queer-adhd

[queer-adhd]

I am very tired but. It's important to know that the NHS is currently being pressured to prevent trans ppl from requesting a clinician of the same gender for examinations, and that at least one police service has stated that strip searches on trans people will be performed by their AGAB. Which obviously means guesswork in most cases. Unfortunately I can't think of a single thing that the GRC is good for now. Although I'll happily take advice via ask.

The Supreme Court did not say the legal definitions of 'woman'/'man' are based on your 'biological sex' for all legal purposes -

it is for the Equality Act only.

Which is fucking terrible on its own (prevents trans-people from claiming discrimination as their true gender & gives credence to the legal/social idea that trans people are not their true identities/are dangerous in single-sex spaces)

But please don't let the inaccurate article titles convince you that all is lost.

This does not change:

the GRA's legal pathway to getting a GRC (including issuance of new birth certificates - which ensures the appropriate gender identity for marriage/civil partnership, and pension rights provision)

or your gender identity's validity in law other than the Equality Act

or the the EA's protection of trans people from discrimination on the basis of gender reassigment (this is ALL trans people, certificated or not. And includes NBs even though they're not covered by the GRA)

or access to changing your gender in administrative areas - like the marker on passports (though - NBs still don't have an X marker option as per the Elan-Cane case)

TERFs may be celebrating this as resulting in total exclusion of all trans people, both with or without GRCs, from 'single-sex' spaces.

This is not true. Today's decision did not allow that - sex based exceptions for 'proportionate' reasons was and still is the rule.

For e.g if a trans woman is excluded from a single-sex space -

Today's ruling means she cannot claim sex-based discrimination as a woman. But, she can still claim she was discriminated against based on gender-reassignment. However, like I said, the Government has already said this sort of sex-based exception would be legal under the EA if it's for 'proportionate' reasons. It's still unclear if today's judgement will have an effect on this - other than groups feeling emboldened by it to exclude trans people - using the existing 'proportionate' exception. Or law/policy-makers being encouraged to amend other legislation/ policies. (Which are both definitely significant consequences)

Please note I used a trans woman as an example here, but this applies to trans men and their access to single-sex spaces

The ruling is still horrifying, and all outrage is totally justified.

But I want to make clear that what TERFs are claiming about the immediate, practical legal impact of this judgement on single-sex spaces is not true.

Neither is the claim that the legal definition of 'woman' no longer includes trans-women in any law other than the EA. The same applies for the definition of 'man' and trans-men.

Do not let them convince you that you have lost more rights than you actually have.

Know your rights under the GRA, and EA protection from discrimination.

source 1, source 2, the judgement

UPDATE (17/04): "An NHS spokesperson told the BBC the service was "reviewing guidance on same sex accommodation" and as part of this process "will consider and take into account all relevant legislation and the Supreme Court ruling"."

The chairwoman of the EHRC (the watchdog for the Equality Act) has said they will issue new guidance to public bodies (including the NHS and prisons) on single-sex spaces -

"The NHS will be pursued if it does not follow new guidance on single-sex spaces, the chairwoman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has said."

Current NHS guidance says trans people should be "accommodated according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns they currently use".

The new guidance will likely ask the NHS to scrap this, or be pursued by the EHRC.

When will the EHRC be releasing this guidance?

"An updated code of practice is expected to be laid before Parliament before the summer recess."

note: this post was edited to include newer information and highlight points.

UPDATE 2: Changed to include the impact on trans men, and add info about non-binary rights.

UPDATE 18/04: FINALLY A MORE BALANCED ARTICLE

[queer-adhd]

One of my childhood friends who like me, was raised as a Zionist just rejected Israel Outdoor's birthright trip offer. We had stopped talking these last few months and she called to apologize and tell me she's not going in May because she's been wrestling with how to reconcile her faith with what Israel is doing. We stopped talking because she couldn't understand why I would do that and now she has come to this conclusion on her own.

This is such a big deal and such a big win for me and I wanted to share this because everyone should know that views can shift. It's definitely not easy and definitely not because of just me but it's possible.

Don't stop talking about Palestine. Don't stop spreading facts about Israel's violent occupation of Palestine.

Btw Israel Outdoors is absolutely disgusting. If you don't know, they recruit college kids on campus to go do birthright trips. They're huge Zionists who openly support the occupation and genocide.

[queer-adhd]

The Supreme Court did not say the legal definition of 'woman' is based on your 'biological sex' for all legal purposes -

it is for the Equality Act only.

Which is fucking terrible on its own (prevents trans-women from claiming discrimination as women & gives credence to the legal/social idea that trans people are not their true identities/are dangerous in single-sex spaces)

But please don't let the inaccurate article titles convince you that all is lost.

This does not change:

the GRA's legal pathway to getting a GRC (including issuance of new birth certificates - which ensures the appropriate gender identity for marriage/civil partnership, and pension rights provision)

or your gender identity's validity in law other than the Equality Act

or the the EA's protection of trans people from discrimination on the basis of gender reassigment.

or access to changing your gender in administrative areas - like the marker on passports.

TERFs may be celebrating this as resulting in total exclusion of all trans women, both with or without GRCs, from 'female-only' spaces.

This is not true. Today's decision did not allow that - sex based exceptions for 'proportionate' reasons was and still is the rule.

If a trans woman is excluded from a women-only space -

Today's ruling means she cannot claim sex-based discrimination as a woman. But, she can still claim she was discriminated against based on gender-reassignment. However, like I said, the Government has already said this sort of sex-based exception would be legal under the EA if it's for 'proportionate' reasons. It's still unclear if today's judgement will have an effect on this - other than groups feeling emboldened by it to exclude trans people - using the existing 'proportionate' exception. Or law/policy-makers being encouraged to amend other legislation/ policies. (Which are both definitely significant consequences)

The ruling is still horrifying, and all outrage is totally justified.

But I want to make clear that what TERFs are claiming about the immediate, practical legal impact of this judgement on single-sex spaces is not true.

Neither is the claim that the legal definition of 'woman' no longer includes trans-women in any law other than the EA.

Do not let them convince you that you have lost more rights than you actually have. Know your rights.

source 1, source 2, the judgement

UPDATE (17/04): "An NHS spokesperson told the BBC the service was "reviewing guidance on same sex accommodation" and as part of this process "will consider and take into account all relevant legislation and the Supreme Court ruling"."

The chairwoman of the EHRC (the watchdog for the Equality Act) has said they will issue new guidance to public bodies (including the NHS and prisons) on single-sex spaces -

"The NHS will be pursued if it does not follow new guidance on single-sex spaces, the chairwoman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has said."

Current NHS guidance says trans people should be "accommodated according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns they currently use".

The new guidance will likely ask the NHS to scrap this, or be pursued by the EHRC.

When will the EHRC be releasing this guidance?

"An updated code of practice is expected to be laid before Parliament before the summer recess."

note: this post was edited to include newer information and highlight points.

[queer-adhd]

[queer-adhd]

Listen, folks, I also hate generative AI and do not think it is an effective accomodation, but if your argument against it is "Oh, you think [task] is hard? What a stupid idiot baby!" then I'm sorry to say that is Literally Just Ableism. Please think about what you are saying. The point should be that it doesn't actually work to solve the problems that people are struggling with, not that they're wrong for struggling in the first place.

[queer-adhd]

My current hobby is infuriating the people running my street's 'definitely a front' Chinese by ordering from them every time they're open. It's been 42 days since they last opened, and I walked in to find the lady at the front sat in the dark. I distinctly heard them firing up the deep fryer for my spring rolls.

[queer-adhd]

reading the el salvador ice horror stories is giving me real anxiety now

[queer-adhd]

I made a thing.

[queer-adhd]

ah. i see the labour part of labour means that if you cannot do labour, you’re unworthy of living i guess :’)))))))))

i sent an email off to my mp using this

you can also add your name to this open letter

[queer-adhd]

if you’re in the uk & worried about the disability benefits reform here’s some things you can do:

from this page you can add your name to scope’s open letter to the chancellor and also fill out a form to send your mp an email inviting them to scope’s parliamentary event to discuss & inform why disability benefits are essential

on trussell’s website you can fill out another form to send an email to your mp asking them to call on starmer to rethink the benefits reform. for both the scope & trussell email form there is a box to add anything you want, but if you want to skip that step you can, just click the button that takes you to the next page :)

there are also these two (one, two) petitions by charity z2k that you can sign. i found both of these through the disabilityrightsuk website

if there are any i’ve missed let me know & i can add them! personally i think that emailing your mp is the most important of any of these, and both scope & trussell have made it very easy to do so !

[queer-adhd]

if you live in the UK, you can fill out this form to send an email to your local mp asking them to speak out against disability benefits cuts.

it's a full template so you only need to add your name and address

[queer-adhd]

Well fucks? Get to it!

[queer-adhd]

I really hope to see the words "humiliating u-turn" in Keir Starmer's future sometime soon.

[queer-adhd]

There's no reason why a country as rich as the UK can't make sure everyone is supported to live good lives.

The government's announcements today are a deliberate choice to punish some of the most vulnerable people instead of taxing the rich.

[queer-adhd]

This is important the cuts will not take place till 2026 we still have time to fight this and fight labour do not give up

[queer-adhd]

I feel like if you’re bed rotting from an autoimmune disease you should get to stop paying bills. just for a little bit. just as a treat.

[queer-adhd]

the way sesame street, a pbs puppet show for literal babies, is pressing on with pride content despite vitriolic monsters descending on every post to insinuate they're pedophiles or demons while some of the biggest companies on the planet who could swim in olympic swimming pools of money like scrooge mcduck on steroids buckle and cave just emphasizes how completely and utterly pathetic these corporations are. they'd butcher a baby if it meant saving a penny.