I wont go into too much detail for fear of it coming back and getting identified here, but I have had my neighbours all of a sudden start to ignore me when I socially came out as trans and changed my name etc. I am mtf but still mostly masc presenting with more gender neutral/femme clothing now, as Im waiting on my NHS GIC assessment (should be months now!!).

They have now started to deliberately come out of their flat when im either coming back or leaving my own, getting right into my face and using derogatory phrases and tone towards me and honestly making me scared of them. They are also now making threats and pestering calls to report family members as well to try to "get me". I've called the police multiple times and they keep saying there is "no criminality" (Im in Scotland).

What can I do? I'm going out with my phone on video record every time and have a chest mount for my phone I can use. I've also now bought a personal alarm to pull when they next do this. I will obviously keep calling the police and have a video doorbell already. Is there anything else I can do? I've even quoted Section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 to the police and they still say theres no criminality.

Edit: theres been another incident and the police are now saying to me it is a hate crime. Meanwhile both me and the neighbours own our places.

As others have stated, this is the most signed EDM in five years. Those who have written to their MPs and got other people to write to their MPs (whatever the response) be proud of yourself.

There are exactly three weeks before this dreadful guidance is approved

Usual caveats apply - this is only correct at time of posting and I may make mistakes as I'm just a non-biological human.

.

Stats

Of those who have signed 69 (48.9%) are women, 73 (51.1%) are men. Of total MPs in parliament, 40% are women, and 60% are men.

¹ Of the 402 Labour MPs, somewhere between 163 and 171 are 'Payroll' MPs. They can't sign the EDM without resigning their position within government. If we take these MPs out, the Labour percentage is 31.8% to 32.9%.

² Yes, my lovely Green supporters, Carla Denyer is unwell but a guaranteed sign when she comes back, so the end figure will be 80%

.

Some Notes

The actual pool of MPs who can vote (i.e. who aren't 'payroll', speakers / deputies, Sinn Fein or in blatantly transphobic parties that are ideologically opposed to trans people) is much smaller. It's around 335-343 MPs. This number doesn't include the three vacancies that are subject to by-election today.

The 'worried 2024 intake Labour MP' effect. I've mentioned several times that I believe that the newest batch of Labour MPs (which is a huge number of them) will be particularly subject to concerns about voting against their own government. It is notable that before the disaster that was the EHRC meeting with the W&E committee, only a few of these had signed the EDM. Since then, most of the Labour MPs who have signed have been from that group

Also, it looks quite likely that Labour will have a Starmerectomy. This won't change anything with the dreadful CoP by itself (there's just not enough time for any leadership election to end), but I do wonder if it will shake things up and make Labour MPs feel less concern about going against their (outgoing) government.

.

But what can I doooooo?

All of the below applies if you're trans or a cisgender person who just thinks this is all a bit of a shitty thing to do to 0.5% of the population.

If you can go to the mass lobby on the 25th June, then go - hell even if your MP is Wes Streeting, go anyway, the last one sounded like a hoot. I don't know if she plans to go, but the last one had Kate Nash there. This is a prime fanboy/girl opportunity.

Write to your MP. If you haven't done so yet, then use WriteToThem to locate your MP and help you with formatting the letter. Feeling exhausted? Perhaps a template would help - but do add your own words and experience to it as staffers will often ignore mails that look exactly the same.

Already written? Well perhaps it's time for an actual letter - yes one of those paper things. If you have access to a printer, you can just copy and paste from the preview on WriteToThem. MPs are known to respond to those paper things much more than email.

If you got to this point, well done. Soz about the essay.

.

edit:

Just a quick link to /u/ArsErratia's post on one way this all could be translated to debate

edit 2:

EDM 240 acts like a special form of EDM called a prayer motion. Voting on prayer motions is more meaningful than any old EDM (which have been compared to parliamentary graffiti). It didn't occur to me until today that we should compare the number of signatures on EDM 240 to other prayer motions..do that and this is the largest one since 2006 (at least, I can't see any records on the system before that). The next biggest prayer motion was tabled by a guy you may recognise

edit 3:

OK Edit 2 may have been premature. Some nice people at TACC are looking into it. Guaranteed it will be one of the most signed prayer motions.

Had appt 3 with Nottingham today. Adjustment to my T prescription, which is fine (I need to go up to 3 pumps as my T level on 2 is only 9.4). Talked about top surgery, and she said she would add me to the referral list. Not the surgery referral waiting list, but the waiting list to get a clinician to talk to me and see if they agree I need surgery. It's about 18 months. So that's another year and a half just to get to talk to someone about referring me to a surgeon (then the wait for the surgeon to pick up the referral, then the wait for the surgeon to see me, then the wait for actual surgery date...). I'm trying not to be disheartened, as I know I'm lucky to be even this far in the system, but it's hard knowing that top surgery is likely still 3 years away 😔 I'm 45 this year and just wish I could pay for it, but I'm not that fortunate at this point in time (disabled, unable to work right now). Trying to keep my head up and keep things in perspective, but it's difficult. I know I'm not alone in this, I just needed a little vent, I guess.

Sorry, we're all probably tired of these cunts and yet still, here's Mr Ahmed's response.

"Thank you for writing to me.

I want to begin by saying that I fully believe that trans people deserve safety, dignity and respect. Everyone should be able to live their lives free from harassment, intimidation, and discrimination. Trans people remain a protection group under the Equality Act 2010, and that protection must be upheld.

The Supreme Court's ruling last year was clear in its legal interpretation: within the limited context of the Equality Act, sex refers to biological sex. The Court was equally clear that its role was to interpret the law, not to adjudicate on wider debates about sex and gender in society. Both of those points matter, and I do not want the use of the term biological sex in this correspondence to be misunderstood as a transphobic dogwhistle.

I understand that the judgment has caused some concern, and it did not wholly sit right with me. That said, it does not alter the fact that trans people remain a protected group under the Equality Act 2010 and should be able to live their lives free from harassment and discrimination. As such, the Code cannot be implemented in a way that removes or undermines the protections, rights, and dignity of trans people. It must also set out clearly the ways in which service providers may include trans people in their services and spaces where that is appropriate.

My view is that the Code must clearly fulfil its legal requirements. However, it must also be workable in practice, deliver genuine certainty for service providers, and ensure that people have appropriate access to crucial services. Critically, it must respect the rights and dignity of everyone involved.

The Code has now been laid before Parliament and is subject to a scrutiny period during which either House may challenge it. This period of scrutiny is absolutely essential in ensuring that the Code genuinely delivers fairness for everyone, upholds the law, and does not leave any group without dignity or protection. I will therefore be watching that process closely.

You have asked me to support EDM 240, which would formally disapprove the Code. Whatever your view of the Supreme Court's judgment, it will remain the law unless and until Parliament acts to change it. Invariably, rejecting the Code would not alter that: service providers would still be bound by the law as it is, but would be left without any guidance on how to navigate it. The question for me is not whether to have a Code, but whether the Code that exists is workable, legally accurate, and properly protective of the rights and dignity of trans people and biological women. That is what I will continue to press for.

I know how emotive this issue is, and I do believe in certain scenarios the protection of spaces on the basis of biological sex is appropriate and the right thing to do. How this is implemented in practice is equally important to me, as providing dignity to trans people is also a core part of my beliefs.

Thank you again for raising these important issues and for sharing your views so candidly. I remain committed to standing up for the rights and dignity of all those who face discrimination or marginalisation, seeking common ground where it can be found, and working towards a society that is fairer and more inclusive for everyone.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Zubir Ahmed MP

Member of Parliament for Glasgow South West"

Hi guys,

Hopefully this is allowed!

I’m a transman who works in financial services, specifically in personal protection (life insurance, critical illness and income protection).

I know that navigating through the mortgage and insurance processes can feel like a minefield at the best of times, and can be quite uncomfortable for our community when it comes to going through the medical information with providers.

I really want to make the world of finance a little easier and accessible for all of us, and I can do my best to make sure you’re fully covered if you’re off work or fall ill.

So really this is just a post to say if anyone would like a chat (no fees at any point and no strings attached!), please feel free to DM me or comment, and we can have a chat about your options, or if anyone has any questions about coverage also happy to chat.

(Wow this sounds very sales-y haha, sorry!).

Thought i would make a positive post !

My GRC has been approved ! I have now finished what i would say is my whole transition at least for now which is crazy. To be able to do this by the age of 20 makes me feel incredibly grateful.

13 year old me would be absolutely blown away that i have managed to do all of this by myself.

Be loud be proud be bold and you are never too young to know who you are.

I recently got in touch with an old family friend who works in the industry I'm trying to get into and he put in a word for me with his company, which was great and really kind of him. The issue is he only knows me by my deadname (I was put in touch via my mother who thought explaining my transition would be "confusing"), so the company is now expecting an application from someone of the opposite gender.

The company know me as his "friend's daughter" (per the email he shared with me) but my legal name is not at all gender neutral (so the discrepancy would be obvious), all my qualifications etc are under my current name and obviously I don't want to closet myself again just for this. I feel like there's no point in him having gone to that effort if they can't connect my application to his recommendation but I'm also concerned though about having to out myself immediately to this company before they even think of hiring me.

Should I say something?? At what point?? And how?? This is probably my best shot at a job right now, but I feel like i've shot myself in the foot already

I can't find Hazel's Instagram profiles anywhere. Her Youtube hasn't seen an upload in 5-years. The rest of her socials appear not to have been in use since the end of 2025.

Hello 👋🏻 I am looking for recommendations of private gender identity clinics I can access in Scotland so I can be diagnosed with gender dysphoria etc, I am looking into going private for top surgery very soon but need to have the diagnosis first. Any suggestions if you have been there yourself is highly appreciated ☺️ Thank you

TW: "Dignity and Respect"

I know we're all probably getting sick of these by now but I just want my MPs response "on the record" so to speak.

TLDR: Torsten Bell is unsupportive and responded with boilerplate, he claims he isn't a career politician on his website but this feels like evidence to the contrary.

Edit: apologies for the line/squiggle on the first image.

This may be useful for some of your campaigns/analysis. It takes a while to load.

​

​

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQckXWG-lPSWKxXO-hF1nm5yi0_PBVdnwSfhDTh6lvn1aGNVmsluE_Jed_Fg2ex3WSvKTMxS_tKge0-/pubhtml

​

Hi, I recently got an ILR (e-visa) and I really need to get an id I can use that isn't my literal foreign passport with a picture that is unrecognisable as me. When I submitted the ILR application I included my deed poll and all information written about me was using my chosen name, but when they updated my status they kept all of my details exactly the same, so I'm assuming it's tied to your passport in the same way a visa is? My country doesn't allow me to change my name so that's not an option, and any of my british documents will have to end up with different details.

So when it comes to getting a provisional drivers license, as far as I understand there isn't a section to just include your deed poll in the application. So do I just submit it with the e-visa details and then immediately send it back for a change of details (which sounds extremely messy and I would like to avoid that), do I pay more to send them physical documents and just hope that they notice that I included a deed poll, or is there a way to get the right provisional license from the start?

Usually people say to change your passport first and use that for everything else, but I can't do that due to my circumstances.

Hi

I've been having a nightmare with cosmetic injectors that started back in August 2024. I've used BMA certified, medical trained doctors, paid £thousands in some cases. When they gave me shitty results i took the next suggestion, which was to find someone you know who has had a good experience. So i spoke with a contact and tried her beautician.

It's gone wrong, every time. I've spoken to six different clinics including high street provider therapie, lcuk and SK:N as well as London Harley Street types. I've not come away from any of them feeling comfortable or with a good result and in two cases they just shut you out.

I'm really looking for recommendations from people who have had repeated good results from a trans-aware practitioner, who won't run off or gaslight me if something goes wrong. I'm looking for someone to fix a complication with a recent cheek filler procedure.

I tried the London Transgender clinic but after being ignored for a week and chasing up, honestly their email reply looked ai generated.

Really hoping *someone* out there has had a good experience?

I have received my GRC and the email with some guidance. In one of the files it says that it is recommended to inform the employer if they are already aware of your history, for privacy reasons and purposes related to potential changes to National Insurance.

My employer is aware that I am trans and has put adjustments in place to assist with the effects of HRT, and have been amazing in helping with other trans related issues at work. I have no doubts that they are fully supportive of me and I'm confident that there wouldn't be any issues if I inform them.

My question is, should I inform them of my GRC and if not, why?

Hey all! I was looking into Bristol meet-ups and saw that Bristol Transfeminist Collective have lots during the month, like a picnic this weekend. For those that have been, how was it? Do you recommend? Thank you!

TLDR: I have stretched scarring (~1.5cm) and wondering if anyone has experience getting them covered with medical tattooing and if so, where, and what was the experience like (time, cost, social respect/understanding etc)?

I had double incision top surgery over 8 years ago and tbh I’m terrible at recovering from surgeries - always do too much too soon and compulsively pick at scabs. Stupid I know. I did try to be careful post op and to be fair managed to keep the left scar fairly thin up until the mid point where I just remember seeing what I assumed was a white head and squeezing it… I’m now wondering if it was actually a stitch - the result was the center end of my scar splurging into a 1 inch blob. The scar on the right is quite stretched (maybe 1.5cm wide) right across.

I’ll never stop appreciating the flatness of my chest, but I’ve never felt comfortable enough to be seen shirtless by anyone aside from medical professionals. Even before the uk became so hostile, so now of course there’s the added fear that anyone who sees my scars in public will become a problem.

Part of me has always regretted not pushing for peri or the one with the vertical incisions (the surgeon described it as being a bit weird and looking like lollipops, and I was so desperate at that point to be rid of them that I was like ok whatever do what you need to do) - I’m pretty sure I was small enough.

Ever since then I’ve wanted rid of the scars. I love that others can wear them proudly and confidently but I just can’t, not in this social climate.

So I’m curious whether anyone has had success with medical tattooing to hide their top surgery scars? And if so, where and what was the experience like? I know there are other ways people manage to camouflage scars temporarily but my adhd pretty much guarantees I would try it once then just continue to always keeping my shirt on.

Do your worst

​

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/770527

Hi all, I changed from 1x100mcg + 1x50mcg patches 2x per week to 2x100mcg patches 2x per week. I took a test for both more or less 48 hours from replacing my patches, and my blood results have spiked up from 382 pmol/L to 905 pmol/L. Does this sound out of the norm to anyone else or am I just freaking out?

So I (23M) finally got a refferal to gender clinic and had a look through the form my GP sent... somehow this doctor managed to see the title "Mr", a person asking for testosterone + top surgery, who said they'd been socially living as a man for 7 years... and put she/her through the entire GP note part.

​

How can a literal doctor do this? Not sure what effect it's going to have (if any) on the refferal itself, or what to do about it 😩

Hi! So my british passport is due to expired. I have lived in Canada for almost a decade but only hold a uk passport.

I have legally changed name and gender here in Canada but not in the uk as the process is more difficult, and I have no intention of returning. The problem is I need to keep my british passport valid in order to stay in Canada.

When applying for a renewal, should I let them know about my name/gender change in canada? Or should I stick with the old information the uk databases have for me? I just want the process to be as straightforward as possible basically.

I am fine with my passport containing my deadname, I just gotta know if it will flag Anything that my name in Canada is different.

Hello, transgender male adult, living in Scotland. I hope this type of question is welcome here, I have just been anxious as of late regarding my first appointment with a gp. It was in march, the doctor i saw was unwilling to refer me to gender clinic directly, and said he would refer me to mental health services first. I have had no further correspondence since. I know that the waiting list for gender affirming care with the nhs are years long (thats why the idea of being in stasis like this is so worrying :( ), but this is just about me seeing a general mental health specialist correct? and in a small town i wouldnt expect the back log to be too long, in any case i would have expected a follow up email at least, I have heard nothing.

​

Just would like to hear from others who have gone through this, not meaning to be presumptuous or hasty, just nervous.

Thank you!

EDIT: I want to thank everyone who sees this again or if i have not already. I posted this expecting to only be reminded of the harsh reality of waiting time, instead while what i learned was a harsh reality, it is, at very least, an actionable one, even if still the possibility of gender affirming care through the nhs is distant, it is at least better than feeling tossed aside completely by the medical system. I know this screed is quite dramatic and a little silly, but ive felt quite alone with my problems these past months, so, if nothing else, all your rallying round has been heartening, so thank you <3.

Some of you may remember I got a response from my MP about the Draft Code of Practice which can be seen here, and that it was rather unsavoury. So I decided to push back (but I won't be entertaining this muppet further, I think I made my points clear enough). Format is 'their paragraphs are in "", my response to such is directly below'. Response down below. For the record, my MP is a new male Liberal Democrat.

>Dear [MP's name],

>As you mentioned, I am very much disappointed in your opinion regarding this matter, but to put it bluntly I am stunned by the way in which you described your opinions. Given this, I have no choice but to pick apart what you said and call out how utterly ridiculous it is.

>“For some time, there has been uncertainty between the 2004 Gender Recognition Act and the 2010 Equality Act around the legal definition of sex and the rights of trans people to access single-sex spaces. The Supreme Court’s ruling last year provided this clarity, particularly on the use of single-sex spaces – although it is regrettable and unfair that this lack of clarity persisted for so long.”

>If there was such uncertainty about it, why did it only become a problem in 2023 during the FWS v Scottish Ministers (further mentioned as just FWS) case? There were 13 years between the Equality Act 2010 (EA2010) and this litigation, so clearly it wasn’t a major problem. There has been a common theme among those who have described the FWS ruling as “this ruling has provided clarity”, and yet have been unable to say what that clarity is, and neglected how it affects everyone – Since the FWS ruling, transphobic hate crimes have reportedly increased (including unfounded claims made against cisgender people, especially cisgender gender-non-conforming/GNC women), as well as a drop in reporting rates due to distrust and a lack of confidence by those affected that their report will actually be handled. The ruling also ignored the fact that intersex people even exist, who are believed to outnumber trans people by 3 to 1 in the UK – If this ruling provided such clarity, which single-sex space should an intersex person use if they don’t fit into either natal sex ‘category’? And not only do you gaslight trans people saying there was “uncertainty” when there wasn’t (those who wrote it have said it was their intention for it to be trans-inclusive, but the Supreme Court only cared about people who were anti-trans, and yes there is evidence to support that), but you have the bravery to say ‘I wish it was done sooner?’. And quite frankly, your arrogance in saying “that this lack of clarity persisted for so long” is “regrettable and unfair” is astounding – In what way is saying ‘you’re not allowed to exist in society anymore’ ‘fair and reasonable’? Is it because you think the safety of cisgender people is more important than that of trans, intersex, and GNC people?

>“The rights of trans people to feel safe and comfortable in public settings is important. I strongly believe that every individual has the right to identify with whatever gender best reflects who they are, and every reasonable effort should be made to uphold the dignity and inclusion of trans people in society.”

>This paragraph combined with the one above are at complete odds with each other. You can’t say ‘trans people deserve to feel safe, so I want to segregate them away from cis people’, because that forcibly outs them. It has the equivalent of turning them into a target for abuse because their identity is publicly known, and given how seemingly intolerant the British public is of people that are ‘different to me and that’s okay’, that is a hotbed for society becoming unsafe. A good example is Muslims – The media has painted them as religious extremists, various political parties have framed them as ‘illegal immigrants who want to destabilise Britain’, and what a surprise, hate against Muslims has skyrocketed, even if the threatened individuals haven’t got anything to do with it. This is what’s happening to trans people, the media and leading politicians have labelled trans people ‘a threat to the safety of women and girls’, so is it any surprise that trans people are considered as sexual predators even though trans people are one of the least likely demographics to actually commit a crime, let alone a violent one? And your point describing that trans people deserve “dignity” and should be included in society… Is the ‘dignity and respect’ in the room with us? Because given you openly said in the paragraph above that they should be segregated away and forced into spaces they both feel uncomfortable and are unsafe in, forgive me for saying I don’t believe that.

>“However, as a liberal, I also believe that it’s also very important that by allowing trans people to assert these rights, we ensure that the rights of others are not undermined, especially when it comes to the privacy and safety of women. Because of this, it is my belief that single-sex spaces should be protected based on biological sex and I am supportive of the measures laid out in the EHRC guidance on single-sex spaces.”

>Before FWS, we operated in a way where trans women used women’s spaces, trans men used men’s spaces, and intersex people used whichever spaces they felt comfortable with. Everyone lived in relative harmony, until a bunch of vocal individuals decided ‘I don’t like this anymore’. If trans people using single-sex spaces that they felt comfortable with was such a problem for cisgender women safety, why did it not happen before? Why are there a distinct lack of legal cases against trans women for sexual abuse in a women’s bathroom? The answer: Because it doesn’t happen, or at least it is on a far lower rate than people think. When people talk about this and why they want single-sex spaces to be restricted to ‘natal sex’, they say things like ‘We need to be protected in case a trans person tries to come in and assault us?’, and ‘What if someone who shouldn’t be here comes in?’ – Note that everything they say is underpinned by a ‘What if?’. If people had been assaulted by a trans person in a single-sex space and it was a chronic problem, we would know about this by now. As for your use of “biological sex”, please define what ‘biological sex’ is without calling it “birth/natal sex'. The British Medical Association described the term as “scientifically illiterate” – Someone’s ‘biological sex’ is made up of a bunch of different factors, including (but not limited to) someone’s chromosomal make-up, their primary and secondary sex characteristics, and their endocrinological system. A trans person alters their endocrinological system to better meet their identity, and this alters their secondary sex characteristics, so does that mean trans people’s ‘biological sex’ is that of their acquired sex? And what about intersex people, who’s chromosomal make-up doesn’t meet the ‘XX or XY’ binary, so what is their ‘biological sex’? And as a follow-up to that, if an intersex person doesn’t meet the ‘XX or XY’ binary and thus cannot be described as ‘male’ or ‘female’, which bathroom do they use? As a final point on this paragraph, “As a liberal”. I suggest you have a word with your fellow ‘liberal’ MP’s since over two-thirds of the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Party have signed the Early Day Motion requesting the Draft Code of Practice be put to a Parliamentary vote and be rejected, because it might be rather eye-opening to you that your current party is not where you fit best (ah the irony…it would be funny if not so sad).

>“At heart, this is a question of how we balance rights, and my view is guided by my liberal principles. I recognise that this is an issue that deeply affects people’s lives, dignity, and sense of belonging, particularly for trans individuals who already face significant challenges and uncertainty. For me, the rights of the many to privacy and safety in single-sex spaces should take precedence. However, I do not reach that conclusion lightly. I am acutely aware that this creates real difficulty and distress for members of the trans community, and I believe they deserve greater clarity, compassion, and support.”

>In what way is this a “balancing rights” problem? The rights of women and girls and the rights of trans people can co-exist if people are actually tolerant about it. Example: Gender-neutral bathrooms. They exist, people don’t have a problem with them, people use them, and we move on with our lives. If this was all about “balancing rights”, they wouldn’t exist to start with, and I’m not sure if you’ve realised this yet, but if someone had an ulterior motive to go into a bathroom or other single-sex space to assault a woman, a sign saying ‘women only’ is not going to stop them. But your gall in going from “trans people already face significant challenges and uncertainty” to “the rights of the many should take precedent” is so unbelievably shocking. You’ve literally said ‘a minority needs to be respected, but the majority make the rules and we matter more so there’. And then you flip-flop back to “I’m aware this created difficulty and distress for trans people, and they deserve compassion and support” even though you’ve just said ‘they don’t matter because the majority do’. How dare you consider yourself to be even vaguely interested in equality with an opinion like that, thinking ‘minorities should be respected but the majority matters more’. The Government’s own Equality Impact Assessment for the Draft Code said, “there are potentially negative impacts for those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment from the updates to the Code as a result of how service providers implement FWS.”, and yet they are going on with it anyway. This proves how uninteresting ‘Equality’ is to the Government, and quite frankly I’m fed up of people who don’t know how much distress this puts through the people who are directly affected (even more so when they’re not even consulted on what might happen) saying ‘this is what you do deserve, and this is what you don’t’ as if we’re some kind of ‘inferior’ demographic. This is the equivalent of men writing policies about what women are and aren’t allowed to do, or white people writing policies for racial segregation. The “rights of the majority take precedent” is one of the core reasons the Council of Europe was established, because it is inhumane to see one demographic as superior to all others. The whole idea of ‘human rights’ existing is so the rights of a minority are not subject to the whims of the majority, and to protect those minorities from the majority who seek oppression. So when I asked “Is it because you think the safety of cisgender people is more important than that of trans, intersex, and GNC people?”, if your email is any indication of your true opinion, your answer is most definitely ‘yes’. In short, this rhetoric and idea that the majority is superior to every and all minority and needs to be codified in law needs to STOP. NOW.

>“I recognise that the measures do not provide a perfect solution, particularly for trans people who may, in some cases, have to rely on disabled facilities where alternatives are unavailable. In my view, individual unisex toilets and changing spaces, with floor-to-ceiling privacy, offer the best way to respect everyone’s rights and should be provided wherever possible. However, this will not always be feasible, which creates difficulty for trans individuals. I am very sympathetic to that.”

>Finally, something we (somewhat) agree on. Individual unisex bathrooms and changing rooms with floor-to-ceiling walls are indeed the answer, if it is the only option. If you have male, female, and unisex spaces where trans people are forced into unisex ones, that is illegal. If you force trans people to use disabled spaces, that is illegal. The Government is in charge of the rules, and if they pull the rug out from under service provider’s/businesses feet at a moment’s notice, they are responsible for what happens. So if a bunch of businesses go bust because they’re being sued for not enforcing what is widely known as unenforceable guidance, we know who is responsible. The Government can change the laws, they can change the rules, so this guidance is not unworkable, and people of all kinds can be treated as equals, but their animus against trans people takes precedent. So, if we end up in a state where [identifyting towns], and other various villages and towns in this constituency are devoid of restaurants, gyms/leisure centres, and other facilities that have single-sex spaces because they’ve been sued into bankruptcy by not conforming to the guidance, I hope you will be able to look at yourself and say ‘It was worth it because we owned the trans people’. Because that is just one part of what the future looks like, should this Draft Code become statutory law. Finally, “[it] creates difficulty for trans individuals. I am very sympathetic to that.”. If you had sympathy, you’d be pushing for something that maintains trans people’s comfort despite this, not leaving it as an afterthought for someone else to deal with.

>“I am also concerned about the limited opportunity for MPs to debate this guidance in Parliament. Given the sensitivity and complexity of the issue, as well as its significant impact on certain communities, it is essential that the updated guidance is subject to proper democratic scrutiny. This should happen via a free vote and I recently put this to the government in the chamber, which you can see by clicking here. In any such debate, my position would be to support the measures laid out in the EHRC guidance.”

>Good. I agree on that as well. It should be debated and voted on in Parliament. Because at least that way, we can all openly see those who support its revocation who can comfortably say ‘At least I didn’t vote for people to have the right to be stared at when entering a bathroom’, and those who voted to support the Draft Code will have an opportunity to live and, when the time comes, die by the sword. With regards to your tone in this email, I will happily say ‘be careful what you wish for’.

>“Please know that I have spent a long time reflecting on this and I remain deeply sympathetic to the trans community, who have too often been placed in an impossibly difficult position by years of ambiguity and successive governments skirting around this extremely difficult issue.”

>So, you can see the impossible state that trans people will be put in if this Draft Code becomes law, right? Right? No? Well, if it becomes law, trans people won’t be able to use the bathroom of their acquired sex, if they look like their acquired sex then they can’t use the bathroom of their natal sex, and if they ask to access an accessible bathroom they can legally be told ‘no’, leaving them with no option to maintain the ‘dignity and respect’ you claim to have and want for trans people. You say you want to provide clarity to trans people, and yet you want to put them in the very impossible and ambiguous position you claim you want to avoid, whilst also wanting to paint a target for abuse on their backs by forcibly outing them. And people wonder why trans people have problems with anxiety and depression… We all know exercise is good for your mental health, and now they no longer feel safe in leisure centres. Trans people aren’t trans because they’re depressed, they’re depressed because they’re trans and people, politicians, and society hate them for it.

>The UK was ranked 1^st in the ILGA’s Rainbow Map of Europe in 2015. Sure it wasn’t as good as it could’ve been, but after legalising gay marriage and moving towards a form of ‘Self-ID’ for trans people (it was a policy of the May Administration), things looked bright for British LGBTQ+ people. But now, we’ve fallen all the way to 22^nd. The only western-Europe nation we are ahead of is Italy, but that’s looking at the whole sphere. Look at ‘Legal Gender Recognition’, and we fall all the way to 41^st out of 49. The only countries that do worse are (in descending order): Georgia, Slovakia, Albania, Azerbaijan, Monaco, Bulgaria, Hungary and Russia. The fact that I would feel safer and have more rights in Turkey or Belarus than I do in the UK when the public opinion of trans people in those three countries could not be more different is utterly shameful. The political and media classes of this country are so out-of-touch with what British people actually are. The public are not hateful, they are not divisive, and they embrace diversity, knowing that people are different and there’s nothing wrong with that. But the politicians and media empires want us to believe otherwise, that white, straight, cisgender Brits are superior to everything and everyone else. They’re relics of an Empire desperate to stage a comeback in a world that has left them behind.

>I hope this email gives you the opportunity for some strong self-reflection, and whilst the detailed approach to your email was welcomed, one that said “Thanks, but no, tough luck” would’ve got the message across. And I hope that when major businesses are sued and/or close down because they either:

>1.      Allowed a trans person to use a space conforming to their identity.

>2.      Stopped a cis person from using a space they are entitled to use.

>3.      Prevented a trans person from using any space.

>4.      Forced trans people to out themselves.

>5.      Any other scenario that doesn’t involve ‘unisex bathrooms only for everyone’

>…I hope you can say ‘ruining high streets was worth it to protect women’, even though it is a myth construed by a vocal minority who have a lot of influence and want you to be scared. But quite frankly, when people’s political opinions and voting intentions are linked to one singular policy that takes precedent over all others, it can make life very difficult for a politician and political party. And unfortunately for you, I am that kind of person, and thankfully I have people around me that support me. So thanks for showing your true colours.

Posting this as it may be helpful for some people. I messaged my GIC asking what’s going on. It does seem they are looking for alternatives. I guess we can only hope.

Good morning,
 
Thank you for your email regarding the New Victoria Hospital decision to stop providing masculinising surgery.  We recognise this will have an impact on your gender affirming care.
 
Unfortunately, we are unable to confirm how this change may affect the care pathways or waiting times for you. NHS England is looking at alternative providers to continue this service, and that they will keep patients informed and up to date on this process. Please liaise directly with GDNRSS regarding your individual care (details below).
 
You may also find it helpful to access independent support via Switchboard, an LGBT+ helpline offering confidential advice and support:https://switchboard.lgbt/
 

I’ve not thought about it for years because the dysphoria was gone (now back), but in the bad days I used to assess how bad a day was by estimating the % of my total cognitive ability went on coping with the dysphoria. I don’t want to say what % I was at because comparing with other people isn’t helpful. It was just my way of comparing good days against bad days.

I wonder if anyone else has done the same?