Mailwatch(ed) Forum

The mania of the TRAs got us nowhere and did the trans community no favours at all. Politicians dithered, appeased or hid. But the calm expertise of Cass and now the juristic wisdom of the Supreme Court have offered a path forward.
It is a path of civility, rooted in clinical experience and jurisprudence rather than ideology. It takes account of rights old and new and deploys calm and measured language to achieve clarity, but also to reassure those who feel vulnerable, disenfranchised or humiliated. It is the splendid opposite of the polarised, performative politics that is now so dominant, on right and left.
There aren’t many reasons at present to feel that Britain is leading the way – but this is one of them. It is how democracies survive and prosper. It plots a route out of screaming matches, virtue signalling and tribalism. It calls upon us all to be decent, adult, mindful of evidence rather than decibels, clicks and smug assumptions.
This is, in other words, that rarest of things: a moment of authentic opportunity. Let’s not squander it.

The mania of the TRAs got us nowhere and did the trans community no favours at all. Politicians dithered, appeased or hid. But the calm expertise of Cass and now the juristic wisdom of the Supreme Court have offered a path forward.
It is a path of civility, rooted in clinical experience and jurisprudence rather than ideology. It takes account of rights old and new and deploys calm and measured language to achieve clarity, but also to reassure those who feel vulnerable, disenfranchised or humiliated. It is the splendid opposite of the polarised, performative politics that is now so dominant, on right and left.
There aren’t many reasons at present to feel that Britain is leading the way – but this is one of them. It is how democracies survive and prosper. It plots a route out of screaming matches, virtue signalling and tribalism. It calls upon us all to be decent, adult, mindful of evidence rather than decibels, clicks and smug assumptions.
This is, in other words, that rarest of things: a moment of authentic opportunity. Let’s not squander it.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 2:50 pm I put this to some trans friends. Their reply was broadly "You are who you feel you are, and we can spot a pisstaker from miles away".

Personally I think the entire 'debate' is a load of bollocks, because the real question isn't so much about women's safety or biological definitions, but do wankers feel emboldened enough or that it's socially acceptable to treat anyone they consider weird, like shit in public?

Abernathy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 25, 2025 9:05 pm As ever with these sort of things, it would be good know whether “which disgracefully refused to hear from trans people before its decision” is true - or what it even means. Is the supreme court really obliged to listen to the views of any group with an interest before arriving at a judgement ? I’m not sure that it is. And anyway, is the suggestion that the court would have delivered a different judgement had it but sat down with a few trans folk? I’d suggest not - all day long. This stuff can be so disingenuous.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 25, 2025 11:10 pm Basically, FTM trans man. Can't use the men's because they don't have a dick.

Boiler wrote: ↑Sat Apr 26, 2025 6:00 pm Use a cubicle in the men's.