Some WESC submissions that are worth a read....(my thread of bookmarks)

Judge Paula Grey is president of the Gender Recognition Panel

She doesn't make any recommendations, but she sets out how the process currently works

Which chimes with my analysis of the GRP User Panel and statistics https://t.co/XixEz7lNJv

She is also co-author if the Equal Treatment Bench Book and writes about how the judges are trained by Gendered Intelligence
There is the government's own response

https://t.co/bOn9XecAkz

On single sex spaces they say the law is clear that service providers are able to restrict access to spaces on the basis of biological sex where there is clear justification.
The response from @womensaid is significant.

Their members want trans survivors to get support they need but not by undermining their ability to serve women with female staff & female only services

They highlight lack of clarity

https://t.co/p7096sZcos
This was their position in 2015

They have moved on alot - they have been consulting with members since last year, and have had the courage to say what their members told them, not what Stonewall wanted to hear

https://t.co/CM3V0mL02u
You remember this is the report that Stonewall commissioned from @nfpSynergy where they interviewed managers of women's domestic violence services and heard *none of this*

Something wrong with this listening process I think!

https://t.co/FxVIy3qLNk
. @Transgendertrd 's evidence is excellent and full of evidence - focused on young people, particularly girls

@cwknews @charlesworth102 and the team

https://t.co/tXRoJuSSih
Then there is the evidence from @SexMattersOrg - which draws on the gender dissidents survey that I did in the summer, the GRP User Group minutes, the paper by @RebeccaMKBull and Alesandra Asteriti and the work of @mbmpolicy

https://t.co/ESi59oPB65
Barnardos have lost the plot.

Obviously they submitted this evidence before Keira Bell v Tavistock - maybe they will have a rethink?

They seem to have lost all sight of safeguarding principles https://t.co/xgnx7dLz0x
In particular they are concerned about the " risk of unnecessary disclosure within educational institutions" of a child's sex.

They want adults to keep secrets with children, and to lie to other children about sex.
The BMA's evidence is interesting in that none of relies on refers to medical expertise.

They say that GD is neither a medical or a MH issue based on survey responses to the govts consultation.

What is the point of doctors or medical research, eh?

https://t.co/iZtRxHpsSK
Sport England say more guidance is needed.

(but they also seem to have forgotten sex in their commitment to equality, at paragraph 11. Sex Matters!)

https://t.co/DM6ICeysuA
Ruth Pearce who gave oral evidence provides supplementary evidence which, extraordinarily, accuses the other presenters Kathleen Stock, Rosa Freedman and Alice Sullivan of "distortions" and "untruths"

https://t.co/7qUSga9Abl
This is what Pearce says about the Swedish Study.

These were *not* the findings of the Swedish study....
Here is my earlier thread on the Swedish Study https://t.co/cblSWsRfvQ

More from Law

Hot take: Courts might be able to review the legality of this impeachment, even under current political-question doctrine. Here’s why and how the issue might arise:


Suppose Senate convicts and disqualifies Trump from ever holding federal office. Trump files paperwork to run anyway, but state officials deny his application, citing his Senate impeachment judgment. Trump sues, arguing that the judgment is void.

Normally a legal dispute about a prospective candidates eligibility to run would certainly present a justiciable case or controversy. But are courts bound to accept the Senate impeachment judgment as valid? Maybe not. Here’s why:

According to Article I, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” This is a small amount of judicial power vested in Congress. When trying impeachments, the Senate sits as a court.

The Senate’s judicial power includes the power to decide relevant legal questions that arise, such as what procedures are sufficient to constitute a “trial” w/in the Constitution’s meaning. Such legal determinations are conclusive, as SCOTUS held in Nixon v. United States (1993).

You May Also Like

#ज्योतिष_विज्ञान #मंत्र_विज्ञान

ज्योतिषाचार्य अक्सर ग्रहों के दुष्प्रभाव के समाधान के लिए मंत्र जप, अनुष्ठान इत्यादि बताते हैं।

व्यक्ति के जन्म के समय ग्रहों की स्थिति ही उसकी कुंडली बन जाती है जैसे कि फ़ोटो खींच लिया हो और एडिट करना सम्भव नही है। इसे ही "लग्न" कुंडली कहते हैं।


लग्न के समय ग्रहों की इस स्थिति से ही जीवन भर आपको किस ग्रह की ऊर्जा कैसे प्रभावित करेगी का निर्धारिण होता है। साथ साथ दशाएँ, गोचर इत्यादि चलते हैं पर लग्न कुंडली का रोल सबसे महत्वपूर्ण है।


पृथ्वी से अरबों खरबों दूर ये ग्रह अपनी ऊर्जा से पृथ्वी/व्यक्ति को प्रभावित करते हैं जैसे हमारे सबसे निकट ग्रह चंद्रमा जोकि जल का कारक है पृथ्वी और शरीर के जलतत्व पर पूर्ण प्रभाव रखता है।
पूर्णिमा में उछाल मारता समुद्र का जल इसकी ऊर्जा के प्रभाव को दिखाता है।


अमावस्या में ऊर्जा का स्तर कम होने पर वही समुद्र शांत होकर पीछे चला जाता है। जिसे ज्वार-भाटा कहते हैं। इसी तरह अन्य ग्रहों की ऊर्जा के प्रभाव होते हैं जिन्हें यहां समझाना संभव नहीं।
चंद्रमा की ये ऊर्जा शरीर को (अगर खराब है) water retention, बैचेनी, नींद न आना आदि लक्षण दिखाती है


मंत्र क्या हैं-
मंत्र इन ऊर्जाओं के सटीक प्रयोग करने के पासवर्ड हैं। जिनके जप से संबंधित ग्रह की ऊर्जा को जातक की ऊर्जा से कनेक्ट करके उन ग्रहों के दुष्प्रभाव को कम किया और शुभ प्रभाव को बढ़ाया जाता है।