Nicky W

All it can say about me is that I have functioning eyes 😔

Yeah it is amazing, though I’m not sure if a film will be able to do it justice

I heard a BBC news report about this on the radio earlier and the reporter said that the use of they/them pronouns for the tribunal had been agreed by all parties (including Rose) for the purposes of neutrality, which was why the BBC was also using them in reports

Are you in a hotel on Christmas Day??

I'll say it again: if any other ethnic or religious minority said "please don't use this particular term or chant, you might not have bad intentions but it is deeply racist and threatening to us", the reaction would be mortified apology.

And that's without a mass terror event four days ago

Completely inadequate, & the UK public's indifference to this genocide is a moral stain on us all

Ah, sorry

That’s the wrong Brian Cox

Exactly the same thing happened to me. Doctor very keen to get me on SSRIs. My sister suggested it might be menopause-related, or at least aggravated by that. Had to insist on HRT, against doctor’s recommendation. Anxiety massively reduced within a few days/weeks

Not upset. Pointing out the level of incompetence of the GLP 🤷‍♀️

“its” website 🙄 Maybe learn to write grammatically before you try anything trickier?

I still don’t know anything about her. What’s the problem with her politics?

I couldn't even do level 3. I think I'm not just a robot, I'm a shit robot

SOOO looking forward to this. Your founder is going to get his arse handed to him

I remember Derren Brown doing a TV show on exactly that derrenbrown.co.uk/shows/the-sy...

6. Schedule 3 of the Equality Act allows single-sex services in certain contexts. That is still the law. Yet this letter frames any attempt to apply that law as discrimination. It’s not. It’s statute.

(The above 6 points were taken from another commentator, so I can’t claim 100% credit) 6/6

5. The letter has a glaring hole. It refuses to acknowledge competing rights. Women’s groups, faith-based providers, victims of trauma, even the organisations delivering services, are nowhere to be found. 5/6

4. They say the EHRC should have waited. For what? Clarity had just been handed down by the Supreme Court. Silence at that point would have been negligence. Regulators are there to clarify, not play dead.

3. The EHRC is accused of causing “distress” and “harm” by issuing interim guidance. Serious charges, offered without a shred of evidence. No examples, no stakeholder testimony, no data. Just emotion in search of legal weight. 3/6

2. The letter tries to draw a line: trans people with a Gender Recognition Certificate are affected, others are not. That’s not how it works. The Court didn’t create carve-outs. It defined a statutory term. That applies across the Act. 2/6

1. The EHRC hasn’t “overreached” the Supreme Court ruling, nor is it making policy. It is responding to precedent. The judgment binds. The Commission must update its Code to reflect it. This is not ideological. It’s legal obligation. 1/6

Excruciatingly poor letter. Particularly embarrassing given you're a KC and a legislator

Here

I've watched exactly what she said (it's at around 1 hr 21 in the video) and you're distorting her point. NC is talking about whether the ruling removes all benefits of obtaining a GRC from the specific perspective of access to SS spaces, not commenting on people's motivations for transitioning

Yes, exactly

Eric Morecambe smiling pitchside at Kenilworth Road while holding a signed Des O'Connor photo.

Remembering Eric Morecambe on what would have been his 99th birthday 🫶

She was fantastic. Cool, calm, rational. Not deliberately insulting anyone, just stating the facts in a discussion where they were very relevant

Not sure why this is news? There have been pink bluebells down the road from me for as long as I can remember.
Reserve worker finds his first pink bluebell www.bbc.com/news/article...

Where's this from?

How?