正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

“The new clause is unnecessary because it is very unlikely that digital verification services will be used in many, if not all, of the cases specifically raised by members. Such as with the NHS to gain access to single sex wards or for screening, or to enter other female... show more

Connie Shaw

39,633 subscribers

33,365 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

健康养生新闻政治

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 条评论

Animatronic 的头像

Animatronic1 年前

"Safeguarding works by thinking of the worst outcomes and preventing them." This can't be repeated enough.

HC ⬛️◼️▪️ 的头像

HC ⬛️◼️▪️1 年前

@Glinner Despicable display. Absolutely void of care to any woman despite the endless legal battles that we face.

Jane Walmsley 💚🤍💜 的头像

Jane Walmsley 💚🤍💜1 年前

He couldn’t care less about the rights of women and girls, and he doesn’t even hide it, we’re simply not important, he also doesn’t seem to care about accuracy of data, utterly shameful

Melissa Martin 的头像

Melissa Martin1 年前

Digital sex verification does not digitally verify sex. We know. It has no value. So why is it there? It can only be to confuse & mislead. See you in court.

Antonia Frances 💙🦕 的头像

Antonia Frances 💙🦕1 年前

I’m convinced @RhonddaBryant actually hates women.

Hennie Inglis 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🇳🇱 💚🤍💜 的头像

Hennie Inglis 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🇳🇱 💚🤍💜1 年前

@NoToMisogyny You open up any means for fetishists men to have access to 'women' then it will be abused. This is @UKLabour circumventing the Supreme Court ruling re who is a woman. This is self-ID by stealth We will have to go to court once again.

JayGee 的头像

JayGee1 年前

@Glinner He epitomises ‘modern’ Labour. Seemingly decent, yet cult deluded in the background, bending and distorting legal and other process to fit silent, captured and in some cases, warped, agendas. And blind to the most obvious forms of misogyny of all. Totally reprehensible.

Mini’s Mum 的头像

Mini’s Mum1 年前

@PHughes74470229 Very unlikely…. I wonder what percentage will try… maybe 0.5-1% of the population. The percentage of the population who think they have changed sex. They say it will never happen, it always does.

Agent 19131 & 9766 Jonathan Hartley 💙🇺🇦 的头像

Agent 19131 & 9766 Jonathan Hartley 💙🇺🇦1 年前

@JammersMinde Presumably digital ID won't be a card these men can flash (pun intended) to get access to women's single-sex spaces and services. Even so, it begs the question why the government is ok with establishing an identity scheme it knows will contain false information.

Dizzy Lizzie 的头像

Dizzy Lizzie1 年前

He’s vile.

相关视频

"If a female wants a female only space or sports opportunity she is owed that by federal law, state law, and common sense. Anything else is discriminatory, illegal, and wildly regressive" Our referendum restores Title IX in Maine & reclaims the sex-based civil rights of ALL kids Leader of the Maine Girl Dads, and the Protect Girls Sports in Maine ballot referendum, testifies on 4/14/2026 in front of the Judiciary Committee. The ballot referendum simply harmonizes state law with federal Title IX, ensuring that sports & private safe spaces in schools are designated by Sex. Testimony from dozens of girls, parents and advocates on 4/14 in Augusta made it clear that: 🚨Males are in female private spaces (bathrooms and locker rooms), every day. This is commonplace 🚨Males have been reported to be masturbating in female safe spaces at school (as testified by school children and parents), in addition to many reports of voyeurism 🚨Males are competing in and winning female sports, including the girls' state championship in high jump last year 🚨Young female students stay quiet and are scared to bring this up, as adults have made them feel as if THEY are the problem for not being OK with males in their safe spaces and their sports 🚨Many females are experiencing mental trauma from males in their private spaces and sports The ballot referendum to "Designate School Sports Participation & Facilities by Sex" protects the Sex-based Civil Rights of ALL kids: ✅The act designates all competitive school sports and safe spaces (bathrooms, locker rooms, showers) by Sex. ✅Nobody is banned. Ever. Everyone plays sports and accesses private spaces, simply designated by Sex. ✅This is inclusive: everyone has a Sex, Sex is not Gender (definitionally, legally, scientifically), and there is no right or wrong way to be male or female (look, feel, present, even identify however you want). Sex is big enough for everyone. ✅Nobody is banned. Ever. Everyone plays sports and accesses private spaces, simply designated by Sex.

"If a female wants a female only space or sports opportunity she is owed that by federal law, state law, and common sense. Anything else is discriminatory, illegal, and wildly regressive" Our referendum restores Title IX in Maine & reclaims the sex-based civil rights of ALL kids Leader of the Maine Girl Dads, and the Protect Girls Sports in Maine ballot referendum, testifies on 4/14/2026 in front of the Judiciary Committee. The ballot referendum simply harmonizes state law with federal Title IX, ensuring that sports & private safe spaces in schools are designated by Sex. Testimony from dozens of girls, parents and advocates on 4/14 in Augusta made it clear that: 🚨Males are in female private spaces (bathrooms and locker rooms), every day. This is commonplace 🚨Males have been reported to be masturbating in female safe spaces at school (as testified by school children and parents), in addition to many reports of voyeurism 🚨Males are competing in and winning female sports, including the girls' state championship in high jump last year 🚨Young female students stay quiet and are scared to bring this up, as adults have made them feel as if THEY are the problem for not being OK with males in their safe spaces and their sports 🚨Many females are experiencing mental trauma from males in their private spaces and sports The ballot referendum to "Designate School Sports Participation & Facilities by Sex" protects the Sex-based Civil Rights of ALL kids: ✅The act designates all competitive school sports and safe spaces (bathrooms, locker rooms, showers) by Sex. ✅Nobody is banned. Ever. Everyone plays sports and accesses private spaces, simply designated by Sex. ✅This is inclusive: everyone has a Sex, Sex is not Gender (definitionally, legally, scientifically), and there is no right or wrong way to be male or female (look, feel, present, even identify however you want). Sex is big enough for everyone. ✅Nobody is banned. Ever. Everyone plays sports and accesses private spaces, simply designated by Sex.

Maine Girl Dads

17,055 次观看 • 1 个月前

Do you want to know what the women called TERF’s believe? Buckle up. Here it is: Women are adult human females. Men are adult human males. No man is a woman. Woman, man, boy, girl, female, male are all sex based terms. No human being has or can change sex. Femininity and masculinity are socially created and imposed. Being feminine is not a condition of being female. Being masculine is not required to be male. Men and boys can be feminine. Women and girls can be masculine. "Transwomen" are men. Lesbians are women who are sexually attracted to other women. Gay men are men sexually attracted to other men. Legal sex just means a man has changed his identity documents to claim to be a woman. Gender ideology is bullshit. No child is born in the wrong body. Puberty blockers and cross sex hormones are sterilisation of primarily homosexual or autistic youth. "Trans" isn’t a coherent demographic of people. "Trans" is a man made concept. Safeguarding of women’s boundaries is important. Safeguarding children is paramount. Female spaces are necessary. No males in female sport. When we say female, we’re saying it to reference both women and girls. Otherwise, we’ll be specific about women or girls. Nonbinary is the equivalent of emo or goth, it’s a phase and doesn’t deserve or warrant legislative validation. Females are oppressed on the basis of being female, aka sex. Don’t believe us? Look to women in Afghanistan. While males are also entitled to male only spaces, they’re very different in society and law to female spaces. Women’s rights matter. From the full episode of TERF TV episode 1.4

Do you want to know what the women called TERF’s believe? Buckle up. Here it is: Women are adult human females. Men are adult human males. No man is a woman. Woman, man, boy, girl, female, male are all sex based terms. No human being has or can change sex. Femininity and masculinity are socially created and imposed. Being feminine is not a condition of being female. Being masculine is not required to be male. Men and boys can be feminine. Women and girls can be masculine. "Transwomen" are men. Lesbians are women who are sexually attracted to other women. Gay men are men sexually attracted to other men. Legal sex just means a man has changed his identity documents to claim to be a woman. Gender ideology is bullshit. No child is born in the wrong body. Puberty blockers and cross sex hormones are sterilisation of primarily homosexual or autistic youth. "Trans" isn’t a coherent demographic of people. "Trans" is a man made concept. Safeguarding of women’s boundaries is important. Safeguarding children is paramount. Female spaces are necessary. No males in female sport. When we say female, we’re saying it to reference both women and girls. Otherwise, we’ll be specific about women or girls. Nonbinary is the equivalent of emo or goth, it’s a phase and doesn’t deserve or warrant legislative validation. Females are oppressed on the basis of being female, aka sex. Don’t believe us? Look to women in Afghanistan. While males are also entitled to male only spaces, they’re very different in society and law to female spaces. Women’s rights matter. From the full episode of TERF TV episode 1.4

Sall Grover

367,336 次观看 • 2 年前

Anna Cody, Australia’s sex discrimination commissioner, intervened in a federal court case against women only spaces, the accurate definition of woman & biological sex, instead in favor of men who claim to be women. All while school aged girls are not drinking water at school to avoid having to use bathrooms with boys in them, while women are being charged with vilification for accurately calling men men, while women are being injured on sports fields by men who claim to be women, while lesbians are denied their own events, while women have their lives turned upside down & have to raise almost $2million to fight for women only spaces in court, she has sided specifically with men who claim to be women. She has attended “trans rights” speaking events but never “women’s rights” events. I know she has heard the voices of women who rely on women only spaces because we submitted affidavits from these women in the Tickle v Giggle court case. Women who have been abused, women who are in recovery, women whose faith relies on sex segregation, women with trauma, women whose day to day needs require woman only spaces, lesbian women denied lesbian only events. She has ignored it all in favor of men who claim to be women. In the Giggle v Tickle appeal, it’s Giggle saying that the law can serve everyone. Have your trans only spaces, have gay only spaces, have male only spaces, have women + men who claim to be women spaces if you want, just also have female only spaces. The sex discrimination commissioner is actively against this, in favor of whatever men who claim to be women want. When you allow school girls to go without adequate single sex bathrooms, lesbians to be denied to right of single sex association, every woman who needs woman only spaces to go without, you are discriminating against women, and you’re doing it on the basis of sex. Yes, the sex discrimination commissioner is discriminating against women on the basis of sex. So for her to stand on stage and say that she not only listens to women but centers women who have experienced discrimination in her work is a demonstrable lie. I know this because I have the receipts. The sex discrimination commissioner should be forced to resign because she is not accurately doing her job. She is welcome to be a trans rights activist elsewhere but it certainly shouldn’t be in the office of the SEX discrimination commission.

Anna Cody, Australia’s sex discrimination commissioner, intervened in a federal court case against women only spaces, the accurate definition of woman & biological sex, instead in favor of men who claim to be women. All while school aged girls are not drinking water at school to avoid having to use bathrooms with boys in them, while women are being charged with vilification for accurately calling men men, while women are being injured on sports fields by men who claim to be women, while lesbians are denied their own events, while women have their lives turned upside down & have to raise almost $2million to fight for women only spaces in court, she has sided specifically with men who claim to be women. She has attended “trans rights” speaking events but never “women’s rights” events. I know she has heard the voices of women who rely on women only spaces because we submitted affidavits from these women in the Tickle v Giggle court case. Women who have been abused, women who are in recovery, women whose faith relies on sex segregation, women with trauma, women whose day to day needs require woman only spaces, lesbian women denied lesbian only events. She has ignored it all in favor of men who claim to be women. In the Giggle v Tickle appeal, it’s Giggle saying that the law can serve everyone. Have your trans only spaces, have gay only spaces, have male only spaces, have women + men who claim to be women spaces if you want, just also have female only spaces. The sex discrimination commissioner is actively against this, in favor of whatever men who claim to be women want. When you allow school girls to go without adequate single sex bathrooms, lesbians to be denied to right of single sex association, every woman who needs woman only spaces to go without, you are discriminating against women, and you’re doing it on the basis of sex. Yes, the sex discrimination commissioner is discriminating against women on the basis of sex. So for her to stand on stage and say that she not only listens to women but centers women who have experienced discrimination in her work is a demonstrable lie. I know this because I have the receipts. The sex discrimination commissioner should be forced to resign because she is not accurately doing her job. She is welcome to be a trans rights activist elsewhere but it certainly shouldn’t be in the office of the SEX discrimination commission.

Sall Grover

90,143 次观看 • 10 个月前

“The Supreme Court judgment sets out the law on this, not just as it is now but as it has always been. It is clear from that judgment that, where single-sex accommodation is provided, [NHS confederation guidance] puts the NHS England in breach of the law” Thank you to Lord Arbuthnot for raising the critical issue of single-sex spaces for NHS staff in the House of Lords yesterday.

“The Supreme Court judgment sets out the law on this, not just as it is now but as it has always been. It is clear from that judgment that, where single-sex accommodation is provided, [NHS confederation guidance] puts the NHS England in breach of the law” Thank you to Lord Arbuthnot for raising the critical issue of single-sex spaces for NHS staff in the House of Lords yesterday.

Sex Matters

21,755 次观看 • 1 年前

‘They want the dignity of being confirmed in their sex … their adopted sex if you like,’ said Nick Robinson in his BBC Radio 4 interview with Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson, the new chair of the EHRC, about updated guidance on single-sex spaces. This is not impartial language or framing. “Adopted sex” is not a recognised legal or scientific term. Nor is it accurate. Sex is not something that can be adopted or changed. “Adopted sex” is activist framing, and if journalists choose to use such terminology it should be clearly signposted as such rather than presented as a statement of fact.

‘They want the dignity of being confirmed in their sex … their adopted sex if you like,’ said Nick Robinson in his BBC Radio 4 interview with Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson, the new chair of the EHRC, about updated guidance on single-sex spaces. This is not impartial language or framing. “Adopted sex” is not a recognised legal or scientific term. Nor is it accurate. Sex is not something that can be adopted or changed. “Adopted sex” is activist framing, and if journalists choose to use such terminology it should be clearly signposted as such rather than presented as a statement of fact.

Janet Murray

64,167 次观看 • 2 个月前

In 2025, "An entire team - 50 girls - lost the state championship because the boy won the (girls’) pole vault event, which gives you 10 points, and that girls’ team lost by 1 point… that person probably affected at least 100 girls that season.” - Coach Allen Cornwall The Maine Women’s Lobby - and many others - continue to say that it’s “not happening here” and it’s a “manufactured crisis”. There’s a word for that: GASLIGHTING. If a female wants a female only space or sports opportunity she is owed that by law. Period. Same with Males. This isn't a new concept nor a new right - this is a reclamation of Sex-Based Civil Rights that have existed for 54 years. Anything else is sex-based discrimination of young female schoolchildren, and it's sexist, regressive, and illegal. Sex-based discrimination cannot continue in our schools, and we believe the solution is inclusive and progressive. Testimony in Augusta on 4/14/26 made it clear that: 🚨 Males are in female private spaces (bathrooms and locker rooms), every day. This is commonplace 🚨 Males have been reported to be masturbating in female safe spaces at school (as testified by school children and parents) 🚨 Males have won female state championships even last year, and continue to play in female sports across the state 🚨 Young female students stay quiet and are scared to bring this up, as adults have made them feel as if THEY are the problem for not being OK with males in their safe spaces and their sports The ballot referendum to "Designate School Sports Participation & Facilities by Sex" protects the Sex-based Civil Rights of ALL kids: ✅ The act designates all competitive school sports and safe spaces (bathrooms, locker rooms, showers) by Sex. ✅ Sex is not Gender (definitionally, legally, scientifically) ✅ The act respects Gender Identity while recognizing biological fact, designating all competitive sports and private spaces in public schools by innate, immutable Sex. Every human has a Sex (Sex includes ALL identities)! ✅ We have the progressive belief that there is no right or wrong way to be a male or female! Dress, feel, present, identify how you want. Sex is big enough for everyone. ✅ Nobody is banned. Ever. Everyone plays sports and accesses private spaces, simply designated by Sex.

In 2025, "An entire team - 50 girls - lost the state championship because the boy won the (girls’) pole vault event, which gives you 10 points, and that girls’ team lost by 1 point… that person probably affected at least 100 girls that season.” - Coach Allen Cornwall The Maine Women’s Lobby - and many others - continue to say that it’s “not happening here” and it’s a “manufactured crisis”. There’s a word for that: GASLIGHTING. If a female wants a female only space or sports opportunity she is owed that by law. Period. Same with Males. This isn't a new concept nor a new right - this is a reclamation of Sex-Based Civil Rights that have existed for 54 years. Anything else is sex-based discrimination of young female schoolchildren, and it's sexist, regressive, and illegal. Sex-based discrimination cannot continue in our schools, and we believe the solution is inclusive and progressive. Testimony in Augusta on 4/14/26 made it clear that: 🚨 Males are in female private spaces (bathrooms and locker rooms), every day. This is commonplace 🚨 Males have been reported to be masturbating in female safe spaces at school (as testified by school children and parents) 🚨 Males have won female state championships even last year, and continue to play in female sports across the state 🚨 Young female students stay quiet and are scared to bring this up, as adults have made them feel as if THEY are the problem for not being OK with males in their safe spaces and their sports The ballot referendum to "Designate School Sports Participation & Facilities by Sex" protects the Sex-based Civil Rights of ALL kids: ✅ The act designates all competitive school sports and safe spaces (bathrooms, locker rooms, showers) by Sex. ✅ Sex is not Gender (definitionally, legally, scientifically) ✅ The act respects Gender Identity while recognizing biological fact, designating all competitive sports and private spaces in public schools by innate, immutable Sex. Every human has a Sex (Sex includes ALL identities)! ✅ We have the progressive belief that there is no right or wrong way to be a male or female! Dress, feel, present, identify how you want. Sex is big enough for everyone. ✅ Nobody is banned. Ever. Everyone plays sports and accesses private spaces, simply designated by Sex.

Maine Girl Dads

34,930 次观看 • 2 个月前

Trans women will be banned from female-only hospital wards under changes being made to the NHS Constitution. Women will also be given the right to request female doctors for intimate care. The NHS constitution, which is being updated by the Secretary of State for Health, will formally state: 'We are defining sex as biological sex.' Louisa James reports.

Trans women will be banned from female-only hospital wards under changes being made to the NHS Constitution. Women will also be given the right to request female doctors for intimate care. The NHS constitution, which is being updated by the Secretary of State for Health, will formally state: 'We are defining sex as biological sex.' Louisa James reports.

Good Morning Britain

334,474 次观看 • 2 年前

This is the state of society today. A man thinks he has the right to access female-only spaces because his feelings were hurt by people not believing he is a woman. Is that not the object of the game? It is not a woman's burden that you have chosen to medicalise yourself, and it is not up to them to act as your human shield. Just stop. I had to edit out the ending of this video because a minor was on camera, and I do not allow that. I said: "I appreciate that, but women shouldn't have to feel uncomfortable for you to feel comfortable. If they continue to challenge you, advise them that you are male or speak to a member of staff." To see the full protest video, I have posted it on my Substack below. If you are interested in supporting me attending these protest please go to the link in the bio or subscribe to the substack.

This is the state of society today. A man thinks he has the right to access female-only spaces because his feelings were hurt by people not believing he is a woman. Is that not the object of the game? It is not a woman's burden that you have chosen to medicalise yourself, and it is not up to them to act as your human shield. Just stop. I had to edit out the ending of this video because a minor was on camera, and I do not allow that. I said: "I appreciate that, but women shouldn't have to feel uncomfortable for you to feel comfortable. If they continue to challenge you, advise them that you are male or speak to a member of staff." To see the full protest video, I have posted it on my Substack below. If you are interested in supporting me attending these protest please go to the link in the bio or subscribe to the substack.

MichaelDPUK 💜🦎

12,815 次观看 • 1 个月前

“Not only are these women taking the punches, the rest of us are getting hit with it as well because once you make it legal sex is what everyone has to acknowledge it means women’s sport is no longer a thing, female spaces are gone & you don’t have the right to say that’s a man.”

Sensitive content

“Not only are these women taking the punches, the rest of us are getting hit with it as well because once you make it legal sex is what everyone has to acknowledge it means women’s sport is no longer a thing, female spaces are gone & you don’t have the right to say that’s a man.”

Sall Grover

291,882 次观看 • 2 年前

A man who claims to be a woman attempted to explain what women think about men who claim to be women. He completely failed. *ahem* • “They reject the distinction between gender identity and sex and that these two things can be in conflict” No. We know that gender identity & sex are very different. In fact that is basically our entire argument. Gender identity = a manmade concept. Sex = Naturally observable over the entire natural world, including humans. Binary & immutable. • “They are concerned with the safety & integrity of spaces that are typically reserved for women” No. Not “typically”. *Are*. ARE reserved for women. “Typically” is an admission that you know the group trying to gain access to the women’s spaces aren’t women. Which is our entire point to begin with, sir. They’re men. • “Trans people are concerned with safety & privacy in private spaces.” Great. Then leave women’s spaces alone, respecting the women who want them, and focus on creating your own spaces catering to your “man claiming to be woman” needs, whatever they may be. We won’t stop you. • “Trans people are seeking to go about their business & mind their business” Cool story, but the problem is the process of that appears to be changing the definition of “woman” in law & gaining access to women’s spaces, services & sport. So we fight back because we are not willing to give up our rights & needs so men in dresses can “go about their business”. • “We have had inclusive policies… and there was not a spate of people pretending to be trans, going into spaces & abusing anyone.” Either a) you’re ignoring all of the cases of men invading women’s spaces & sexually assaulting women - we can name 10 examples just in prisons off the top of our head - because it doesn’t suit your argument; b) you’re completely aware & just lying; c) you argument is they weren’t “trans” which means they must have been making it up; d) even if there were no cases, it still doesn’t make men women! • “Discomfort alone is not grounds to exclude people.” No, it isn’t. Sex is. Men are excluded from women’s spaces on the basis of sex. We exclude all men, including men with a gender identity and men we are comfortable with. It’s frankly unforgivable to speak this untruthfully about this issue in 2026, and it’s utterly shameful that two men just nodded along to blatantly obvious untruths. This is the intellectual equivalent of junk food.

A man who claims to be a woman attempted to explain what women think about men who claim to be women. He completely failed. ahem • “They reject the distinction between gender identity and sex and that these two things can be in conflict” No. We know that gender identity & sex are very different. In fact that is basically our entire argument. Gender identity = a manmade concept. Sex = Naturally observable over the entire natural world, including humans. Binary & immutable. • “They are concerned with the safety & integrity of spaces that are typically reserved for women” No. Not “typically”. Are. ARE reserved for women. “Typically” is an admission that you know the group trying to gain access to the women’s spaces aren’t women. Which is our entire point to begin with, sir. They’re men. • “Trans people are concerned with safety & privacy in private spaces.” Great. Then leave women’s spaces alone, respecting the women who want them, and focus on creating your own spaces catering to your “man claiming to be woman” needs, whatever they may be. We won’t stop you. • “Trans people are seeking to go about their business & mind their business” Cool story, but the problem is the process of that appears to be changing the definition of “woman” in law & gaining access to women’s spaces, services & sport. So we fight back because we are not willing to give up our rights & needs so men in dresses can “go about their business”. • “We have had inclusive policies… and there was not a spate of people pretending to be trans, going into spaces & abusing anyone.” Either a) you’re ignoring all of the cases of men invading women’s spaces & sexually assaulting women - we can name 10 examples just in prisons off the top of our head - because it doesn’t suit your argument; b) you’re completely aware & just lying; c) you argument is they weren’t “trans” which means they must have been making it up; d) even if there were no cases, it still doesn’t make men women! • “Discomfort alone is not grounds to exclude people.” No, it isn’t. Sex is. Men are excluded from women’s spaces on the basis of sex. We exclude all men, including men with a gender identity and men we are comfortable with. It’s frankly unforgivable to speak this untruthfully about this issue in 2026, and it’s utterly shameful that two men just nodded along to blatantly obvious untruths. This is the intellectual equivalent of junk food.

Sall Grover

122,589 次观看 • 4 个月前

Moderator: What about the girls who feel uncomfortable & cheated? Women's Lobby of Maine: Oh they're the problem & they're misinformed; the science is clear there's no advantage. Moderator: Show us the evidence! Women's Lobby: GASLIGHT & MISDIRECT Shameful + embarrassing. Here are the facts: ‼️There are males in female sports and spaces in Maine. Listen to just the testimony from 4/14. ‼️ Our referendum designates private spaces in schools by Sex (all schools, all ages) like bathrooms and locker rooms. This is common sense, and appropriate for all ages. ‼️ The act also designates competitive sports in schools by Sex (for most towns, competitive school sports start in junior high, or some in high school... anything before that is a town sport and not included in the bill). This is inclusive, fair, and progressive. ✅ Everyone plays and has access to private spaces. ✅ Everyone has a sex, and sex is not gender. ✅ There is no right or wrong way to be male or female (look, feel, present, even identify how you want). A female that wants a female-only space or sports opportunity in school is owed that by Federal Civil Rights Laws that have existed for 54 years. Same with males. Anything else is sexist, regressive, discriminatory, and illegal.

Moderator: What about the girls who feel uncomfortable & cheated? Women's Lobby of Maine: Oh they're the problem & they're misinformed; the science is clear there's no advantage. Moderator: Show us the evidence! Women's Lobby: GASLIGHT & MISDIRECT Shameful + embarrassing. Here are the facts: ‼️There are males in female sports and spaces in Maine. Listen to just the testimony from 4/14. ‼️ Our referendum designates private spaces in schools by Sex (all schools, all ages) like bathrooms and locker rooms. This is common sense, and appropriate for all ages. ‼️ The act also designates competitive sports in schools by Sex (for most towns, competitive school sports start in junior high, or some in high school... anything before that is a town sport and not included in the bill). This is inclusive, fair, and progressive. ✅ Everyone plays and has access to private spaces. ✅ Everyone has a sex, and sex is not gender. ✅ There is no right or wrong way to be male or female (look, feel, present, even identify how you want). A female that wants a female-only space or sports opportunity in school is owed that by Federal Civil Rights Laws that have existed for 54 years. Same with males. Anything else is sexist, regressive, discriminatory, and illegal.

Maine Girl Dads

155,404 次观看 • 1 个月前

This gentleman says he will continue to use women’s single-sex spaces in public settings. Despite knowing it is lawful and legitimate for service providers to exclude him. Why? Because he believes he is entitled to be there. And because he thinks minimum-wage staff will eventually get tired of challenging men like him and simply look the other way. Women know this pattern. Some men don’t accept “no”. They keep pushing boundaries, believing that if they persist for long enough, women will eventually give in. They know how difficult it can be for women to be taken seriously. They know how uncomfortable it is to keep objecting. And they rely on eventually wearing women down. Women warned this would happen. If men were told that calling themselves women gave them access to female spaces, some would push those boundaries as far as they could. This video - and I’ve seen many like it - shows some are still trying to wear women down. Even after the law clarified that service providers can lawfully exclude men from women’s single-sex spaces, they are openly saying they’ll ignore those boundaries. But respecting women’s boundaries shouldn’t be optional.

This gentleman says he will continue to use women’s single-sex spaces in public settings. Despite knowing it is lawful and legitimate for service providers to exclude him. Why? Because he believes he is entitled to be there. And because he thinks minimum-wage staff will eventually get tired of challenging men like him and simply look the other way. Women know this pattern. Some men don’t accept “no”. They keep pushing boundaries, believing that if they persist for long enough, women will eventually give in. They know how difficult it can be for women to be taken seriously. They know how uncomfortable it is to keep objecting. And they rely on eventually wearing women down. Women warned this would happen. If men were told that calling themselves women gave them access to female spaces, some would push those boundaries as far as they could. This video - and I’ve seen many like it - shows some are still trying to wear women down. Even after the law clarified that service providers can lawfully exclude men from women’s single-sex spaces, they are openly saying they’ll ignore those boundaries. But respecting women’s boundaries shouldn’t be optional.

Janet Murray

271,863 次观看 • 24 天前

🤨 Yvette Cooper is already muddying the waters on the new EHRC statutory code of practice that requires single-sex spaces to be based on biological sex. The code has just come into force. It implements the 2025 Supreme Court ruling that “sex” in the Equality Act means biological sex. Single-sex spaces, wards, toilets and changing rooms are for the sex recorded at birth. Full stop. Stig Abell put the simplest possible question to the Health Secretary on Times Radio: “Let’s be absolutely clear about this, single sex ward, someone who identifies as a woman but was born a man would have to go to a male side of the ward rather than a female side of the ward?” Her reply: “The guidance will be set out shortly to make sure there maybe people who will need additional provision or additional arrangements made. It’s very clear where there is single sex arrangements in place it needs to be done on the basis of biological sex.” “Additional provision.” “Additional arrangements.” This is the classic fudge. The law is clear. The code is clear. Biological sex is the criterion. Yet the moment the question becomes concrete, a male patient on a female ward, the language softens into process, guidance, special cases and future arrangements. We have seen this movie before. Clarity on paper, then endless carve-outs, risk assessments, “individual circumstances” and institutional reluctance to enforce the actual rule. Women end up sharing intimate spaces with males while officials congratulate themselves on “balancing rights”. It should be simple. If a service is single-sex, it is for that sex. People who do not belong to that sex use the opposite-sex facilities. No endless reinvention of the wheel. Instead we get the same tired pattern: pander to a tiny minority, amplify the loudest and angriest voices within it, and treat women’s privacy, safety and dignity as negotiable. The overwhelming majority of the public, and the plain wording of the law, are treated as the awkward obstacle rather than the starting point. Cooper says the law is clear. Then she immediately starts talking as if it isn’t. That is how these things get unpicked in practice. Women have every right to be sceptical.

🤨 Yvette Cooper is already muddying the waters on the new EHRC statutory code of practice that requires single-sex spaces to be based on biological sex. The code has just come into force. It implements the 2025 Supreme Court ruling that “sex” in the Equality Act means biological sex. Single-sex spaces, wards, toilets and changing rooms are for the sex recorded at birth. Full stop. Stig Abell put the simplest possible question to the Health Secretary on Times Radio: “Let’s be absolutely clear about this, single sex ward, someone who identifies as a woman but was born a man would have to go to a male side of the ward rather than a female side of the ward?” Her reply: “The guidance will be set out shortly to make sure there maybe people who will need additional provision or additional arrangements made. It’s very clear where there is single sex arrangements in place it needs to be done on the basis of biological sex.” “Additional provision.” “Additional arrangements.” This is the classic fudge. The law is clear. The code is clear. Biological sex is the criterion. Yet the moment the question becomes concrete, a male patient on a female ward, the language softens into process, guidance, special cases and future arrangements. We have seen this movie before. Clarity on paper, then endless carve-outs, risk assessments, “individual circumstances” and institutional reluctance to enforce the actual rule. Women end up sharing intimate spaces with males while officials congratulate themselves on “balancing rights”. It should be simple. If a service is single-sex, it is for that sex. People who do not belong to that sex use the opposite-sex facilities. No endless reinvention of the wheel. Instead we get the same tired pattern: pander to a tiny minority, amplify the loudest and angriest voices within it, and treat women’s privacy, safety and dignity as negotiable. The overwhelming majority of the public, and the plain wording of the law, are treated as the awkward obstacle rather than the starting point. Cooper says the law is clear. Then she immediately starts talking as if it isn’t. That is how these things get unpicked in practice. Women have every right to be sceptical.

J Stewart

18,844 次观看 • 7 天前

"Digital verification could be used to access single-sex services, so it needs to be correct. Failure to act today will bring in self-id by the back door." Shadow Minister of State for Department for Science, Innovation and Technology Dr Ben Spencer speaks to amendment N21 in the UK House of Commons #DataBill debate.

"Digital verification could be used to access single-sex services, so it needs to be correct. Failure to act today will bring in self-id by the back door." Shadow Minister of State for Department for Science, Innovation and Technology Dr Ben Spencer speaks to amendment N21 in the UK House of Commons #DataBill debate.

Sex Matters

182,342 次观看 • 1 年前

🎙“Is it your position that trans-women are women?..” John Swinney’s inability to answer this question clearly & concisely is damning for the First Minister of Scotland A constant waffle referencing ‘Rule of Law’ or ‘Legislation’ does not answe the direct question asked This uncertainty leads to breaches in the law - as we see with NHS Fife - of single-sex spaces not being protected as there is no clarity from Government on ‘the law’

🎙“Is it your position that trans-women are women?..” John Swinney’s inability to answer this question clearly & concisely is damning for the First Minister of Scotland A constant waffle referencing ‘Rule of Law’ or ‘Legislation’ does not answe the direct question asked This uncertainty leads to breaches in the law - as we see with NHS Fife - of single-sex spaces not being protected as there is no clarity from Government on ‘the law’

Rustler

95,746 次观看 • 1 年前

No one seemed to want to answer the important question regarding the M&S in Colchester. Are there any spaces just for men or just for women or are they all "gender neutral"/Mixed Sex? So I rang them. The woman in the recent video said they were "breaking the law". They aren't. Marks and Spencer told me that they have 6 changing spaces LOCATED within the Men's dept. 6 spaces LOCATED within the women's department. All 12 are mixed sex and available to everyone. They are not marked as single sex spaces because they aren't single sex. Audio recording below. I did not give Yvonne the customer services representative a hard time because I was not making a complaint, I was getting clarification and info about the store's changing provision and she is not responsible for producing Marks and Spencer policy. The company policy dictating this mixed sex changing arrangement throughout the store is legal. This is the entire problem. Women have been misled to think single-sex changing spaces have now been returned to them. That would be a lie. Marks and Spencer and others can continue to provide spaces unacceptable and unsafe to women. They can do it within the remit of the Equality Act. For women to be safe there needs to be a change to the law which insists on women having single sex space to change or go to the toilet. That has not been achieved by any court ruling or guidance around the Equality Act and GC groups who mostly applauded the recently released 'Code of Practice' know this because they are stuffed full of lawyers. The man in the video may have terrible customer service skills, he may even be prejudiced against women with GC views, but the policy is legal. Grassroots activism on behalf of women might eventually force a change from providers. It is probably all that could, because the Equality Act remains rigidly against us. Yet the grassroots have previously been frowned upon and sneered at for our shouty ways while the GC Suits "handle everything professionally". The woman in the store accused a man of "breaking the law" which he wasn't. Now we have one of the Sex Matters lawyers exposing that employee's details online. What a mess.

No one seemed to want to answer the important question regarding the M&S in Colchester. Are there any spaces just for men or just for women or are they all "gender neutral"/Mixed Sex? So I rang them. The woman in the recent video said they were "breaking the law". They aren't. Marks and Spencer told me that they have 6 changing spaces LOCATED within the Men's dept. 6 spaces LOCATED within the women's department. All 12 are mixed sex and available to everyone. They are not marked as single sex spaces because they aren't single sex. Audio recording below. I did not give Yvonne the customer services representative a hard time because I was not making a complaint, I was getting clarification and info about the store's changing provision and she is not responsible for producing Marks and Spencer policy. The company policy dictating this mixed sex changing arrangement throughout the store is legal. This is the entire problem. Women have been misled to think single-sex changing spaces have now been returned to them. That would be a lie. Marks and Spencer and others can continue to provide spaces unacceptable and unsafe to women. They can do it within the remit of the Equality Act. For women to be safe there needs to be a change to the law which insists on women having single sex space to change or go to the toilet. That has not been achieved by any court ruling or guidance around the Equality Act and GC groups who mostly applauded the recently released 'Code of Practice' know this because they are stuffed full of lawyers. The man in the video may have terrible customer service skills, he may even be prejudiced against women with GC views, but the policy is legal. Grassroots activism on behalf of women might eventually force a change from providers. It is probably all that could, because the Equality Act remains rigidly against us. Yet the grassroots have previously been frowned upon and sneered at for our shouty ways while the GC Suits "handle everything professionally". The woman in the store accused a man of "breaking the law" which he wasn't. Now we have one of the Sex Matters lawyers exposing that employee's details online. What a mess.

Jean Hatchet

93,624 次观看 • 2 个月前

A X Space hosted by a woman where the filthiest of men were making cheap remarks about Farrhana. @vatshpriya2, male validation shouldn't make you so blind that you forget basic decency. Or is it what you've learned only? And for my FD mates, @Junaid___Shah & anyone else who chose to go up as a speaker there, at least I expect my people to either call out such creepsters or not participate in such spaces just to entertain low-life creatures...As a Rebellion, be mindful of the spaces you choose to be part of. Not every platform or conversation deserves your presence.

A X Space hosted by a woman where the filthiest of men were making cheap remarks about Farrhana. @vatshpriya2, male validation shouldn't make you so blind that you forget basic decency. Or is it what you've learned only? And for my FD mates, @Junaid___Shah & anyone else who chose to go up as a speaker there, at least I expect my people to either call out such creepsters or not participate in such spaces just to entertain low-life creatures...As a Rebellion, be mindful of the spaces you choose to be part of. Not every platform or conversation deserves your presence.

𝐊𝐚𝐚𝐒𝐡𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝

37,342 次观看 • 1 个月前

This is just sad! Trans people should be so embarrassed and ashamed of this whole thing. Why are you supporting the takeover of women’s spaces? It is such MALE behavior.. bullying women into submission. The trans women I know are so disgusted by this. Why not make your own trans women only space or make your own app or just deal with the fact that some women do not want you in their space BUT NO you have to act all entitled like a big man baby🤮 FU and that disgusting Trans CULT you all belong to. Repulsive. Sall Grover

This is just sad! Trans people should be so embarrassed and ashamed of this whole thing. Why are you supporting the takeover of women’s spaces? It is such MALE behavior.. bullying women into submission. The trans women I know are so disgusted by this. Why not make your own trans women only space or make your own app or just deal with the fact that some women do not want you in their space BUT NO you have to act all entitled like a big man baby🤮 FU and that disgusting Trans CULT you all belong to. Repulsive. Sall Grover

Buck Angel Transsexual

16,677 次观看 • 2 个月前

New WEF Report Reveals the Global Elites’ Shocking Plan to Enforce Vaccination Have you taken all of your shots? The globalists are proposing that digital IDs could be used to track the unvaccinated. Where this leads is major institutions, including JPMorgan, are predicting that the metaverse represents a multi-trillion-dollar opportunity. It is projected that by 2026, nearly 30% of online users will have adopted the metaverse for activities such as work, shopping, education, and entertainment. Here’s the kicker: the WEF report says digital ID will be “a cornerstone in metaverse identity.” So, imagine needing an ID not just to drive or travel but to log in and interact online. That means that if you haven’t been a good boy or good and complied with taking all of your shots, you could find your online access restricted by the unelected technocrats controlling the digital world. That is just the tip of the iceberg. It could get so much worse than that. Watch and listen to for more details.

New WEF Report Reveals the Global Elites’ Shocking Plan to Enforce Vaccination Have you taken all of your shots? The globalists are proposing that digital IDs could be used to track the unvaccinated. Where this leads is major institutions, including JPMorgan, are predicting that the metaverse represents a multi-trillion-dollar opportunity. It is projected that by 2026, nearly 30% of online users will have adopted the metaverse for activities such as work, shopping, education, and entertainment. Here’s the kicker: the WEF report says digital ID will be “a cornerstone in metaverse identity.” So, imagine needing an ID not just to drive or travel but to log in and interact online. That means that if you haven’t been a good boy or good and complied with taking all of your shots, you could find your online access restricted by the unelected technocrats controlling the digital world. That is just the tip of the iceberg. It could get so much worse than that. Watch and listen to for more details.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

424,069 次观看 • 2 年前