
London Trans Pride sees ‘record-breaking turnout of 100,000 people'
Speeches were delivered by people including Heartstopper actress Yasmin Finney, and trans rights campaigner Caroline Litman, whose transgender daughter Alice took her own life in 2022 after waiting almost three years for gender-affirming healthcare.
About 40,000 more people joined London Trans Pride compared with last year, when the event recorded a turnout of about 60,000 people.
Organisers and participants said this year's Trans Pride event, the sixth in a row, was of particular importance in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling in April, when judges said the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.
Bobby Harding, fundraising lead for London Trans+ Pride, said they were delighted at the large number of people, adding: 'It's so clear how much it's needed and how much it's wanted.
'It's a total honour to be part of history like this, because this is now the largest Trans Pride event in history, in the world.
'We are more determined than ever to show up and let people know that we deserve a place on this earth, and we are entitled to dignity and privacy, as is our human right.'
Harding expressed concern at the consequences of the Supreme Court ruling on trans people, saying the community was increasingly worried about being subjected to violence and discrimination in public spaces.
'People have got a lot of confidence, especially from the ruling, that they think that they have the right to tell someone what toilet they can and can't use, and what spaces they can and can't be in,' Harding said.
'It's really dangerous.
'Because it's like, if the police want to do it, then we can fight that.
'But the danger is that citizens, individuals, are taking it upon themselves to act out the law which, in any scenario, is wrong. It's vigilante.
'It's really scary.'
In the wake of the Supreme Court ruling the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issued interim guidance saying trans women 'should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in workplaces or public-facing services like shops and hospitals, with the same applying for trans men using men's toilets.
Cabinet Office minister Pat McFadden later said the 'logical consequence of the judgment' and the EHRC guidance was that people will have to use toilets, changing rooms and other facilities of their biological sex.
But he added that there would not be any 'toilet police'.
In April, the British Transport Police also became the first to announce they would change their strip-search policy to have trans people held in custody searched by an officer in line with their birth sex.
'It, once again, gives rise to the idea that there is a certain way for women to look, but at the end of the day, it's trans women that suffer the violence,' Harding said.
Alex Parmar-Yee, from Trans+ Solidarity Alliance, was also at Pride on Saturday.
'It's important to turn up en masse to make sure that it's very clear what the feelings are in terms of the rights which we're fighting for, but also in protest of some of the harmful proposals that are currently being considered,' she said.
Referring to the EHRC interim guidance, she added: 'This guidance has not provided any additional clarity, and actually is going to devastate the lives of trans people (who) will lose access to essential services and spaces.
'The main concern really here is that it feels like there's not been a consideration of trans members of the community, and that this guidance will pass behind closed doors, without the scrutiny, and without visibility, and without democracy.
She added: 'With the large number of people here today, and it being potentially the largest Trans Pride event in the world, I think it's a real key moment and focal point to go and really concentrate that feeling and that message.'
Ms Parmar-Yee also raised concerns about the rhetoric used in public and online discussions of trans rights, saying: 'The rhetoric is not helping. There is a lot of hate which is amplified.
'And I think you sort of see this happening around the world, and then you see it mirrored in the policy.
'You look at the bathroom ban that's being proposed, and you sort of realise that, although we may consider the UK quite different from a country like America, it's a bathroom ban that would make someone like (US President) Donald Trump proud.'
She said the next step for Trans+ Solidarity Alliance, a not-for-profit organisation supporting trans rights organisations and activists, was a call for transparency over the guidance in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling.
'There is a lack of transparency and I think we cannot be a nation that accepts a bathroom ban becoming law behind closed doors,' she said.
The EHRC is expected to put forward a more detailed code of practice for ministerial approval this summer.
Lewis G Burton, one of the founding members of London Trans+ Pride, said in a statement on Saturday: 'This year's London Trans+ Pride made history once again, with over 100,000 trans+ people and allies marching through central London – smashing our own world record of 60,000 and continuing our legacy as the biggest trans+ pride event in history.
'It was an emotional and powerful day.
'At a time when the Supreme Court is making sweeping decisions about trans people without consulting a single trans person or organisation, and when a small, well-funded lobby of anti-trans campaigners continues to dominate headlines and waste public resources, our community came together to show what real strength, solidarity and care looks like.
'The message was clear: we will not be erased.
'Our existence is natural, historic, and enduring.
'You can try to take away our rights, but you will never remove us from society.
'We are a part of humanity – and the public will not stand by while harm is done to our community.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Record
5 hours ago
- Daily Record
John Swinney says an SNP majority at Holyrood is needed for a second independence referendum
EXCLUSIVE: The First Minister has laid out his plan to secure another referendum after the first vote in 2014. John Swinney has declared the SNP will need to win a Holyrood majority next year to secure a second independence referendum. In a major shift, the First Minister has moved away from Nicola Sturgeon's position of claiming a majority of SNP and Green MSPs is enough for indyref2. He will table a motion to his party's conference arguing that the SNP winning outright is the mechanism for triggering another referendum. Sturgeon's SNP fell short of winning on their own in 2021, but she demanded indyref2 after her party and the pro-independence Greens won a majority of MSPs. Westminster knocked back her call and the Supreme Court later ruled that indyref2 is outwith Holyrood's powers. Swinney will now go back to the approach of former SNP First Minister Alex Salmond fourteen years ago. Salmond secured an outright majority for the SNP at the 2011 Holyrood election, a result that led to a joint agreement with the UK Government on a referendum. In his column for the Daily Record, Swinney wrote: 'For us to achieve that independence, the first step is to secure a legal referendum recognised by all. In 2011 we secured that reliable and dependable route when the SNP achieved a majority of seats at Holyrood. 'That is the only mechanism that has been proven to deliver such a vote - so that is what we need to deliver again. 'That is why I have submitted a motion to the SNP conference proposing that we work to deliver a majority of SNP MSPs in the Scottish Parliament to secure that referendum on Independence. 'The SNP has high ambitions for Scotland, and we must be bold to deliver on those ambitions. We must be ready to follow the path which we know can lead us to an independent state.' Swinney has been under pressure to produce a route map and strategy for delivering independence. Senior activists believe the Supreme Court decision created a vacuum that the Scottish Government has struggled to fill. A senior SNP source said the Government still believed an SNP/Green majority 'should' be enough for indyref2, but the experience of the past four years showed 'this is not going to happen'. The insider claimed the new position is a 'pragmatic' change based on an outcome the pro-UK parties could not ignore. Swinney's Record column also underlines his personal commitment to a referendum as the route to independence. Some independence activists believe an SNP majority at either Holyrood or Westminster is enough to deliver independence without another vote. The source said Swinney is firmly of the view there must be a referendum. Scottish Lib Dem leader Alex Cole-Hamilton said: "At last year's election the SNP took an all mighty beating because people were tired of them obsessing over one issue. It seems like John Swinney is a glutton for punishment. "Perhaps rather than focusing on what the SNP membership cares about, he should focus on what the country needs. The health service and the state of our schools has been neglected for too long because all the SNP care about is breaking up the UK." Scottish Tory Deputy Leader Rachael Hamilton said: ' John Swinney is like a broken record on this divisive issue. He should stop trying to placate the fanatics in his own party and accept the fact that most Scots firmly rejected the SNP 's plans to break up the UK and have no desire to revisit them. 'Instead, he should be trying to repair the immense damage his party's policies have inflicted on Scotland's economy and essential services such as our schools and NHS.'


The Independent
17 hours ago
- The Independent
This weekend, 100,000 people stood up to fight against the demonisation of trans people
One hundred thousand people, let me repeat, 100,000 people joined Saturday's march for London Trans+ Pride. It broke 2024's record of 60,000 and extended the capital's reign as the largest trans rights protest in the world. But pride doesn't even begin to encompass the full breadth of emotion I feel: not only in making it happen, but in the tenacity of our community. This was my second year helping to organise the march – and I do apologise to any of those still hearing the echoes of my voice ringing out 'Claim your space, we have the whole of Whitehall!' through a megaphone. As a proud trans woman, working alongside the collective of 30 or so volunteers who put on this event every year is a privilege. I am by no means its voice, and there are many others more qualified to be the community's voice, such as artist Lewis G Burton, BBC presenter Dr Ronx and Heartstopper actor Yasmin Finney, who all made speeches in Parliament Square. But I am writing this as someone who found comfort and community here and wanted to give back. For me and for so many other people, Saturday's march represents the ultimate safe space. It is a day of protest and of joy, liberation and celebration. There wasn't anything like it when I started my transition some 15 years ago. I was lucky enough to know exactly who I was from a young age – just as my mother had known who she was, and my father had known who he was. My parents have been my most supportive allies, and I was so moved to see signs from other families along the march. I spent several years working as an organiser of large-scale events before joining London Trans+ Pride. And while my career may have been my foundation for this move into advocacy, nothing can prepare you for the energy of those marching. I'm not surprised that so many more people joined compared to 2024. It has come at a time when we need proactive activism and allyship more than ever. Following the explosion against trans+ rights in the last five years, from puberty blocker bans to the Supreme Court's contested ruling in April – that the legal definition of a woman is someone born biologically female – friends, family and total strangers have stepped up and demonstrated their support – and highlighted that most Britons have never, and will never, view trans people as a threat. Our team was supported by almost 600 volunteer stewards. These people come from all over the UK and give up their time to guide the march. We could not safely deliver an event of such magnitude every year without them, and we owe them so much. They, and the additional 35,000 marchers we saw yesterday, have stepped up at a time when visible support is so needed. We tend to see significant mainstream coverage about small protests against immigration, but little about the thousands of people supporting trans rights. We heard the author Caroline Litman speaking about her late daughter, Alice, and initiatives highlighted from ally support groups such as the Trans Solidarity Alliance and Not in Our Name, and the enviable strength and determination of Trans Kids Deserve Better. When I had time to look up from my work as a pink blur of headsets and event management forms, I could soak in the phenomenon engulfing me. I spent all day being moved by the placards, banners, flags, and by the humour. The progressive spins on viral trends were a favourite: 'Nothing beats a Jet2 Holiday; except top surgery.' British irony combined with the joy of medical autonomy: something I see regularly in my new career in gender-affirming healthcare – an area persistently targeted in the tirade against our community. In my role, I get to float between marchers, volunteers and community workers throughout the march and see all the variety of support there. And while my bones may be a little worse for wear after what can only be described as the job of a lifetime – and thank goodness for comfy shoes – I couldn't imagine anything better. But this lovely day is counterbalanced by the continued demonisation of women like me, people like this and communities like ours. Our rights appear to be being used as pawns on the world's political stage to distract from larger issues. London Trans+ Pride was, is and will always remain a testament to joy. It confirms us as human by showing up for each other and everyone else through the intersectionality of systemic oppression. 2025 continues to be a horrific year for human rights. But, thanks to everyone who marched and made history, today, the future for trans people feels a little brighter.


Telegraph
17 hours ago
- Telegraph
Trans ruling means every lavatory user will need to be checked, museums claim
Staff will have to check the sex of visitors using lavatories after the Supreme Court's trans ruling, museum bosses have claimed. Museums Galleries Scotland, a national body that represents 455 non-national museums and receives £1.7 million a year in public funds, claims organisations will have to close while they reassess lavatory provisions. In April, the Supreme Court ruled that 'sex' in law is a person's biological sex, not gender identity. However, the Scottish Government has so far failed to produce guidance for public bodies on single-sex spaces such as lavatories. In its submission, the museums body says it has concerns the EHRC's initial guidance does not 'uphold the spirit of inclusion' and that the human rights body did not consult with trans people or trans organisations in its development. Policing of toilets is 'unfeasiable' The response goes on to say: 'When there is a need to 'prove' your sex, what proof will be acceptable given gender recognition certificates are not, nor are altered birth certificates – but how would you know? It is likely this role would fall on front-of-house staff, which we believe puts undue pressure on them to do this 'in a sensitive way which does not cause discrimination or harassment'. 'The practical application of policing toilets is unfeasible as, to avoid discrimination, it would require every single person using toilets to be checked adding substantial workload and staff costs to undertake this role.' Museums Galleries Scotland also raised concerns the interim guidance does not make reference to people with intersex conditions and states there are 1.1 million intersex people in the UK. Susan Smith, co-founder of For Women Scotland, said the Museums Galleries Scotland submission is 'a masterclass in legal idiocy and scientific illiteracy'. She said: 'The EHRC guidance aims to protect organisations and ensure they adhere to law: it is not supposed to set out the best way for public bodies to evade or trash their responsibility to protect the public from discrimination or harassment. ''Inclusion' covers all protected characteristics and rights have to be balanced. The time of prioritising the demands of trans-identifying men over the real needs of women and other groups is over.' Ms Smith said the assertion that staff would have to police toilets is 'wilfully misunderstanding' that having policies that align with the law 'does not mean they are required to vet every user'. MGS accused of 'scaremongering' Instead it means if women complain about a man being in the women's lavatories, it will be investigated. 'What is clear is that MGS have had unlawful policies for some time. All parties at the Supreme Court understood that self-identification has never been lawful, including the Scottish Government, which funds MGS,' Ms Smith said. 'Finally, it is outrageous that MGS are happy to spread debunked lies and attempt to scaremonger about serious medical conditions which they call 'intersex'. Last time we checked, museum staff were not endocrinologists. 'The status of people with Differences of Sex Development is not affected by the Supreme Court ruling and the wildly inflated numbers MSG cite should embarrass whoever submitted the report.' The museums body also states that members of the public have been 'policing toilets' at heritage sites by 'making assumptions based on stereotypes' and has created an 'environment of suspicion'. Dr Kath Murray, of the policy organisation Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, said: 'It is deeply concerning that a major national institution signed off and submitted such an ill-informed response to the EHRC consultation. 'The response fails to consider the needs of women and instead repeats trans activist talking points. The figures cited on the 'intersex' population have been widely debunked and bear no relevance to the implementation of the Supreme Court judgment.' The Nationalist government released its response to the consultation late on Friday night, claiming that services needed to justify why they were single-sex.