@keyne-unable.bsky.social
Folk devil ¦ wonkish agitator for climate @Transition-Network and trans lib @TransActualUK/TMW ¦ busy touching grass ¦ gamemaster, gardener, bookworm ¦ does other things but don't worry about it ¦ views not mine either ¦ pronounced like cane ¦ they/them
Oh that's right! A secret minor vs major administrative sex distinction perhaps. Sounds like an awful cover of Leonard Cohen's 'Hallelujah'.
I believe that is the secret fourth category of 'administrative sex', which is applied to any self-reported sex data, but it depends on who you ask.
In practical terms that's the result of their ruling on "biological sex", until a biometric definition is actually provided. But "biological sex" is not actually defined by the original birth certificate, it wasn't defined at all but was intended to refer to physical characteristics not legal status
But it was incoherent to start with so... 🤷
I'm not sure that's right, certificated sex and so-called "biological sex" are in the eyes of the SC the same for all cis people. The point of the term "biological sex" is just to say certificated sex (except for people who have GRCs) and frame this as a natural instead of legal distinction.
Also it's darkly funny that, in a government policy document listing key definitions, they could not offer a definition of biological sex, because the legal term has no definition, and there is no coherent binary definition of sex in science. Is it clear yet the supreme court were winging it?
Perhaps they did listen to our concerns, even if they never really replied......
transactual.org.uk/blog/2025/11...
Amidst worse news, I'm very glad to see that the digital ID policy is steering away from including gender/sex data at all - this is the right move from practical and moral perspectives. That data is often wrong, leads to outing, harassment or exclusion, and not needed on any kind of ID card.
This is a similar playbook indeed. These people are 'merchants of doubt', as Oreskes & Conway put it in their book and documentary of the same name. Except this time the BS is coming from the top. Highly recommended read/watch for defenders of trans rights and clinical researchers.
Do please let us know the result!
DHSC started invoking more and more exemptions to FOI requests after that, but we have further email correspondence documented (www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cont...) and they note they are withholding a lot from that FOI under those exemptions so may have been several more times since.
A good point, we have clear records for one meeting in July 2024, (tacc.org.uk/2025/10/03/i...), a vague comment which implies further contact to me (www.wearequeeraf.com/revealed-str...) ....... (1/2)
He does love hearing from *abusive* parents of trans kids at least, just look how many times he's met with the 'chilli in the mascara' ring "Bayswater Support Group"
In the same way 'meddling activist judges whose immigration decisions should be resisted by government' becomes 'impeccable, impeachable, unquestionable and eternal wisdom of the FWS supreme court judgement'.
Those backbenchers need to wake up if they think Streeting opposes this anyway.
If Streeting doesn't want to be blamed for this, maybe he could speak out and condemn it and apply some pressure? Y'know. Be a minister with a view. Otherwise they're just trying to have their cake and eat it - proclaiming how suddenly powerless they are to challenge anti-trans discrimination.
Promoting social cohesion, the "snitch on your neighbours and teachers for not loving england enough until a climate of fear makes them stop talking about our international crimes" method.
In addition to what's been shared, I'd like to add 'seems to be gearing up to make us all wear digital pink triangles and refuses to engage with us about data policy at all'. transactual.org.uk/blog/2025/11...
Honestly having a defined parliamentary style and colour scheme like this is pretty fun.
Not even bothering to launder their reliance on homophobic tropes anymore. Unnatural, sick, delusional - all the same things they said in the 90s.
This is outright advocacy for abusive conversion practices.
I should have added 'dressed up in progressive sounding language'.
What if Phyllis Schlafly but with more bullshit evolutionary psychology?
We need more awareness of orgs that sound like they're a Serious Scientific Outfit while secretly being a collection of Christian fundies cranking out junk science and 'studies' with ass methodology to legitimise their ideological agenda.
That's about as pure epistemic vandalism as it gets.
Where can I sign up to the ZNBP then?
Sure. I'll believe it when they fire Mahmood and Streeting instead of just a change in tone from No.10. They're appealing to the side who wants policy with platitudes and vice versa.
100%. And if you're a journalist looking to find those human interest stories, get in touch with press@transactual.org.uk
We have a bank of case studies (beyond what was published in our reports - link) including those who have opted in to follow-up contact.
transactual.org.uk/impacts-of-t...
Presumably followed by "How dare they, that's the Supreme Court's job!"
Seeing as the UK is finally arresting people for misconduct in pubic office, I have a list. Who do I send it to?
Unbelievably dense to put everything into a box of being pro or anti 'technology' as a concept, or perhaps a deliberate propaganda tool - anyone against the oligarch's version of progress is against progress. You are not allowed your own values or vision, it's AI slop or go back to the trees.
Us: this technology in the hands of these specific oligarchs and within an economy with these incentives currently seems to be causing more harm than good and their plans for it seem like they would make life worse. Maybe invest in tech for public good.
Them: WHY DOES THE LEFT HATE TECHNOLOGY
This is awesome, a huge thanks from us at TransActual!