If the government will force you to accept men as women, they can force you to accept anything. What’s next?

One of the many odd things about transactivism is how it accommodates both the idea that you can’t tell whether someone’s a woman by how well they perform femininity and the idea that a trans identified man can prove he’s a woman by demonstrating how well he performs femininity.

But it’s irrelevant. The law will remain. If you think the law is wrong - what are you going to do to change it? You will need to be explicit that you do not think women have a right to single sex female spaces.

There’s a real problem here which is partly ‘our’ fault. Journalists simply haven’t challenged enough this activist idea that rejecting the Code can change the law. They haven’t sufficiently factchecked transactivist MPs, and have even contributed to this Code-led belief by stressing (constantly) the importance of waiting for the Code. Some have even ‘waited for the Code’ themselves in building their own policies. Of course the National doesn’t explain in this piece either ‘The guidance bans transgender women from using female toilets, changing facilities and sports teams, and transgender men from the male facilities’ It’s wishful thinking on a spectacular scale. ‘More than 15k people write to MPs calling for EHRC trans guidance to be scrapped’ thenational.scot/news/261912…

I think my fave is 'introduce non-binary legal recognition'. Let's legally define something that has *no definition* as it's definition. I mean that's obvs what we all stood for Parliament to do...

This is Samuel Corner, sledgehammer raised, ready to strike the police woman lying at his feet, arm held out in a vain plea for mercy. Samuel Corner is not a martyr nor a "young activist", he's just a common-or-garden thug.

Furthermore, this is only to do with LGB people insofar as we are also allowed to gather together on a single sex basis. The law currently allows that. If you want to take that right away from us, own it. Don't lump us in with those who would forbid it.

Similarly for @LibDems who have signed #EDM240 in opposition to their manifesto pledge.

If you're going to oppose delivery of our manifesto pledges, you really shouldn't have put yourself forward as a Labour candidate.

Run this through the TRANSlator Men have a right to enter single sex female spaces; they say this is what they want and I am going with it. I don’t think women have a right to single sex spaces but I don’t want to say that out loud. I am a serving MP but I don’t have a clue about what a statute is and what guidance about the statute is, or I think this performative crap is more important than anything else.

Hello again I see there is someone purporting to be me Harlen Warlow. Not me but pinching my posts. ‘Landscape’ Adam Gorczyński. Polish (1805-1876) Oil on Canvas Stunning light here

Every single person who still cringes at the memory of trying to bullshit their way through an interview or exam question: today, the slate is wiped clean. Set down your burden of shame. Nothing - nothing, I say - could touch this.

The sections of the Code of Practice that focus on the law on the separate sex/single-sex exceptions are not that long. Write your own amended version of those sections, Nadia. At least one of you 131 MPs who signed this motion should tell us what you want the Code to say in those sections and explain how it fits with the law and with case law. Because, so far, all I’ve heard from you is posturing. You believe you can do a better job at writing this Code than the public body that was set up to do that job? Great! Prove it. Posturing alone doesn’t prove that.

The Precision Trap

Nadia should stop wasting parliamentary time. The code elaborates the law. It cannot change it. To remove well- established equality & sex discrimination legislation, she must change the law. And, find a different political party. @UKLabour supports equality legislation.

The full UK State Pension is now worth around £12,548 a year. That's less than half the earnings of someone working full-time on the National Minimum Wage, despite many pensioners paying taxes and National Insurance for 40, 50 or even 60 years. Yet every time the Treasury needs money, the same voices appear demanding the Triple Lock be scrapped. Why? State pension spending is forecast at around £154 billion this year, but that supports over 13 million pensioners, many of whom rely on it as their primary income. Meanwhile, billions continue to disappear into failed projects, government waste, bureaucracy, consultants, quangos and policies that deliver little value to ordinary taxpayers. The Triple Lock isn't some gold-plated luxury. It exists because politicians allowed the State Pension to fall behind for decades. Even today, a full State Pension is barely above the poverty line and is nowhere near a typical working wage. If politicians want to save money, start with waste, inefficiency and failed spending programmes. Leave pensioners alone. They worked, they paid in, they built this country and they deserve dignity in retirement, not another raid on their income.

Absolutely no-one sees my tweets so I'm going to try out some new content. Let me know what you think. Ok.. David Hockey was overrated and not as good as Jack Vettriano.

Five questions to get people thinking

Dear @LindsayHoyle_MP : It is imperative that these attacks on @RosieDuffield1 be formally condemned and investigated. To allow this to go unaddressed is a statement that the House does not care about the freedom of speech--or safety--of its Members.

The conclusion I draw from the Early Day Motion that more than 130 MPs are entirely relaxed at the prospect of continued unlawful sex discrimination seen in recent judgments like the Darlington Nurses and LS v NHSE. As an experienced equality lawyer that sadden me greatly