Nicky W
banner
nickyw.bsky.social
Nicky W
@nickyw.bsky.social
Jam on top of cream, always
Exactly the same thing happened to me. Doctor very keen to get me on SSRIs. My sister suggested it might be menopause-related, or at least aggravated by that. Had to insist on HRT, against doctor’s recommendation. Anxiety massively reduced within a few days/weeks
November 13, 2025 at 7:06 AM
Not upset. Pointing out the level of incompetence of the GLP 🤷‍♀️
October 16, 2025 at 4:57 PM
“its” website 🙄 Maybe learn to write grammatically before you try anything trickier?
October 16, 2025 at 2:44 PM
I still don’t know anything about her. What’s the problem with her politics?
October 11, 2025 at 7:09 AM
I couldn't even do level 3. I think I'm not just a robot, I'm a shit robot
September 22, 2025 at 1:13 PM
SOOO looking forward to this. Your founder is going to get his arse handed to him
September 5, 2025 at 6:27 AM
I remember Derren Brown doing a TV show on exactly that derrenbrown.co.uk/shows/the-sy...
The System – Derren Brown
derrenbrown.co.uk
July 14, 2025 at 7:48 AM
6. Schedule 3 of the Equality Act allows single-sex services in certain contexts. That is still the law. Yet this letter frames any attempt to apply that law as discrimination. It’s not. It’s statute.

(The above 6 points were taken from another commentator, so I can’t claim 100% credit) 6/6
July 4, 2025 at 5:40 AM
5. The letter has a glaring hole. It refuses to acknowledge competing rights. Women’s groups, faith-based providers, victims of trauma, even the organisations delivering services, are nowhere to be found. 5/6
July 4, 2025 at 5:38 AM
4. They say the EHRC should have waited. For what? Clarity had just been handed down by the Supreme Court. Silence at that point would have been negligence. Regulators are there to clarify, not play dead.
July 4, 2025 at 5:37 AM
3. The EHRC is accused of causing “distress” and “harm” by issuing interim guidance. Serious charges, offered without a shred of evidence. No examples, no stakeholder testimony, no data. Just emotion in search of legal weight. 3/6
July 4, 2025 at 5:36 AM
2. The letter tries to draw a line: trans people with a Gender Recognition Certificate are affected, others are not. That’s not how it works. The Court didn’t create carve-outs. It defined a statutory term. That applies across the Act. 2/6
July 4, 2025 at 5:35 AM
1. The EHRC hasn’t “overreached” the Supreme Court ruling, nor is it making policy. It is responding to precedent. The judgment binds. The Commission must update its Code to reflect it. This is not ideological. It’s legal obligation. 1/6
July 4, 2025 at 5:34 AM
Excruciatingly poor letter. Particularly embarrassing given you're a KC and a legislator
July 3, 2025 at 7:07 AM
Here
June 6, 2025 at 12:07 PM
I've watched exactly what she said (it's at around 1 hr 21 in the video) and you're distorting her point. NC is talking about whether the ruling removes all benefits of obtaining a GRC from the specific perspective of access to SS spaces, not commenting on people's motivations for transitioning
June 6, 2025 at 10:12 AM
Yes, exactly
May 15, 2025 at 12:17 PM
She was fantastic. Cool, calm, rational. Not deliberately insulting anyone, just stating the facts in a discussion where they were very relevant
May 14, 2025 at 1:34 PM
Where's this from?
April 17, 2025 at 5:23 PM
How?
April 16, 2025 at 10:03 AM
Crikey
April 8, 2025 at 11:58 AM
My daughter’s en route there today to play in a gig tonight. Just told her to expect the city to be full - she said that must be why they’re staying in a hotel out of town. Although then asked me what a trade fair was 🤣
April 8, 2025 at 11:30 AM