issue when facing an unexpected failure of the lighting. To which I say, if Caitlyn is that impaired, whatever quack pushed that kid through transition should be beaten senseless with the rolled-up copy of their notice of license suspension.