iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Thomas Wilson

Trans+ Solidarity Alliance @transsolidarity.bsky.social · 15/06/2026

🆕 Alongside colleagues, we have written to the Prime Minister setting out the damage he is doing to our community. We have made clear that this is a political choice. The UK must pick another path, and the responsibility here lies with government. Read more: transactual.org.uk/blog/2026/06...

Dear Prime Minister,
We have all written to this government numerous times in the past year to warn you about the devastating impact of your approach to LGBTQ+ policy on the ability of trans people to participate in public life with dignity. This Government failed to act at any point to secure and defend trans people's fundamental rights and protections, and the current situation has become completely untenable for a rights-respecting nation.
The Supreme Court's job is to interpret statute, it is for our political representatives to set out a coherent vision for what the law should be and to make the law better. Even before the For Women Scotland judgment, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has acted in a way that has shredded our community's trust in regulators and institutions. This is not good enough.
The Code of Practice now before Parliament is set to crystallise an interpretation of the law that is fundamentally in conflict with the UK's human rights obligations. Many MPs have already spoken out about the unjust and unworkable situation the code would create, and more than a hundred have already used the limited available scrutiny process to oppose it.
We urge you to listen to these concerns. The Code does not provide clarity; it exacerbates confusion, conflict, and risk. We have consistently argued that a Code of Practice must pass three tests to be workable: it must protect trans people's ability to participate fully in society, support organisations that wish to remain inclusive, and comply with the UK's domestic and international human rights obligations. This Code fails on all counts.
Prime Minister, the everyday harms this causes will be wide-ranging. This will be viewed as Labour's legacy on LGBTQ+ rights for a generation.

You still have the opportunity to intervene - scrap this harmful guidance and change the law to fix the mess we find ourselves in.

The government's own Equality Impact assessment outlines these consequences starkly, warning of discrimination, physical danger, and limiting trans people's access to vital services. Beyond just our trans communities, the assessment warns of the dangers of appearance-based gender policing on the safety of the public at large.
This Code of Practice could absolutely have been better within the current legal framework, and its current raft is dangerous and unacceptable. This is, however, also a symptom of the broader legislative probler acing our community and requiring action from our governmen
Last year's Supreme Court ruling turned Parliament's intentions for UK equality law on its head. It interpreted the Equality Act in a way that is clearly in direct opposition to decades of deliberate policymaking and well-documented intent. It has turned decades-old settled policy on how trans people should be treated into a mess of contradictory, harmful and incoherent rules.
The current Deputy Prime Minister, David Lammy MP, said this in response to a proposed amendment to prevent trans people accessing services in line with our gender identities when debating the Gender Recognition Act before it was passed more than twenty years ago:
“the Government entirely reject the implication of the new clause that transsexuals might set out to cause offence to others. That is not the Government's experience, and we therefore reject the new clause. The Government also believe that separate facilities for minority groups are objectionable, and we urge the House to reject the proposal."
Yet now your Government is set to approve a Code that not only condones that approach but encourages it as the norm across Britain. The Supreme Court said that their ruling would not be disadvantageous to or remove protection from trans people with or without a GRC", but the government's own impact assessment now makes clear that widespread harm is happening.

823997 239

Thomas Wilson @thomaswilsonuk.bsky.social · 01/06/2026

If it's any consolation to Pat, 'what benefits are you entitled to' is not a question DWPs system asks currently, as any benefits advisor or charity working on increasing benefit uptake will tell you!

010 1

Reposted by Thomas Wilson

shaunt @shaunvids.bsky.social · 04/01/2026

lovely little logic loop here. the left have accurately described reality, but i still think they're wrong, so what if it was somehow in fact the left's describing of reality that perverted history to make them right. quantum politics. no fair, you changed the outcome by measuring it!

252516413 2.5K

Thomas Wilson @thomaswilsonuk.bsky.social · 30/10/2025

I am so glad that Chaminda is repeatedly saying this because listening to political podcasts and reading the British press can make you think you are going insane sometimes. When you cut spending, the need that spending was previously servicing does not, surprisingly, evaporate into thin air!

020 2

Reposted by Thomas Wilson

Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan @london.gov.uk · 17/09/2025

What’s happening in Gaza is a genocide.

2960304 960

Reposted by Thomas Wilson

Debbie Weekes-Bernard @debbieweekesb.bsky.social · 16/09/2025

The Far-right aim to stoke fear & divide our diverse communities by spreading hate but they will fail. By standing together & celebrating diversity we send a clear message of unity. Leaders must recognise this & use their words, positions & platforms to pull communities together not apart

011 1

Thomas Wilson @thomaswilsonuk.bsky.social · 23/07/2025

Feels like with the UK's response to the genocide in Gaza we are moving into stage 3 of the 4 stage strategy.

youtube.com

Yes, Prime Minister - Foreign Office Crisis Management - the four stages

YouTube video by John Doe

040 4

Thomas Wilson @thomaswilsonuk.bsky.social · 02/06/2025

These things do annoy me because just putting responses next to each other like this tells you exactly nothing. The key question is 'how many people said they wanted defence spending to go up, but didn't want taxes or cuts to pay for it'. Suspect it's quite a bit lower than this implies.

020 2

Thomas Wilson @thomaswilsonuk.bsky.social · 22/04/2025

I can't say I've had a lot of time for Starmer but good lord, even I expected better than this. A real nadir, retreating on his previously stated views the moment it became even the slightest bit contentious to hold them. Spineless, pointless, heartless cruelty.

0111 11

Reposted by Thomas Wilson

Craig Berry @craigpberry.bsky.social · 11/03/2025

Looking ahead to the disability benefits green paper, this essay for @citizensadvice.bsky.social makes the case for a system focused on improving health outcomes. Co-authors @maddyirose.bsky.social, @victoria-anns.bsky.social & Simon Collerton We challenge the 5 big falsehoods underpinning cuts…🧵

9322137 322

Thomas Wilson @thomaswilsonuk.bsky.social · 25/11/2024

Maybe I'm missing something obvious in the assisted dying debate, but I'm surprised so much of the discussion is focusing on hospice/pallative care. Surely the dire state of social care is the much greater concern? Many more cases of MCA not being followed or coercion happening surely?

050 5