Perhaps the WESC could ask why the recommendations made only last year, by the previous incarnation of the committee, have yet to be actioned?

"29. We recommend that the Government Equalities Office issue a clear statement of the law on single-sex services to all Departments, including the requirement under the public sector equality duty for commissioners of services to actively consider commissioning specialist and single-sex services to meet particular needs. (Paragraph 168)

30. We do not believe that non-statutory guidance will be sufficient to bring the clarity needed in what is clearly a contentious area. We recommend that, in the absence of case law the EHRC develop, and the Secretary of State lay before Parliament, a dedicated Code of Practice, with case studies drawn from organisations providing services to survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. This Code must set out clearly, with worked examples and guidance, (a) how the Act allows separate services for men and women, or provision of services to only men or only women in certain circumstances, and (b) how and under what circumstances it allows those providing such services to choose how and if to provide them to a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. (Paragraph 190)"

I fail to see the point of conducting new inquiries when previous ones have had no effect at all. Clearly those recommendations will fail to please their lobby group masters, but if recommendations are simply ignored then there seems to be no point in having such a committee at all.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cm...

"she was repeatedly calling Trans Women, Men"

Please point to where that was said in the judgement?

This is completely untrue, and you could at least have the manners to spell Maya's name correctly. You really should retract your comment.
https://mforstater.medium.com/five-myths-and-trut...

You can keep misquoting the law (Stonewall law as we know it), but you are quite simply incorrect. The GEO and the EHRC, both heavily under the influence of Stonewall and other lobby groups, have been 'misrepresenting' (lying, to be frank) the Equality Act for ten years.
Ann Sinnot is taking them to judicial review over it. They have been quietly removing their incorrect advice but over the years it has been disseminated into thousands of so called 'diversity' policies.
It will take years to undo, but we will do it. https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/action-against-...

1. Yes they do. Perhaps you should go and look at that law: https://fairplayforwomen.com/equality-act-2010_wo...

Lord Winston has since expressed serious concerns about reassignment surgery.
The fact remains that sex is easily observed in the vast majority of humans, apart from a tiny percentage of people with DSDs. And this has absolutely nothing to do with being 'transgender', but it is used by gender ideology activists to obfuscate.
Babies, even dogs, are very very good at discerning sex. Women are particularly good at it as it is a protective mechanism we have developed over thousands of years.
Tebbit knew exactly what he was talking about, and indeed all his concerns have come to proved correct; men in womens' sport, prisons, changing rooms, compelled pronouns....

"I checked your posts on this website and you have only ever posted on Transgender issues."
You clearly did not read what we said. You have no idea of the names our members post under so stop with this attempt at smearing us.

"Does Keira Bell have a Gender Recognition Certificate ?
I've read her Crowd Justice and it's a tragic illustration of the risks of treating underage people of Gender Dysphoria."
Keira says "It has the ability to trap us detransitioners as when we begin to recover from gender dysphoria we are stuck on the “gender recognition register” and there is no policy to be able to revert to our original birth certificates with our birth sex." https://safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2020/05/12/a-de....

"With respect to Detransitioners, the purpose of the two year living in their acquired gender is supposed to prevent patients subsequently regretting transition. If there are a significant number who regret transition after two years then the Royal college of Psychiatrists need to review their guidelines."
Yes they do, so why aren't gender ideology activists asking for this? In fact they go out of their way to shut down research in this very area, calling it 'transphobic" and "politically incorret". https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41384473

"With respect to the drop out rate at Gender Clinics they have reported that 50% of first appointments are missed and then 50% of second appointments are missed, which is a 75% drop out rate and then during the following two years two thirds drop out. This was on the RCPSY website a while back as an explanation of long wait times for Gender Clinics."
Again, link to source please.

You can DM us via our Twitter account @CUPWomensPledge or email us at cupwomenspledge@gmail.com Look forward to hearing from you.

I and other members of our group post on many issues. We post on gender ideology anonymously as many of us have had our jobs and our families threatened, not to mention our personal safety. I'm surprised that you don't understand that and it is rather patronising of you to assume we have no other interests.

This is not about 'transgender issues', it is about the rights of women and children, particularly girls.
There is no allowance for detransitioners in the GRA to revoke their status. This is already causing problems.
"Can you find anyone with a Gender Recognition Certificate who regrets their medical treatment ?"
Yes! Kiera Bell is one who speaks openly about it.
There are hundreds of people in the UK who regret their transition and a network has been set up for them: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-detransiti...

The point of the retracted paper is that it had to be retracted due to its conclusion that surgical intervention helps people with gender dysphoria; it had to be withdrawn as it was proved to be categorically untrue!

You said "* 90% of people referred to a Gender Clinic do not complete transition. " Source?

The solution is simple; if the GRA is to remain it must maintain the medical gatekeeping that already exists and the EHRC and GEO must stop misrepresenting the law. Single sex spaces are lawful and necessary.

We are just glad to see it being discussed. a couple of points though:

* There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Gender Recognition Act
There is. It is bad law and we would be in favour of repeal. If you read Hansard, everything those opposed to it said would happen, has happened, despite promises it would not (men in women's sport, for example, 'compulsory' pronoun use).
It is badly written and conflates sex and gender (another problem that was pointed out and was dismissed).
Birth certificates note a person's SEX, not their gender, so you cannot 'change gender' on a birth certificate.

* Gays and Lesbians need to realise that Transgenders require medical treatment, which they do not.
Not really sure of your point here, but peopel with gender dysphoria do need mental health support to come to terms with their sexed bodies. 'Reassignment' surgery actually gives worse outcomes in terms of mental AND physical health, as noted in a recently published retraction of a paper (strangely ignored by the mainstream media though the original paper did get quite a bit of publicity) https://disrn.com/news/american-journal-of-psychi...

* Self identification of a medical condition is wrong in principle and would not work in practice.
Yes. Sex is a protected characteristic that gives women in particular, certain rights. Nobody is allowed to SelfID into other protected characteristics, (age, pregnancy, disability) why is sex up for grabs?

* Medical intervention in underage children needs a lot more care and attention than for adults.
Agreed. There has been a 4000% increase in girls being referred to GIDS. Penny Mordaunt promised an 'urgent' enquiry 2 years ago and we have heard not a peep. An ex-Tavistock clinician said at times it felt like 'they were transing away the gay'....

Women should not have to be fighting these battles; the government should be upholding the rights of women under the EqA2010 and protecting our childre. Is that too much to ask?
Instead we are having to take them to court because a government agency has been giving out unlayful guidance for TEN YEARS. https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/action-against-...

A lot of this can be laid at the feet of lobby groups like Stonewall (they wanted the single sex exemptions removed from the EqA) who have had their feet under the tableof almost every government department. Go and check out their 'Top 100 employers'. Almost every department is a so called 'Stonewall Champion'. They have given awards to civil servants for removing single sex toilets in their department, to give one example.

Enough. Women and their allies have been fighting back. Numerous court cases are in the pipeline. It should never have come to this, and most of the public are still in the dark.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/13007292226133...