The whole of the UK is skewed to transphobia because of JK spider georg over there in her mouldy castle its mad

I love when Gundam has radios not work under Minovsky particles and therefore in order for mobile suits to communicate they have to do a gay little bro-touch to establish physical acoustic contact, something that the series remembers as often as 30% of the time

🤔

I misread this image so badly that I can only really hope to illustrate what I saw. ( Also a good excuse for an #art study )

Death to the UK judiciary system. A system that gives us no justice, only cruelty

The Online Safety Act sure has made being online more dangerous.

Unironically I'd consider this grounds for arresting Blair on charges of complicity in war crimes. More grounds than there already was for that, I mean.

This is an important one, folks. The question isn't how ID cards would improve efficiency under a humane and sensible government, it's how they would be misused by, say, Nigel Farage to target brown people or queer people or disabled people or just white migrants like me who are a little weird.

so the Economist article isn't attributed an author. but someone in the replies of this 🧵 tipped me off that it was Jəsse Singal. & it turns out that it was, which in retrospect isn't surprising (as he's one of the ppl who would never answer this question):

>English original visual novel, not irony-poisoned >Psycho-pop cyberpunk murder mystery >Evil women engaging in Death Note-level mental gymnastics >1250+ Overwhelmingly (99%) positive steam reviews >Pic unrelated >You should be playing of the Devil

If you don't support trans women in professional women's sports and hrt for teenagers then you should fix your heart

Oh. So when you trained them on the notes of medical doctors they repeated the same biases. Odd that.

They are still trying to push for a way to blame trans people for Kirk's death. They wanted the killer to be trans SO BADLY. Now they are basically saying "who cares, let's kill trans people anyway, that's the retribution the right demands."

Outrageous bollocks from a pathetically thin skinned Government which is willing to humiliate Britain on the international stage to brown nose one of the most dangerous men the world has ever known. www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...

So now that it’s confirmed that none of the messages on the bullets were pro-trans, maybe we should have a national conversation about how multiple newspapers repeated a lie about us on their front pages hours after doubts had already been cast over it?

Learnign that not only do the greens do a leadership election every 2 years, but because the last guys got 3 years, Zach only gets 1 year??? That's frankly stupid. Do you plan to have 3 different leaders during a single term if you form a government? Deeply unserious

This is such a delusionally nonsensical comment. Of course there's a "biological glass ceiling" - excluding intersex women doesn't change that! 99% of women (and men!) entering a sport are biologically incapable of ever being the best in the world at it, that's the reality of elite sport!

UK universities haven't protected transphobic bigots, transphobic bigot finds

Love a Pride list where the participants are banned from Pride.

Holy shit, look what the Guardian did. They changed it "Transgender people must accept a perceived reduction in their rights after the supreme court decision on gender because they “have been lied to over many years” about what their rights actually were..>"

These guidelines say that the judge doesn't have to respect a non-binaries pronouns if they are they/them because its too confusing, and then like 1 page later, it suggests that judges should use they/them pronouns for binary trans people instead of their correct pronouns. its pure transphobia lmao

Supreme Court: “It is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain on the meaning of gender or sex, nor is it to define the meaning of the word “woman” other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010.” BBC: hold my beer www.bbc.com/news/article...

I've said before that while trans people have no actual advantage in sports, if they *did* and the choice was between "no sports" and "no bodily autonomy for trans people" anyone who would choose to keep sport is a monster.

This is—it bears repeating—ethnic cleansing and a war crime. It feels utterly pointless to say, and roughly equivalent to screaming into the void, but the United States should not be supporting or providing any aid to a state that has ethnic cleansing as a policy position.

Numerous United Nations experts have expressed concern about the implications of the UK Supreme Court judgment for trans people's human rights, including the guidance from the EHRC. They urge decisive legal reform to protect human rights. www.ohchr.org/en/press-rel...

This is one thing the transphobes and the bigots need to get through their fucking skulls, is that I don't fucking care if my presence distresses you. That's on you, bitch. Manage your own emotions like a fucking adult. If you can't respect someone different from you, die fucking mad about it.

wait wasn't this like a major part of the FWS case? and here it is in writing that it wasn't an issue and already solved

If I was a foreign intelligence officer, I'd get Labour to turn Blue, further harm the welfare state and demonise migrants until the British vote for an anti-system party financed by dark money from my government

Pretty much all the midwives who ensured I and my babies survived my two births were apparently footnotes to a squalid chapter in my country's history.

Will you look at that statues getting better protections than trans people in the uk lmao

it’s worse than that because the implication isn’t even that ‘phones bad’ because her killers were radicalised online, but that too much phone is why she was trans in the first place

Yes, the obvious thing to do is to amend the law to make trans rights more explicit but I don't think there are any circumstances where it is valid to blanket ban people on the basis of being trans.

So now it's not only 'unacceptable' to criticise the Supreme Court, it's also unacceptable to criticise the EHRC (and by implication any other regulator)? They're not exactly beating the charges of authoritarianism

"i never heard of autism growing up"

"biological sex" is exclusively defined by working back from "whatever the disgusting trannies aren't".

Britain™ moment

Constructing a situation where people are whatever gender they need to be in order to be punished is probably the platonic ideal of British governance.

Chalk washes off but some things are immutable – every Home Secretary, Labour or Tory, cares more about feeding the rightwing press with the outrage it craves, than understanding why people feel the necessity to protest

People have interpreted this as a call for a boycott, when I actually want a wealth tax so aggressive it'd make Lenin say, "steady on, lad" if Lenin talked like Wallace from Wallace and Gromit.

Is it me or is saying 'trans people are still protected from discrimination!' a bit like 'no homo' but for human rights violations

Tells you everything you need to know about the UK that one of its richest and most beloved people spent years making it harder for people to use the toilet, and celebrated by posting an Andrew Tate style photo of herself smoking a cigar on a yacht

If sex is natural and biological why does it have to be “assigned at birth”? And why is it so rigidly policed? Boys shamed for wearing dresses etc? If sex were natural it wouldn’t need policing. And is sex genitals, chromosomes, hormones, gonads or brains? How is sex “assigned”? And why?

The trannies should simply advocate for their own segregation