Latest news with #SimonBlake
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Social media posts by Laurence Fox calling two people paedophiles would not have been taken 'seriously' by many people, Court of Appeal hears
Social media posts by Laurence Fox referring to two men as paedophiles likely would not have been taken 'seriously' by many people, the Court of Appeal has heard. The actor-turned-activist was successfully sued by now-Stonewall CEO Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal over a row on Twitter, now known as X. Fox, 47, called Mr Blake and the former RuPaul 's Drag Race contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, 'paedophiles' in an exchange about a decision by Sainsbury's to mark Black History Month in October 2020. A High Court judge said Fox should pay both men £90,000 each in damages and slammed the Reclaim Party founder for trying to 'attach blame and discredit' the pair during litigation. Fox called for a boycott of the supermarket and was called 'a racist' by the pair, as well as broadcaster Nicola Thorp, before he responded with the 'paedophile' tweets, which led to the libel claims. The judge dismissed Mr Fox's counter claims against the pair and Ms Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism. The 47-year-old is now challenging the £180,000 High Court ruling at the Court of Appeal in London, attending the first day of the hearing today. Sporting a tattoo of a crucifix on his neck and smoking a cigarette, Fox arrived hand-in-hand with his wife Elizabeth, who he married earlier this year during a private ceremony. The former actor was dressed in a white shirt, jeans and a pair of tan Vivo barefoot hiking boots worth about £296. Patrick Green KC, for Mr Fox, said in written submissions that the judgment which found Mr Fox had libelled the pair should be quashed due to 'errors of approach' by the judge, including over whether Mr Blake and Mr Seymour were caused serious harm. Mr Green said: 'Her conclusions were in any event, plainly wrong, on any fair consideration of the evidence.' The barrister added that Mrs Justice Collins Rice had wrongly decided damages for the two men, who, along with Ms Thorp, are opposing the appeal. Mr Green said that the decision on damages did not consider the actual words Mr Fox used 'and the likelihood that many or the vast majority of readers would have not have taken them seriously, particularly in their context'. The barrister said that in one of her rulings, the judge 'ignores the actual words used, or their all important context'. He also said the judge 'failed to account adequately or at all' for an apology Mr Fox made, or alleged misconduct by Mr Blake and Mr Seymour in 'exaggerating' the harm and distress caused. Mr Fox told the original trial in November 2023 that his use of the term was 'rhetorical', and 'there was no inference at any point that I thought they were a paedophile'. 'I was diminishing the ridiculousness of calling me a racist,' he said. And on Monday, Mr Green said it was clear Mr Fox was being rhetorical. The barrister told appeal judges: 'He's not saying "I am a racist and they are paedophiles' and everyone understood it in that way." Adrienne Page KC, for Mr Blake, Mr Seymour and Ms Thorp, said in written submissions that Mr Fox's appeal was 'lacking in merit'. She continued: 'The "paedophile" tweets did not embody the appellant's opinions about Mr Blake and Mr Seymour. 'They conveyed factual imputations of the most serious defamatory character.' The barrister added there was 'no meaningful retraction or apology' by Mr Fox. She later said: 'Whichever way one looks at it, the judge was fully entitled to reach the factual conclusions that she did on the serious, real-world, reputational impact of the appellant's tweets, for the reasons which she gave. There was nothing wrong with her analysis in fact or law.' Ms Page added that Mr Fox's case at trial had been 'largely devoted to hypothesising, as already noted, a series of different scenarios as to the various ways or settings in which his tweets may have appeared to different readers'. 'After very careful and conscientious evaluation, the judge was, unsurprisingly, not persuaded of this on the facts,' she continued. Ms Page continued that the sums of £90,000 in damages awarded to the pair were 'unexceptionable'. The hearing before Lord Justice Dingemans, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing and Lord Justice Warby is expected to conclude on Tuesday. During the last court battle, Fox had counter-sued Mr Blake and Mr Seymour and broadcaster Nicola Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism. In a previous judgment in January 2024, Mrs Justice Collins Rice ruled in favour of Mr Blake and Mr Seymour, dismissing Mr Fox's counter-claims. During a ruling in April of that year, the judge said Mr Fox should pay Mr Blake and Mr Seymour £90,000 each in damages. She said: 'By calling Mr Blake and Mr Seymour paedophiles, Mr Fox subjected them to a wholly undeserved public ordeal. It was a gross, groundless and indefensible libel, with distressing and harmful real-world consequences for them.' During the previous court case, Lorna Skinner KC, for Mr Blake and Mr Seymour, had said the pair should receive 'at least six-figure sums' from Mr Fox, calling a suggestion the pair should only receive a 'modest' award 'nonsense'. However, Patrick Green KC, for Fox, said the starting point of damages should be between £10,000 and £20,000, with the total being 'substantially lowered' due to an apology from Mr Fox and the absence of malice. Fox previously described the original judgment as a 'bullies charter' and said he disagreed 'profoundly' with the result. He said in a post on X at the time: 'I don't know what the judge will award these people. But the costs of these proceedings are enormous. So a whopper of a cheque is getting written in the next few days.' Fox added: 'We are seeing the courts used maliciously across the west and that is a very concerning trend. So enjoy the victory guys and I hope it is short lived!' Mrs Justice Collins Rice declined to make an order requiring the 47-year-old to publish a summary of the judge's decision on his X account. During a hearing in March 2024, Mr Green had said there was no need for the Lewis actor to publicise the ruling decision on his social media. He said in written submissions: 'This has been the most high-profile libel action of the year and both the trial and the judgment were massively reported in the media.... There can be few, if any, original publishees in the present case who will be unaware of its outcome.' The barrister added: 'The outcome of this long-running case literally could not be better known than it is already. 'For whatever passing doubts or vague suspicions that may have at some time subsisted in the minds of readers, only a modest financial award in compensation should be due.' Mr Green added: 'The remarks were quickly retracted and apologised for, and at the very least it was clear to the public at large at an early stage that the allegation was baseless.'
The Independent
a day ago
- Entertainment
- The Independent
Laurence Fox ‘paedophile' posts would not have been taken seriously, appeal told
Social media posts by Laurence Fox referring to two people as paedophiles likely would not have been taken 'seriously' by many people, the Court of Appeal has heard. The actor was successfully sued by now- Stonewall CEO Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal over a row on Twitter, now known as X. Mr Fox called Mr Blake and the former RuPaul's Drag Race contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, 'paedophiles' in an exchange about a decision by Sainsbury's to mark Black History Month in October 2020. Mr Fox called for a boycott of the supermarket and was called 'a racist' by the pair, as well as broadcaster Nicola Thorp, before he responded with the 'paedophile' tweets which led to the libel claims. In two judgments in 2024, Mrs Justice Collins Rice ruled in favour of Mr Blake and Mr Seymour and said Mr Fox should pay the pair £90,000 each in damages. The judge dismissed Mr Fox's counter claims against the pair and Ms Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism. The 47-year-old is now challenging the rulings at the Court of Appeal in London, attending the first day of the hearing on Monday. Patrick Green KC, for Mr Fox, said in written submissions that the judgment which found Mr Fox had libelled the pair should be quashed due to 'errors of approach' by the judge, including over whether Mr Blake and Mr Seymour were caused serious harm. Mr Green said: 'Her conclusions were in any event, plainly wrong, on any fair consideration of the evidence.' The barrister added that Mrs Justice Collins Rice had wrongly decided damages for the two men, who, along with Ms Thorp, are opposing the appeal. Mr Green said that the decision on damages did not consider the actual words Mr Fox used 'and the likelihood that many or the vast majority of readers would have not have taken them seriously, particularly in their context'. The barrister said that in one of her rulings, the judge 'ignores the actual words used, or their all important context'. He also said the judge 'failed to account adequately or at all' for an apology Mr Fox made, or alleged misconduct by Mr Blake and Mr Seymour in 'exaggerating' the harm and distress caused. Mr Fox told the original trial in November 2023 that his use of the term was 'rhetorical', and 'there was no inference at any point that I thought they were a paedophile'. 'I was diminishing the ridiculousness of calling me a racist,' he said. And on Monday, Mr Green said it was clear Mr Fox was being rhetorical. The barrister told appeal judges: 'He's not saying 'I am a racist and they are paedophiles' and everyone understood it in that way.' Adrienne Page KC, for Mr Blake, Mr Seymour and Ms Thorp, said in written submissions that Mr Fox's appeal was 'lacking in merit'. She continued: 'The 'paedophile' tweets did not embody the appellant's opinions about Mr Blake and Mr Seymour. 'They conveyed factual imputations of the most serious defamatory character.' The barrister added there was 'no meaningful retraction or apology' by Mr Fox. She later said: 'Whichever way one looks at it, the judge was fully entitled to reach the factual conclusions that she did on the serious, real-world, reputational impact of the appellant's tweets, for the reasons which she gave. 'There was nothing wrong with her analysis in fact or law.' Ms Page added that Mr Fox's case at trial had been 'largely devoted to hypothesising, as already noted, a series of different scenarios as to the various ways or settings in which his tweets may have appeared to different readers'. 'After very careful and conscientious evaluation, the judge was, unsurprisingly, not persuaded of this on the facts,' she continued. Ms Page continued that the sums of £90,000 in damages awarded to the pair were 'unexceptionable'. The hearing before Lord Justice Dingemans, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing and Lord Justice Warby is expected to conclude on Tuesday.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Laurence Fox ‘paedophile' posts would not have been taken seriously, appeal told
Social media posts by Laurence Fox referring to two people as paedophiles likely would not have been taken 'seriously' by many people, the Court of Appeal has heard. The actor-turned-activist was successfully sued by now-Stonewall CEO Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal over a row on Twitter, now known as X. Mr Fox called Mr Blake and the former RuPaul's Drag Race contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, 'paedophiles' in an exchange about a decision by Sainsbury's to mark Black History Month in October 2020. Mr Fox called for a boycott of the supermarket and was called 'a racist' by the pair, as well as broadcaster Nicola Thorp, before he responded with the 'paedophile' tweets which led to the libel claims. In two judgments in 2024, Mrs Justice Collins Rice ruled in favour of Mr Blake and Mr Seymour and said Mr Fox should pay the pair £90,000 each in damages. The judge dismissed Mr Fox's counter claims against the pair and Ms Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism. The 47-year-old is now challenging the rulings at the Court of Appeal in London, attending the first day of the hearing on Monday. Patrick Green KC, for Mr Fox, said in written submissions that the judgment which found Mr Fox had libelled the pair should be quashed due to 'errors of approach' by the judge, including over whether Mr Blake and Mr Seymour were caused serious harm. Mr Green said: 'Her conclusions were in any event, plainly wrong, on any fair consideration of the evidence.' The barrister added that Mrs Justice Collins Rice had wrongly decided damages for the two men, who, along with Ms Thorp, are opposing the appeal. Mr Green said that the decision on damages did not consider the actual words Mr Fox used 'and the likelihood that many or the vast majority of readers would have not have taken them seriously, particularly in their context'. The barrister said that in one of her rulings, the judge 'ignores the actual words used, or their all important context'. He also said the judge 'failed to account adequately or at all' for an apology Mr Fox made, or alleged misconduct by Mr Blake and Mr Seymour in 'exaggerating' the harm and distress caused. Mr Fox told the original trial in November 2023 that his use of the term was 'rhetorical', and 'there was no inference at any point that I thought they were a paedophile'. 'I was diminishing the ridiculousness of calling me a racist,' he said. And on Monday, Mr Green said it was clear Mr Fox was being rhetorical. The barrister told appeal judges: 'He's not saying 'I am a racist and they are paedophiles' and everyone understood it in that way.' Adrienne Page KC, for Mr Blake, Mr Seymour and Ms Thorp, said in written submissions that Mr Fox's appeal was 'lacking in merit'. She continued: 'The 'paedophile' tweets did not embody the appellant's opinions about Mr Blake and Mr Seymour. 'They conveyed factual imputations of the most serious defamatory character.' The barrister added there was 'no meaningful retraction or apology' by Mr Fox. She later said: 'Whichever way one looks at it, the judge was fully entitled to reach the factual conclusions that she did on the serious, real-world, reputational impact of the appellant's tweets, for the reasons which she gave. 'There was nothing wrong with her analysis in fact or law.' Ms Page added that Mr Fox's case at trial had been 'largely devoted to hypothesising, as already noted, a series of different scenarios as to the various ways or settings in which his tweets may have appeared to different readers'. 'After very careful and conscientious evaluation, the judge was, unsurprisingly, not persuaded of this on the facts,' she continued. Ms Page continued that the sums of £90,000 in damages awarded to the pair were 'unexceptionable'. The hearing before Lord Justice Dingemans, Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing and Lord Justice Warby is expected to conclude on Tuesday.
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Laurence Fox arrives at court with his new wife to challenge £180k ruling after losing libel battle against two men he branded paedophiles
Laurence Fox has arrived at court with his wife to challenge a £180,000 High Court ruling after losing a libel battle against two men he branded 'paedophiles' online. The actor-turned-politician was successfully sued last year by former Stonewall trustee Simon Blake and drag artist Crystal over a row on X, formerly Twitter. Fox, 47, called Mr Blake and the former RuPaul 's Drag Race contestant, whose real name is Colin Seymour, 'paedophiles' in an exchange about a decision by Sainsbury's to mark Black History Month in October 2020. A High Court judge said Fox should pay both men £90,000 each in damages and slammed the Reclaim Party founder for trying to 'attach blame and discredit' the pair during litigation. Shortly after the verdict was announced in April 2024, Fox called the result 'so surreal it's almost funny' in a bizarre social media post in which he also claimed: 'Lady justice ain't blind. She's got both eyes wide open.' He wrote: 'None of the claimants could provide a single witness in court to support the claim that they had suffered any harm. You get the same wonga if you lose a leg at work. 'So surreal it's almost funny. Lady justice ain't blind. She's got both eyes wide open. Will be appealing.' Fox and his wife Elizabeth arrived at the Royal Courts of Justice in London this morning as the right-wing online provocateur sought to make good on his vow to appeal the judgment. Sporting a tattoo of a crucifix on his neck and smoking a cigarette, Fox arrived hand-in-hand with his wife, who he married earlier this year during a private ceremony. The former actor was dressed in a white shirt, jeans and a pair of tan Vivo barefoot hiking boots worth about £296. During the last court battle, Fox had counter-sued Mr Blake and Mr Seymour and broadcaster Nicola Thorp over tweets accusing him of racism. In a previous judgment in January 2024, Mrs Justice Collins Rice ruled in favour of Mr Blake and Mr Seymour, dismissing Mr Fox's counter-claims. During a ruling in April of that year, the judge said Mr Fox should pay Mr Blake and Mr Seymour £90,000 each in damages. She said: 'By calling Mr Blake and Mr Seymour paedophiles, Mr Fox subjected them to a wholly undeserved public ordeal. It was a gross, groundless and indefensible libel, with distressing and harmful real-world consequences for them.' During the previous court case, Lorna Skinner KC, for Mr Blake and Mr Seymour, had said the pair should receive 'at least six-figure sums' from Mr Fox, calling a suggestion the pair should only receive a 'modest' award 'nonsense'. However, Patrick Green KC, for Fox, said the starting point of damages should be between £10,000 and £20,000, with the total being 'substantially lowered' due to an apology from Mr Fox and the absence of malice. Fox previously described the original judgment as a 'bullies charter' and said he disagreed 'profoundly' with the result. He said in a post on X at the time: 'I don't know what the judge will award these people. But the costs of these proceedings are enormous. So a whopper of a cheque is getting written in the next few days.' Fox added: 'We are seeing the courts used maliciously across the west and that is a very concerning trend. So enjoy the victory guys and I hope it is short lived!' Mrs Justice Collins Rice declined to make an order requiring the 47-year-old to publish a summary of the judge's decision on his X account. During a hearing in March 2024, Mr Green had said there was no need for the Lewis actor to publicise the ruling decision on his social media. He said in written submissions: 'This has been the most high-profile libel action of the year and both the trial and the judgment were massively reported in the media.... There can be few, if any, original publishees in the present case who will be unaware of its outcome.' The barrister added: 'The outcome of this long-running case literally could not be better known than it is already. 'For whatever passing doubts or vague suspicions that may have at some time subsisted in the minds of readers, only a modest financial award in compensation should be due.' Mr Green added: 'The remarks were quickly retracted and apologised for, and at the very least it was clear to the public at large at an early stage that the allegation was baseless.'
Cosmopolitan
25-06-2025
- Politics
- Cosmopolitan
Pride 2025: LGBTQ people on how Pride feels different this year
In June, also known as Pride month, rainbow flags, glitter, and slogans akin to 'love is love' are usually splashed across everything from buses to offices to drinks packaging. But this year, the landscape is looking, in the words of Stonewall's chief executive, Simon Blake, 'remarkably monochrome'. Although pinkwashing, AKA the corporatisation of Pride, has long been widely mocked, this year, companies that previously touted their support have lowered their masts, instead choosing to scale back their support for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) more broadly. So much so that Southampton Pride in the Park, Liverpool Pride, Hereford Pride, and Plymouth Pride have been called off because of difficulty securing funding. And with interest in Reform UK unfortunately burgeoning, it's likely that DEI will continue to face attacks across the country — considering party leader Nigel Farage's apparent objective to come for what he describes as a 'woke virus.' While thousands of other Pride celebrations will still go ahead across the world, in 2025, some say the festivities seem to be imbued with a notable shift. We're currently halfway through a year that has already seen some drastic rollbacks to LGBTQIA+ rights across the world — and the effects are palpable. Having been named the best place for LGBTQIA+ rights in Europe in 2015, this year, the UK has slipped to 22nd on ILGA Europe's annual Rainbow Map and Index. The fall in ranking follows the UK Supreme Court ruling in April that the legal definition of 'sex' refers solely to 'biological' men and women and not trans people, a decision that legitimises the exclusion of trans people from single-sex spaces. The ruling also restricts the definition of lesbianism to women assigned female at birth (AFAB), as the court claims that including trans and non-binary lesbians under the definition would render the concept of sexual orientation 'meaningless' — a complete disregard of the fact that almost the entire lesbian community (96%) in the UK is in support of trans people. Alongside this atrocious attack on trans rights, hate crimes against trans people have doubled in London alone in the past five years, and increased by 1,426% in the last decade in England and Wales. Elsewhere, US president Donald Trump is attempting to roll back trans rights across the country (although, unlike our Supreme Court, the US' has blocked his executive order hoping to misgender trans people on passports). Meanwhile, this year has also seen Hungary pass a law declaring there are only two genders, which bans LGBTQIA+ events. Against a turbulent political backdrop for the LGBTQIA+ community, will Pride return to its roots as an act of protest, a call for liberation, and an opportunity for the community to band together? In the build up to June, it's been clear the community is not backing down any time soon. The Good Law Project has fundraised over £400,000 to challenge the Supreme Court judgment; thousands of lesbian and sapphic-identifying folk fathered at the inclusive grassroots Dyke March in London on 21 June, while more than 200 Pride events have already happened or are set to take place across the UK and Ireland this year. Below, Cosmopolitan UK speaks to seven members of the LGBTQIA+ community about whether Pride month 2025 feels different to previous years — and how they're working together with their queer siblings and allies to balance the call for change with radiating queer joy. 'This year, Pride feels vital and helpful. In the UK, the last few months have seen really heinous attacks against the trans community from the media, politicians, and those with power. What I have seen as a response is the coming together of people with the overall aim of protecting and supporting one another until there is true equality for all LGBTQIA+ people. For the Dyke March, we've been fundraising because we've noticed that, for our community, people want and need it. There's this sense that Pride isn't just for waving a flag for one day a year, it's about being among the community year-round and supporting each other. It's a really tough situation for LGBTQIA+ people to see relentless anti-LGBTQIA+ headlines, so what we need is our allies speaking up on our behalf, signing and sharing petitions, and telling their friends and family about how anti-LGBTQIA+ issues are not just going to effect our community, but all of us all around the world, and how progress needs to continue. We haven't achieved full equality in society, and when [allies] go to Pride events they need to put themselves arm in arm with our community, and understand that it's a political act and something they should try to incorporate into their lives all year round.' 'Within the community, it's hard to feel like celebrating when trans people's right to exist publicly and access medical care (that vastly improves their quality of life) is being undermined. This is not a fringe issue – trans people are the leaders of our community; attacks on them are an attack on us all. There are also historic and current overlaps between the queer community and the sex worker community – it's disheartening to see the ways that the Online Safety Bill will impact sex workers trying to advertise their services online, while the Nordic Model (shown to make sex workers less safe) is being pushed in Scotland. Then there's the Crime and Policing Bill, which seeks to increase police powers around protests. When events, including Stonewall, started as uprisings against the police criminalising forms of queer life in the US, it's difficult to see these challenges to our right to protest take root in the UK. Throw in the rise of the anti-gender movement across the US, UK and EU, the ongoing genocide in Gaza, and it is an overwhelmingly bleak picture – queerness doesn't exist in a vacuum, and everyone I know is greatly concerned about the other threats to freedom, self-determination and peace that are ongoing. Allies who want to show their support could offer financial and logistical support to community events such as Disabled Queer Prom; donate to surgery fundraisers for the trans community; donate to organisations like The Good Law Project, the Rainbow Project, and Not A Phase; and adopt the Trans Bathroom Sticker grassroots scheme for trans-inclusive bathroom access.' 'I can't help but feel like nobody wants to talk about Pride or show up for the LGBTQIA+ community right now because we're too 'controversial'. And that's heartbreaking: to have my identity reduced to a single word. Since the DEI backlash began in the US, and with the recent Supreme Court ruling, it's felt like the UK has followed suit. Language is shifting. People are afraid to speak up. We mustn't be ignorant of the fact that societal attitudes and public feelings are incredibly contentious right now. Instead of asking about my coming-out journey, they're now asking what basic terminology means. In conversations with friends and strangers, many have forgotten that it's Pride month either innocently — because they think the celebrations start during the July marches — or because it's gone silent. What felt like virtue signalling has now turned to radio silence which makes me wonder as to whether others truly supported my community at all. Still, I have hope that Brits are tolerant and liberal enough to see the hostility, particularly in the media, for what it is and say: 'I don't know a trans person, but this hatred against just 0.6% of the population isn't right.' And then hopefully, they'll show up — and then some. I predict we'll see an influx of allies as we move towards London Pride in July and Trans Awareness Week in November. I've been deeply moved by strangers I've met who've challenged their mates or workplaces on how they're showing up for the community right now, and that is keeping me going. Active, not performative, allyship is what we need right now.' 'This Pride Month definitely does''t feel the same. The tides have been turning for a while, but as soon as Trump said 'screw DEI', essentially, companies took that seriously. The rainbow-washing people complained about isn't a problem anymore because less and less brands want to associate with Pride. Events have less sponsors, some Prides have been cancelled as a result. I've had work cancelled for this month because of the anti-DEI sentiment. It's much harder for activists to financially sustain themselves. Pride campaigns are few and far between nowadays, laws and rights are going backwards, and that lack of visibility and support is coming at a time where LGBTQIA+ people are under attack socially and politically. At the same time, it means that there's much more of a grassroots feel to Pride this year. I've been working in the UK and the US this month, and everyone's so mobilised and coordinated. We're all ready to fight back and stand together.' 'This Pride season feels different, and we all knew it would. Rather than simply celebrating our community, it feels like we are constantly fighting for it. And that can make celebrating Pride feel uncomfortable because, as some of us are waving our pride flags in the streets, others are scared of leaving the house or using a public bathroom. From organisations moving away from Pride-related activities and content, to the UK government defining who we are and what facilities we can use, it feels more like survival, rather than celebratory. Pride is a protest. It always has been. But this year it feels even more so. As a queer and trans activist, I am tired this Pride season, and that is a mutual feeling amongst the community.' 'The lack of Pride campaigns this year proves how disingenuous corporate Pride Month celebrations have been. Rainbow-washed Pride campaigns have always made me cringe, so I never thought I'd be wondering where they've gone! We can reflect on Pride 2025 to see what's going wrong: allies are failing us. We must recognise that Pride is rooted in riots led by Black trans women, so how are we showing direct support today? Instead of spending money on rainbow bunting, find a fundraiser to donate to. Within the Dyke community, we weren't focused on Pride Month, but rather fundraising and events for social and political issues that need support. This is highlighted by this year's Dyke March including a sex worker bloc, Queers for Palestine, Disabled Dykes, and the trans-led Leatherdyke bloc. We honoured our Queer history in June to fight for freedom, meanwhile, corporations backed off. Our Pride event is on the 5th July: Alternative Corporate Pride by the London Leatherdykes. It felt more appropriate to have our Pride event be a direct alternative to London Pride. Our events are collaborative efforts to build community, no matter the month.' 'Pride month has always brought into sharp relief what is happening in that moment. There is a broad sense that, where it's felt like we've generally been making progress and moving forward in some parts of the community for the past 20 years, there is now a definite backlash. That sense of fear; of what's happened; and what could happen, makes a really sharp focus and spotlight right now, and that's why Pride is important. Pride has always been a protest, and that is really key this year. But it also doesn't matter how many times we have to take on the fight for equality — whether they are small fights or big fights, we will continue to do so. We can be resilient and united, and make sure that however many times people want us to back down and our rights to be removed, we will keep coming back as a community and recognising that all of the parts of our community are equally as important until we've all got those rights. We all have to stand together in order to get them because it isn't possible for some of us to have the rights and enjoy them and others not to. [Allies need to] speak up and show up, making sure that people who are from the community know that you support them. It's also important for those of us who are part of the community to make sure that we are demonstrating allyship for everyone in it.' Honey Wyatt is the Sex and Relationships Senior Ecommerce Writer for Cosmopolitan, Women's Health and Men's Health, covering the best sex toys, lubes, and any product or service that positively contributes to sexual wellbeing and healthy relationships. Honey completed an MA in magazine journalism at City, University of London in 2023, which she passed with a merit. She has run Sextras, a podcast and magazine about sex and relationships, since 2020, speaking to experts on everything from sex worker rights to how to practice sex magic and whether man-hating is justified. Previously, she was a reporter for HR magazine, where she covered the importance of wellbeing and diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace, as well as the juicy (and often disturbing) ins and outs of employment tribunals. She has also written about sex, fashion, beauty, and culture for Glamour, Refinery29, Woo, The Independent and SPHERE. When she's not asking everyone she meets invasive questions about their sex and dating lives, you can find Honey bingeing noughties/nineties box sets, belting Chappell Roan or Wicked around her flat, teaching herself a craft that seems unlikely she'll be able to achieve (spoiler: she does), or pondering the meaning of life to a podcast on long walks.
