To elaborate more, the realization that LGBT rights, marriage, transitioning, etc are more than just human rights, they're your rights and whenever homophobes succeed in stopping LGBT rights, your rights are stripped away by people who hate you.

Also, If you're bisexual, did/do you ever consider just tagging along as if you were straight because you could and would rather not deal with homophobes? (Assuming this question makes sense)

(I am trans-inclusive. I believe trans rights are human rights. I believe in self-identification. I will use whatever pronouns someone choose, and I try not to assume pronouns.)

In the UK recently there's been a bit of a debate between trans-phobic "gender critical" feminists who say that for sexual safety women need spaces that are women only, and that this means they need to exclude trans-people.

I think this is bullshit. I'd like some good quality arguments to use against this.

What are your ideas?

• HuffPo: At Least 22 Transgender People Were Killed In 2019. Here Are Their Stories.

• GLAAD is holding on online vigil

• Daily Beast: The Transgender Day of Remembrance: So Much Loss, So Much to Keep Fighting For

This is a bit complicated.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is the government department that pays social security benefits in the UK. There are a range of benefits. Some of these benefits are for people who cannot work because of disability. In order to qualify for some of these disability benefits you need to have a medical assessment with an "independent" doctor. This doctor is independent from the patient. They're employed by companies who are paid by the DWP, so there's supposed to be some kind of arm's length arrangement there.

A doctor was employed by one of these companies to do this assessment work for the DWP. He was a committed Christian. He held that he would not be able to refer to people by anything other than the gender they were assigned at birth.

The DWP is clear: you must respect a person's choice of pronouns.

The General Medical Council (the registrant body for doctors in England) is also clear: you must not impose your personal views upon your patients, especially if it's going to cause distress.

This doctor was spoken to about his beliefs. He declined to change his stance. He lost his job. He took his employer to employment tribunal for unfair dismissal based on discrimination against his protected characteristic: his religious views.

He lost his case.

Here's the legal document: https://christianconcern.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/CC-Resource-Judgment-Mackereth-DWP-Others-ET-191002.pdf

It's pretty long! 42 pages! The last pages give a summary.

You'll notice the URL. He was supported by the Christian Legal Centre. I won't say anything about them, but I'll link this page which gives some useful information: https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2018/04/on-the-naughty-step-the-questionable-ethics-of-the-christian-legal-centre/