It can order it. Whether The Government complies 🤷

www.coe.int/en/web/human...

She’ll soon be able to speak full time in a “personal capacity”, so that won’t have changed.

Something I’ve noticed is there a lot of veiled and implied criticism of GPs. Failing to prescribe medication and failing to properly refer patients are identified as problems. Those are patient harms written in polite language.

I think Wesley dropping it just before recess and xmas is him burying “bad” news (Of course, anything even remotely good for trans people is bad in his eyes).

As soon as the foreword said “Hearing directly from transgender patients significantly enhanced our understanding of the services provided by individual GDCs” I had to give a double-take. Shockingly rare to hear, especially from NHS England.

Screenshot of a paragraph of The Times article. It says “They’re concerned their rights are being taken away. Their anger should be directed at those snake-oil salesmen who sold them the fiction they had rights that have been taken away, and not ever explained that rights are balanced. And that in some areas, such as discrimination law, the rights of biological people hold.” In the imagine “biological people” is highlighted.

Some people aren’t “biological” at all it seems.

That's fair, but it didn't stop one Commissioner speaking in a "personal capacity" on topics antithetical to the role of Commissioner.

Link to archive of that article, as evidence archive.ph/IXNe8

For context, a similar one-on-one conversation with @humanrightsvicky.bsky.social had a BBC News article written afterwards. SM got to have an unchallenged reply and the last word.

Publisher’s notes: “This 2025 chapter isn’t believable. Can you tone it down a bit?”

It sounds like it's more a rolling window of participants. I think what's more worrying is a 12 year old joins the trial, gets blockers for 2 years. Is now 14 and no longer actively participating in the trial. What happens? Do they lose access to puberty blockers? Can they get any other care?

Given the EHRC is captured by them, I think they adopted the consultation submissions by the extremist hate groups.

One of the submissions I've seen say ID is "unreliable" and that "duty-bearers should make the best assessment they can with the available information".🤮

Sounds the same as the leak.

“Courts minister says change needed to stop criminals opting for juries to delay cases”

And I thought we had a presumption of innocence in this country. A show trial would be even faster.

The gap between the minister and the EHRC might be explained by them not expecting the EHRC to double down on their transphobia and offer no justification for mandatory exclusion.

It's hard to appear neutral when one side is driving off a cliff.

Oh no, the great time sink has been opened!

TIL Britain has been living in a unfeasible and unworkable toilet reality for the past 14 years.

I'd love to know what the EHRC's "objective criteria" are.

And they didn't remove it because there was anything wrong with it. They stand by it.

It's not first-hand knowledge unfortunately, but apparently Kirkpatrick's 2nd witness statement says
"the EHRC Board considered that a further step in its strategy to encourage the Minister to urgently progress publication of the draft Code would be to remove the webpage housing the Interim Update"

If it's "science", can it be a protected philosophical belief 🤔

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/1...

How could they have seen this coming? If only someone had warned them... anyone... multiple times... for years... A truly unforeseeable consequence.
\s

Wow, that hilarious! The judge effectively implying she isn’t an expert. 🤡

The EHRC seem to be implicitly framing it like GANHRI rejected the submissions. Glad that’s not true.

It's also important that she was quoting a person. She incorporated her own bias and change Malcolm Mistry's words while reading the news.

Totally unacceptable.

In the recording of his arrest that *he released*, he also doubled down and said to the officers that they should kick trans people using the toilets. It clearly wasn’t a joke.

Yeah, I’m sure the conservative manifesto authors would’ve blushed at including some stuff actually happening now

Labour even failing to be the lesser of two evils when they just do all the evils.

The conservatives’ manifesto promised:
Make the puberty blocker ban permanent - done ✅
Ban the private prescription of puberty blockers - done ✅
Redefine gender/sex in The Equality Act based on “biological sex” (🤮) - done (thanks SC) ✅
Ban teaching “gender ideology” to children - done ✅

Not only did they lie and have not implement the barely positive promises they made in their manifesto, they have implemented EVERY anti-trans manifesto commitment the Conservative Party made and more!!!

My understanding is you are correct. We *all* have the right as individuals to not be discriminated against. There are allowed exceptions under certain circumstances.

“Group based rights” creates a legal hierarchy of people. That’s the path to a dark place.

There wasn’t a gender as a game mechanic, but we had Nidorina and Nidoran, given different Pokédex entries. The rest were presumably unknown at the time.

My personal in-universe canon is they discovered more Pokemon genders between Gen 1 and Gen 2, and it’s an active area of study.