Further dishonesty from the BBC in, again, dogmatically refusing to accept that Laura Kuenssberg spread harmful misinformation about trans people on her flagship politics programme.
I refer you to the text of my Stage 1a and Stage 1b points which I adopt without repeating. Laura Kuenssberg said “Attention's focused on who should be able to access single-sex spaces, like changing rooms. The Supreme Court said in April that it was biological sex, not a trans person's chosen gender, that should determine the answer.” Her statement is (1) wrong and also (2) wrong in a profoundly important way. That it is (1) wrong is evident from an interview published with Lord Hodge, the presiding Supreme Court judge in that decision. In The Times on 12 September 2025 he said: "Hodge, who presided over the case with two female justices, defended the decision and pointed out that the case before the court had nothing to do with how or where single-sex spaces should be created. 'These points weren’t argued before us,' he said. 'We were not there to decide points that were not put to us or were not raised in the course of argument, because we hadn’t heard each side’s position on it.'" His point, which is also evident from the Supreme Court’s Press Summary (https://supremecourt.uk/uploads/uksc_2024_0042_press_summary_8a42145662.pdf), is that what the Supreme Court decided was what "man" "woman" and "sex" meant in the Equality Act.
![The decision clearly has very important implications for single sex spaces. But those implications are not settled and are still being worked out in the Courts. This is evident from the fact that there have been three employment tribunal cases which have gone in different directions on single sex spaces in the workplace. Moreover, in GLP v EHRC [2026] EWHC 279 (Admin) at paragraph 61 the High Court recognised outside the workplace that permitting trans women to use the “female” lavatory whilst requiring other biological men to use the male lavatory could be lawful.
It also cannot be ignored that the Supreme Court itself said “we have concluded that a biological sex interpretation would not have the effect of disadvantaging or removing important protection under the EA 2010 from trans people”.
It is entirely wrong to say, as Kuenssberg did, that the implications of For Women Scotland for single sex spaces were settled by the Supreme Court decision.
It is (2) wrong in a profoundly important way because Laura Kuenssberg’s false statement gives the impression to the schools and employers and service providers who are seeking to comply with the law in a compassionate and inclusive fashion that they have no choice but to exclude trans people from single sex spaces. That is simply not what the Supreme Court decided - as Lord Hodge, the Presiding Judge, made clear.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:xurjtu2wa2akyi64gab34ahg/bafkreiccxws7tnivfr4rh4gagmpjgoogqna5tfanqervsfgi4qj6yxa7i4)
The decision clearly has very important implications for single sex spaces. But those implications are not settled and are still being worked out in the Courts. This is evident from the fact that there have been three employment tribunal cases which have gone in different directions on single sex spaces in the workplace. Moreover, in GLP v EHRC [2026] EWHC 279 (Admin) at paragraph 61 the High Court recognised outside the workplace that permitting trans women to use the “female” lavatory whilst requiring other biological men to use the male lavatory could be lawful. It also cannot be ignored that the Supreme Court itself said “we have concluded that a biological sex interpretation would not have the effect of disadvantaging or removing important protection under the EA 2010 from trans people”. It is entirely wrong to say, as Kuenssberg did, that the implications of For Women Scotland for single sex spaces were settled by the Supreme Court decision. It is (2) wrong in a profoundly important way because Laura Kuenssberg’s false statement gives the impression to the schools and employers and service providers who are seeking to comply with the law in a compassionate and inclusive fashion that they have no choice but to exclude trans people from single sex spaces. That is simply not what the Supreme Court decided - as Lord Hodge, the Presiding Judge, made clear.
And this is the renewed complaint I have today made to the BBC's Executive Complaints Unit.
The BBC, an important cause of the rising tide of transphobia that shames the United Kingdom, is unlikely to correct its mistake.
So we will then look to what further remedies we have.
A lot better than the present shit show!
The Guardian is promoting a commercial enterprise the profits from which will be used to harass, exclude and victimise one of the most vulnerable groups in the country.
This IPSO adjudication against the Telegraph is quite something
Confirms their story titled: ‘We earn £345k, but soaring private school fees mean we can’t go on five holidays’ was completely fabricated, with the family involved non-existent and stock pictures used
www.ipso.co.uk/rulings/0210...
Do you trust Wes Streeting with your data?
If not TACC has complied an easy opt out guide.
Keep yourself and your loved ones safe. Follow the link below or go to TACC.ORG.UK for more information.
tacc.org.uk/2026/03/03/h...
Breaking: Leftwing Celebrities realise Labour are not Leftwing, join actual Leftwing party. In other news today, we are reliably informed that water is wet.
WILL YOU SIGN THE LETTER? Not In Our Name: Women in support of the trans+ community notinourname.org.uk Sign held by Zack Polanski
Awesome to see @zackpolanski.bsky.social supporting the @nionwomen.bsky.social campaign of women opposed to transphobia.
notinourname.org.uk
Let this serve as a warning to Dems who abandon trans folks and vote for anti trans bills. You will be primaried, and you will lose.
🚨 It looks like the UK government is gearing up to upend copyright law in favour of AI companies, legalising the theft of their work.
This is despite creatives' huge protests, and despite previous proposals being roundly rejected by the public.
Please spread the word.
🧵 1/4
If you think what is happening in America can't happen here, it already is. This is in effect pretty much the same as Labour's "guidance" for schools, and means trans young people put at risk of abuse if parents are told. Schools should be safe for trans young people.
www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...
In Defense of Effeminate Boys If anyone had suggested that I might really be a girl, I don’t know how I would have responded. By Ben Appel
If medical authorities have a rigorous way of distinguishing effeminate boys from transgender kids—or of distinguishing transgender kids from proto-gay kids—they aren’t saying. I have met a number of detransitioned gay men who tried to live as women for a time because they and their families were so averse to homosexuality. According to a 2019 report in The Times of London, staffers at Britain’s foremost gender-identity clinic joked darkly that, as a result of the facility’s work, “there would be no gay people left.” A statement last month by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons noted that there is no validated way to assess whether a child’s gender distress will persist over time or disappear without medical intervention. A lack of good research and recordkeeping means that we may never know how many patients who would have been considered effeminate gay boys not so long ago have undergone medical treatments for gender dysphoria.
Absolute trash. The author did not speak to a single medical professional and the article does not contain a shred of evidence that effeminate gay boys are being bamboozled into thinking they're trans.
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/0...
This has been part of the trans-kids moral panic for years, gay adults going "If I grew up now, they'd convince me I'm trans."
If your movement had real evidence, you wouldn't be pointing to alternative-universe hypotheticals! Child psychologists know the difference between gay kids and trans kids
These steps toward caution are wise, but an underlying problem remains: Society still has an irrational fear of effeminate boys, who should be free to live their life without altering anything about themselves. Gender-nonconforming children continue to get the strong impression from censorious peers and well-meaning adults alike that they’d be better off if they became something other than what they are.
My childhood experiences make me skeptical about pediatric gender medicine today. In many kids who grow up to be gay, gender nonconformity manifests long before overt same-sex attraction does. Yet from peers, from social media, and even from some school districts’ teaching material, kids learn simplistic lessons that equate gender nonconformity with gender dysphoria—in essence, If you act and dress like a girl, you are one. In recent years, many doctors and hospitals have been willing to provide puberty blockers and gender-related hormone treatments to minors after only the briefest evaluation of each patient’s circumstances, and LGBTQ activists have cheered the lack of gatekeeping.
Where? How? These people have been pooping this stupid myth back and forth for so long that they don't even bother to provide basic evidence anymore.
It's the *premise* of the article, how did an editor not ask for specific numbers and peer-reviewed studies on this alleged phenomenon?
What's wild about all the TRANS CONTAGION pieces is that, outside of Op Eds, the editing process at these publications make it *almkat impossible* to make even basic factual statements without rigorous fact checking.
A rule that is just shredded, pulped, and thrown out the window for transphobia.
Text reads: “Gender-Affirming Care & Quality of Life” Take part in an online study examining the relationship between access to gender-affirming care in adolescence and quality of life in trans+ and gender diverse adults. 18+ years old; currently living in the UK; identify as trans+ or gender non-conforming; and previously accessed gender-affirming care under age 25 in the UK. Text states the researcher is Amélie (she/her), a Trainee Clinical Psychologist interested in the mental health of trans+ people, with contact email Amelie.Trickett@uea.ac.uk. “In consultation with” TransActual. click the link or scan the code for more information and to take part. survey takes 10 minutes. “Participants Needed.” For every participant, £1 will be donated to Not a Phase (www.notaphase.org)
Researchers at the University of East Anglia are recruiting Trans+ adults for an online study exploring access to gender affirming care and quality of life.
Participate here: app.onlinesurveys.jisc.ac.
If you have any questions, please contact: a.trickett@uea.ac.uk
#TransResearch #ResearchSurvey
Sarah Vaci is a "gender critical" artist who set out 4 years ago this month to create 100 portraits of "female detransitioners." To date, worldwide, she hasn't even found 100 to take part in her project, and at her current rate, it will take her 10 to 15 years to finish.
Why is this important? 1/
Because Sarah believed in the "gender critical" lies, which is why she thought finding 100 subjects would be easy. She likely thought she would be inundated and would have to turn people down. And yet, she is still putting out calls desperately looking for subjects. How can this be? 2/
On social media, this woman publicly hurls all sort of abuse at her ex, who is apparently a trans woman: "porn-soaked sissy", "autogynephile" etc. All the usual slurs. But, of course, The Guardian, along with the rest of the UK media, won't quote her, because they are upholding her victim narrative.
Picture of Zack Polanski holding a board that says: Will you sign the letter? Not in our name: Women in support of the trans+ community Nion Women logo notinourname.org.uk
Thank you to @zackpolanski.bsky.social for your clear support for the trans community. In a political climate where too many are stepping back, visible allyship from political leaders matters.
We were proud to meet Zack at launch of the Trans Lives Report by @transactualuk.bsky.social
More than 86,000 women have now signed the Not In Our Name letter to say that trans exclusion is not what we want and should not be done on our behalf.
If you’re a woman who believes in dignity, fairness and standing alongside our trans+ siblings, add your name:
notinourname.org.uk
Hey, do you reckon we're tending towards fascism in this country?
My goodness, if this is what @zackpolanski.bsky.social can do with just 5 MPs, imagine how amazing a Green Party majority government would be...!
"In a UK survey of over 4,000 trans people, TransActual found that 99% say media coverage has harmed their mental health, 99% have heard politicians express transphobic views, and many have been refused non-transition healthcare simply for being trans."
transactual.org.uk/trans-lives-...
This story, from @natezuke.bsky.social, is absolutely wild. A trans woman who never changed her gender marker was issued a letter invalidating her license. At the DMV they cut up her license, which had an "M" marker.
www.assignedmedia.org/breaking-new...
A scanned image of the first page of a legal document on letterhead from Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas, dated February 27, 2026. It is labeled "Opinion No. KP-0518" and addressed to Mr. Darrel D. Spinks, Executive Director of the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council. A portion of the first paragraph is highlighted in yellow, reading: "mental health care providers" licensed by the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council."
![A scanned image of the second page of the Attorney General Opinion document. A section in the first full paragraph is highlighted in yellow, which reads: "[f]or the purpose of transitioning a child’s biological sex as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles of the child or affirming the child’s perception of the child’s sex if that perception is inconsistent with the child’s biological sex."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:sefgphqp2xqwh2hawaixykwz/bafkreifsl2nf4xp4efqwydrwybswqhnsk2t2mykrbnk5yojrg2xmlb434u@jpeg)
A scanned image of the second page of the Attorney General Opinion document. A section in the first full paragraph is highlighted in yellow, which reads: "[f]or the purpose of transitioning a child’s biological sex as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles of the child or affirming the child’s perception of the child’s sex if that perception is inconsistent with the child’s biological sex."
A scanned image of the third page of the Attorney General Opinion document. The text discusses various statutory and dictionary definitions of the terms "health care provider" and "health care". There are no highlighted sections on this page.
A scanned image of the seventh and final page of the Attorney General Opinion document, showing the "SUMMARY" section and the signature block for Ken Paxton. The entire summary paragraph is highlighted in yellow, reading: "The definition of a “health care provider” in subsection 161.701(2) of the Health and Safety Code unambiguously encompasses the professions regulated by the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council. Any licensee that facilitates the provision of unlawful procedures or treatments that aim to transition a child’s sex are thus forbidden from receiving public money in support of those efforts and, separately, risk revocation of their licenses to practice."
Texas AG Ken Paxton has declared that it is illegal for mental health providers and therapists to treat trans youth. It means that trans youth will be denied access to any mental healthcare that isn't conversion therapy. Paxton also threatens parents of trans youth with child abuse investigations.
This is ultimately about creating the conditions where it is impossible for trans youth to exist, a world that discards them and isolates them from any sort of social support. In short, they want trans kids to kill themselves.
Observe this "debate" over who should decide on what clothes kids are allowed to wear. Labour say parents, Tories say the state. Both of course in total agreement that the kids themselves should have no say in it at all.
