To be shocked by a transwoman guest on Jeremy Vine today asking a female caller what sex she is - and whether she’s “been tested?”

If trans men wish to continue to use the men’s room then that’s on them. I just don’t want a male bodied person in the ladies.

The law clearly and specifically excludes transwomen from its definition of women. This means that if a service, space or activity is said to be 'for women' transwomen should understand it is not intended for them

This is incorrect. Not what “the law” says or does at all.

To be honest if implemented in the way y’all are interpreting/ promoting it would be wayyyyy easier for men to just enter women’s toilets to prey on them- they wouldn’t even have to try and pretend to be trans women, they could just declare themselves trans men and go about presenting exactly as they are! 😂

And depends on, judging by here and social media, some people learning the difference between illegal and unlawful!

That's just a rewording of what I said. If providers have facilities that are designated women, but they operate as mixed sex, it may be discriminatory.

The law clearly and specifically excludes transwomen from its definition of women. This means that if a service, space or activity is said to be 'for women' transwomen should understand it is not intended for them. In a similar way as I would understand a service that said it was for Muslim women was not for me. This doesn't mean that if I decided to attend I'd be arrested. Nor does it mean the Muslim women would be legally compelled to evict me. However, if they asked me to leave and I refused to, the law would support them, not me and if I made a huge fuss, I probably would be arrested. So basically we have a situation where transwomens ability to use women's toilets rests entirely on the willingness of other people to allow them to. Whether they will or not remains to be seen and will largely depend on venue and its user demographic and preferences.

Also if it's unreasonable, why are some organisations simultaneously trying to make toilets gender neutral in the west, but promote female only facilities in places like India and Africa? Is it racism? Women need protected from those men but not these ones?

No.

The ruling clarified that it is possible for providers to restrict facilities/ services to women “female” “at birth” if they can demonstrate a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

Question on toilets if you think men who identify as not men should be allowed in the women's.

How do women tell the difference between a biological man and a biological man who identifies as not a man?

You can't define "female sex" as "people with feminine feels" because that's EXACTLY what the SC ruled.

that’s not at all what they ruled. They simply clarified that for the purposes of interpreting provisions in the EA “women” refers to people “female” “at birth”

It CAN be discriminatory towards women. Which means it COULD be unlawful.

You can't define "female sex" as "people with feminine feels" because that's EXACTLY what the SC ruled.
If you wanted to argue you could have loos for people who have the PC of GR I guess you could try to make that argument but you'd have one for trans identifying males and females, and one for everyone else. That sound like something that would suit? If so you can start up The Crossed Arms and have a Pink And Blue Loo and a Boring People Loo. Enjoy!

Nope. Thats not the case.

The SC says its based on biological sex so toilets if they have a ladies sign will indeed exclude tw. As they should. No ifs or buts.

You see trans women as male ,because thats the truth your particular belief/ opinion about the appropriate use of language.

Why cant that [toilets for females - defined by sex at birth - only] be provided?

The judgement clarifies that it can indeed be provided , if in the given context it can be shown that it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
This has always been the case and this remains the case.

However, there is no obligation for providers to exclude trans women from women’s facilities/ spaces.

But thankfully for reality, the Supreme Court agrees with us

Ah no - they did not offer a judgement on that.

They were simply interpreting the use of specific language in the EA .

But the publican can chuck them out, and if they don't, women can sue the pub for discrimination if they provide men only spaces but no women only spaces, and any pub employees can sue the pub if they don't get single sex loos.

Lol. Quite the fantasy you constructed there.
But it has nothing to do with the recent SC judgement.

(By the way , trans men will still be using the men’s loos).

But thankfully for reality, the Supreme Court agrees with us.
No blokes are going to be arrested for going into the women's loos in a pub.
But the publican can chuck them out, and if they don't, women can sue the pub for discrimination if they provide men only spaces but no women only spaces, and any pub employees can sue the pub if they don't get single sex loos.
As they say on Twitter, cope and seethe.

But why say a toilet is for females only, if you allow some males to access the service?

because (thankfully) there is a very sizeable section of the population that doesn’t see things the same way you do. We don’t see trans women as men, however much you insist we must.

That is your opinion and you are welcome to it. It doesn’t make it illegal for trans women to enter a toilet marked “women’s”/ “female”.

How many times.
THEY ARE NOT WOMEN'S SPACES IF MEN GO IN THEM.

It is not illegal for the blokes to go into the women's loos but the pub owner is no longer providing a women's loo.

Because you are completely wrong. The judgement absolutely does not create a mandate to exclude trans women from all women’s/ female spaces ( it just clarifies that it is not necessarily unlawful to do so) People can “explain to me” that it does all they want; they will still be incorrect.

it also needs to be proportionate- which entails a range of considerations.
It will be context specific .

The key point is that there is no mandate to exclude trans women, only the possibility if the provider chooses to do so and can justify that the various conditions can be met in the context in question.