Rebecca

@beccauk

SFF fan, trans woman, sometimes dances 🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🚀🩰💃

2.733 Folgt907 Follower1.365 Posts

Bluesky

Ist das dein Profil?Übernimm es — dann gehört dir beccauk.dirty.social.Profil übernehmen

Rebecca@beccauk· 28d

For some reason the only people objecting to this were from the UK.

Tabled by Ms Tonia ANTONIAZZI, Ms Kate
OSAMOR, Ms Ruth JONES, Lord George FOULKES,
Baroness Doreen E. MASSEY
In the draft resolution, delete paragraph 5.

Rebecca@beccauk· 28d

Reminder: in 2022 the Council of Europe’s parliamentary assembly condemned gender critical narratives on the basis they dehumanise LGBTI people.

The Assembly condemns the highly prejudicial anti-gender, gender-critical and anti-trans narratives which reduce the struggle for the equality of LGBTI people to what these movements deliberately mis-characterise as "gender ideology" or "LGBTI ideology". Such narratives deny the very existence of LGBTI people, dehumanise them and often falsely portray their rights as being in conflict with women's and children's rights, or societal and family values in general. All of these are deeply damaging to LGBTI people, while also harming women's and children's rights and social cohesion.

Rebecca@beccauk· 29d

And she also failed to get anyone to agree that the gender critical narratives shouldn’t be condemned.

The Assembly condemns the highly prejudicial anti-gender, gender-critical and anti-trans narratives which reduce the fight for the equality of LGBTI people to what these movements deliberately mis-characterise as "gender ideology" or "LGBTI ideology". Such narratives deny the very existence of LGBTI people, dehumanise them, and often falsely portray their rights as being in conflict with women's and children's rights, or societal and family values in general. All of these are deeply damaging to LGBTI people, while also harming women's and children's rights and social cohesion.
Amendment 9
• 24 January 2022
ig: Tabled by Ms Tonia ANTONIAZZI, Ms Kate
OSAMOR, Ms Ruth JONES, Lord George FOULKES,
Baroness Doreen E. MASSEY
In the draft resolution, delete paragraph 5.

Rebecca@beccauk· 29d

Her attempt to remove “and the United Kingdom” failed.

In the draft resolution, paragraph 3, second sentence, delete the following words:
"and the United Kingdom."

Rebecca@beccauk· 29d

The most egregious amendment aimed to remove language expressly stripping funding from anti-LGBTI groups.

refuse to provide funding to local, regional or national authorities or other State or non-State actors that deny the human rights of LGBTI people, and to withdraw such funding if it has already been granted;
Amendment 16
曲
24 January 2022
Tabled by Ms Tonia ANTONIAZZI, Ms Kate
OSAMOR, Ms Ruth JONES, Lord George FOULKES,
Baroness Doreen E. MASSEY
In the draft resolution, replace paragraph 14.4 with the following paragraph:
"challenge local, regional or national authorities or other State or non-State actors that deny the human rights of LGBTI people"

Rebecca@beccauk· Jul 11

The gender-critical movement is anti-rights which is why the gender critical movement has been condemned by international treaty bodies like the Council of Europe. If you don’t want to be called anti-rights maybe don’t be anti-rights?

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 25

A number of MPs are rightly deeply suspicious of the breadth of the healthcare exception. The minister suggests that she doesn’t actually think this provision was necessary… but something about a chilling effect.

That is a really important question. Let me explain how this will work. It is my view that legitimate healthcare would not fall under the remit of this Bill in any way, shape or form, because legitimate healthcare would never be abusing somebody to try to change their identity and causing them serious harm. However, I recognise the concerns about the risk of a chilling effect. We do not want that, because good therapy and good conversation is really important. That is why we have put this exemption on the face of the Bill.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 25

The carve out for healthcare also makes a nonsense of the clause 3 ban on encouraging conversion practices outside the England and Wales. This report by the UN’s independent expert in 2020 found that medical and mental health providers were found to be the main perpetrators in 45.8% of cases…

In a recent global survey, a total of 1,641 survivors of practices of “conversion
therapy” identified main perpetrators. Medical and mental health providers were identified as the main perpetrators in 45.8 per cent of cases, religious authorities, traditional healers and groups in 18.9 per cent, conversion camps and rehabilitation centres in 8.5 per cent and parents in 6.9 per cent. State authorities – such as police, military and other entities –
accounted for 4.4 per cent of cases, and school authorities in 4.4 per cent

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 25

A reminder that around fifth of those who received conversion therapy said it was conducted by health care professionals. www.gov.uk/government/p...

Conversion therapy
Five percent of respondents had been offered so called 'conversion' or 'reparative' therapy (but did not take it up) and a further 2% had undergone it. We did not provide a definition of conversion therapy in the survey, but it can range from pseudo-psychological treatments to, in extreme cases, surgical interventions and 'corrective' rape. These figures were higher for trans respondents (e.g. 9% of trans men been offered it and 4% had undergone it). Faith organisations were by far the most likely group to have conducted conversion therapy (51% of those who received it had it conducted by faith groups), followed by healthcare professionals (19% of those who received it had it conducted by healthcare professionals).

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 23

It keeps happening!

A screenshot from the guardian. On the left a man in black rectangled glasses (Burnham). On the right, a man in black rectangle glasses. (Starmer). They have uncannily similar facial expressions.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 17

Perhaps they’re from the Russian branch?

LDPR - Liberal Democratic Party of Russiala]
[19||20] is a Russian ultranationalist and right-wing populist political party. It succeeded the Liberal Democratic Party of the Soviet Union (LDPSU) in Russia after the dissolution of the

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 11

Ouch.

The machinery of government itself has been left to decay. Decisions that should take days, take months. Departments fight each other instead of the problem. Officials and ministers who know the truth are not always rewarded for telling it. We are trying to govern a more dangerous world with processes designed for a calmer one, and the gap is now showing in the things that matter most.

- Al Carns

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 11

Two issues. 1) why is an independent school in England following the premises regulations for Welsh state schools? 2) the 1999 regs didn’t apply to independent schools.

Example:
10.37. An independent secondary school provides boarding accommodation for male pupils in one dormitory and female pupils in a different dormitory. A trans girl pupil (who was born male) asks to move from the male dormitory to sleep in the female dormitory. The school refuses the request because of the
statutory requirement for sex segregation contained in the Education (School Premises)
Regulations 1999. However, to accommodate the pupil, it arranges for them to be accommodated in a single unit 'study bedroom'. The unit has its own ensuite bathroom with a toilet and shower. This is likely to be lawful.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 11

(An understandable rookie error. The 1999 regs were replaced in England, not Wales, which means they weren’t revoked. They were instead amended.)

the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999(1) after regulation 1, insert—
Application
1A. These Regulations apply in relation to all schools maintained by local authorities in Wales.".

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 11

Stop mentioning the 1999 regulations! They aren’t a thing!

Boarding and trans pupils
10.34. In accordance with the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999, in relation to pupils aged 8 and over, a trans pupil cannot board in the same room as pupils of the opposite sex.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 11

Right, but the 1999 school premises regulations were replaced in 2012…

10.33. It is also important to be aware that, where boarding for both male and female pupils is provided, the Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999 require that pupils aged 8 and over should not sleep in the same room as pupils of the opposite
sex.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 9

As to the provision of shelters for trans women, here’s the relevant findings of the GREVIO - the Council of Europe’s Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence.

232. Reports from civil society organisations further indicate that LBTI women face increased barriers to accessing shelters, in particular trans women. 295 GREVIO notes with concern the growing controversy in debates in the UK around access to specialist support services for trans women. In this context, it wishes to point to the fundamental principles of the Istanbul Convention. which serve to guide decision makers in finding adequate solutions in line with the spirit of the convention. These are first and foremost the principle of non-discrimination set out in Article 4, paragraph 3, requiring all measures taken for the implementation of the convention to be carried out without discrimination

on the basis of any of the grounds listed therein, notably sex, gender and gender identity. Another fundamental principle of the Istanbul Convention is that of service provision for the protection of victims from any further acts of violence. Enshrined in Article 18, this principle requires a gendered understanding of violence against women, and a focus, in any service provision, on the human rights and safety of all victims. Measures taken to this extent must be based on an integrated approach mindful of the relationships of victims to their perpetrators, their children and their wider social environment. Article 18, paragraph 3, further lists the principle of working towards victim empowerment and avoiding secondary victimisation. With these principles in mind, a balance can and must be struck between the need for inclusivity on the one hand, and the need for safety and empowerment of all victims, on the other hand. Solutions may be found on a case-by-case basis, or in the pooling of services, and efforts to this extent will be greatly facilitated by the much-needed expansion of specialist domestic violence accommodation across all four nations of the UK. The result must be one of protection and support to all women, irrespective of any of the characteristics laid out in the convention's non-discrimination clause.
233. In terms of enabling women victims of violence to physically reach shelters, GREVIO notes with interest the "rail-to-refuge" programme. 296 It is a joint initiative by UK rail operators and Women's Aid and provides those travelling to safety with free train tickets. It was instituted during the Covid-19 pandemic because of a rise in requests for help and has been extended since.

234. GREVIO urges the relevant authorities in the United Kingdom to:
a. increase the number and capacity of appropriate, easily accessible and specialist shelters providing safe accommodation in relation to all forms of violence covered by the Istanbul Convention, in line with the standards set by the convention and in an adequate geographical distribution, with the aim of achieving the standard set in the Explanatory Report to the Istanbul Convention of one family place per 10 000 head of population;
b. ensure the provision of safety-oriented and empowering domestic violence shelters for all women, including women with disabilities, Roma women, LBTI women, women belonging to minorities, migrant and asylum-seeking women, women with multiple children and women with teenage male children, and irrespective of local residency.
235. GREVIO strongly encourages the relevant authorities in the United Kingdom to provide sufficient, sustainable, long-term and dedicated funding throughout the entire territory of the United Kingdom to support the establishment and operation of domestic abuse shelters run by specialist providers, including shelters for women with no recourse to public funds.
236. GREVIO further encourages the relevant authorities in the United Kingdom to develop clear pathways from shelters to longer-term accommodation, suitable for ensuring the lasting safety of women victims of violence and their children.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 9

The claimant there also complained that he was forced to “come out” every time he presented his identity documents. He claimed this violated articles 3 and 8. Alas, the court felt as he’d won already it didn’t need to examine that further - while accepting the claim was admissible.

Il. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONVENTION READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLES 3 AND 8
61. Under Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8, the applicant complained that he was forced to repeatedly and involuntarily disclose his gender identity ("come out") every time he had to present his identity documents.
62. The Court notes that this part of the
application is not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention and is not inadmissible on any other grounds. It should therefore be declared admissible. However, in view of its finding concerning Article 8 (see paragraph 60 above), the Court considers it unnecessary to examine whether there has been a violation in the present case of Article 14 read in conjunction with that provision (see S.V. v. Italy, § 77, and X and Y
v. Romania, § 171, both cited above).

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 9

Hard to reconcile the EHRC’s stance with the conclusions of the ECtHR in TH v The Czech Republic, in which it said states had “only a narrow margin of appreciation” in the area of personal autonomy, gender identity and article 8.

However, where a particularly important facet of an individual's existence or identity is at stake, the margin allowed to the State will be restricted (see, in particular, Hämäläinen v. Finland [GC], no. 37359/09, § 67, ECHR 2014, and A.P., Garçon and Nicot, cited above, § 121). The Court has also considered that since the notion of personal autonomy is an important principle underlying the interpretation of the guarantees of Article 8 and the right to gender identity and personal development is a fundamental aspect of the right to respect for private life, the States have only a narrow margin of appreciation in that area (ibid., § 123).

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 9

You might be asking: isn’t this completely incoherent? Yes. Was this intentional? Also yes. Because as the government says, although this guidance is bad for trans people this is mitigated by the section on not policing toilets.

Our assessment is therefore that the likely impacts on gender reassignment as a characteristic are negative, in relation to each of the 3 limbs of the PSED. Mitigating factors are the ability of service providers to create 'third-space' provision for trans people, and the guidance in the Code on when it is, and is not, proportionate and necessary to request information on sex at birth.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 5

The EHRC will be furious when they learn what the ICCPR committee says about trans people…

ICCPR concluding observations 2024, paragraph 19:
The State party should continue its efforts and adopt the measures necessary to prohibit the practice of so-called conversion therapy against lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons, including in Northern Ireland.
Furthermore, it should take legislative and other measures to eliminate intrusive requirements for legal gender recognition, including psychiatric diagnosis, and provide for and effectively implement a quick, transparent and accessible procedure for legal gender recognition that is compatible with the provisions of the Covenant.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 3

So you accept that the UK is failing in its responsibilities to trans people… yet you went ahead with bigoted guidance anyway? Curious.

Requirements for legal gender recognition
The UK government has stated that it does not intend to reform the Gender Recognition Act 2004 to change the requirements for legal gender recognition.
Assessment up to date as of December 2024.

Rebecca@beccauk· Jun 1

Meanwhile in Canada…

Rebecca@beccauk· May 25

Spotted on Facebook. Shared by the Labour group on Blackpool Council. The silence has been broken.

Statement from the LGBT+ Labour National Committee following the publication of the EHRC's updated code of practice
The LGBT+ Labour National Committee is deeply disappointed by the updated code of practice published on Thursday by the EHRC.
Members of all marginalised groups should have the right to fairness, dignity, and respect when accessing services. While the updated code of practice is an improvement on the previous guidance issued in 2025, it still falls short on realising this ideal.
The code of practice as published will likely lead to widespread difficulties for service providers and trans people trying to safely access services. In particular, the recommendation that people may be excluded from services on a 'case-by-case basis' because of their appearance is likely to lead to increased harassment for gender nonconforming people of all identities.
We will continue to campaign for changes which uphold the dignity of Trans and gender-nonconforming people in our community.
If anyone in our community is in need of further support, you can contact the national GBT+ support line, Switchboard, here:
https://switchboard.lgbt

Rebecca@beccauk· May 25

Fascinatingly, Labour seem to be briefing hard on the “we’ve imposed draconian rules that are illegal to enforce” line. Problem is this means the policy is predicated on a tacit acknowledgement that trans people will ignore the rules - which just bring the rules into disrepute

Mail headline: Don't ask trans people what sex they are in toilets, Britain's equalities watchdog says

Rebecca@beccauk· May 22

The Times has noticed that the guidance says don’t police toilets…

“Long-awaited equality guidance has warned that transgender people should not routinely be challenged over which lavatories they use”

Rebecca@beccauk· May 21

Transphobic misinformation from @libbybrooks.bsky.social in the Guardian. In fact the guidance expressly says you shouldn’t challenge people using toilets.

13.170
It is unlikely to be either practical or appropriate to approach any particular individual to make enquiries about their sex in relation to facilities, such as

toilets, which are incidental to the primary service.

Rebecca@beccauk· May 21

The government says the code of practice causes safeguarding risks for trans women, exacerbates tensions between groups in society, and has negative impacts on the protected characteristics of gender reassignment, disability and sex. You must reject it.

Safeguarding risks: Concern that excluding trans women from female services could mean they have to use male services, where they could face a disproportionate risk of violence and sexual assault (although this will depend on the nature of the service in question).
Relations between groups: The debate on single sex services and the treatment of trans people is particularly divisive at this time. The Code of Practice may exacerbate these tensions. This may be somewhat mitigated through careful communications surrounding the Code's publication.

Generally, we have assessed that changes which apply across all protected characteristics contribute to the pursuit of the 3 aims in the PSED, and have a positive impact overall. However, the exception to this would be the gender reassignment protected characteristic, where we do think there are negative impacts. We assess that updates following the FWS ruling may also negatively impact other characteristics, including disability and sex.

Rebecca@beccauk· May 21

So as long as I don’t out myself, the service will have to carry out a multifactorial proportionality assessment before deciding if it can ban me?

13.178
Where an individual confirms, in response to such a request, that they are not of the sex for which the single or separate-sex service or association in question is intended, they may be required to leave and thereafter be excluded from the service. This should again be handled as sensitively as possible in the circumstances.
13.179
Where there remains a genuine concern about the accuracy of the response to a request for an individual to confirm their sex, then the service provider, person performing public functions or association should consider what action is proportionate in the circumstances. There is no type of official record or document in the UK which provides reliable evidence of sex. For example, sex on passports and driving licences may be changed with or without a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), and birth certificates may reflect the acquired gender of someone who has a GRC. Therefore, it is unlikely to be proportionate or practical to ask for further evidence of a person's sex. In such circumstances, it is likely to be necessary to weigh up the relevant factors to decide whether to exclude the individual from the service or association or to permit them to continue to access it.
13.180 Factors that may be relevant to this decision include:
• the strength of the continuing grounds for concern
• the nature of the service
• the nature and potential severity of the risks and potential harms to, respectively, the individual in question and other service users

Rebecca@beccauk· May 21

Human rights? Why would we want to talk about human rights? (Though that implies that the enabling SI that follows might require such a statement…)