To call for this charity to be sued under UK equality act ?!

Why not? Women can attend the mosque, I know it's not a requirement to attend for Friday prayers but there are women's prayer rooms so someone must use them!

Girls over 12 dont attend Mosque

I can’t remember which tv channel it was but it was in a Muslim country where the advert basically said it was ok to sexually harass a woman dressed normally (for the UK) but definitely not ok to sexually harass women dressed in full ‘Muslim’ modest outfits.

The men pushing this have a real problem with women.

I saw an advert for this on one of the Bangladeshi TV channels last week and I looked and thought hmm.

The website I saw didn't actually even specify why it wasn't for females 12+. They didn't have a disclaimer. Have they said why ? I just did a parkrun and the thing I really noticed is my sticky out legs in the gym gear. There are whole clothing lines for "modest" sportswear if that's what they were fretting over, which I suspect might be part of it.

https://muslimcharityrun.org.uk/the-route/

Surprise surprise Lutfur Rahman supported it. (Rahman and Aspire in Tower Hamlets is one of the backers in the formation of YourParty now)

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tower-hamlets-mayor-mosque-ban-women-charity-funrun-b1252693.html

It’s usual for posters to try to stop any discussion on this. Good news if something comes of the public challenge.

Good news that it's being looked into. It really doesn't benefit any community to be treated differently under the law. It just breeds resentment and the govt's attempts to shut down debate won't wash any more.

Maybe next year the East London Mosque will put on 2 races, one for each sex, which would be a good result.

The post you quoted was quite clearly satire.

Comprehension not yours?

" and in one especially charming post, was a fine example of 'our diverse society discriminating against women for the greater good '"

Satire not your strong point I take it?

Yes, clan-based corruption has been brought into this country and the authorities have been too weak and cowardly to deal with it.

But the tide is definatly starting to turn.

This may be a downside of having a Muslim led council run by a man who made a hostile environment for people not in board with his agenda.

Yes, good news. This event has been d allowed to continue with permission from tower hamlets council for years; it will be interesting to find out why no one has whistle blown well before now, if the same t&c were implemented. Somebody needs to be held accountable.

This Op and the one from Sunday are just trying to demonize muslim men and the religion. Just admit that you are a racist Islamophobic person. No point trying to hide behind a keyboard after overdosing on GB news.

The morally bankrup government and trashy media are brainwashing certain people into thinking Muslims/boat ppl/ethnic minorities are the root cause of UKs issues so that they can get away with all sorts. You think the government will deliver on all its promises once it stops the boats ? No one is trying to impose sharia law in the UK, ffs stop listening to trash, dont you have better things to focus on in your life?

If you want to save women, go tell the gov to stop supporting and arming the state that is killing and bombing its neighbours to bits and that includes over 16,000 children and those still under the rubble . Women are being killed with unborn babies in their womb as well as giving birth without medical intervention. Newborns are dying from lack of medicine and food. So please stop your selective racist outrage and look deep into real issues. Your tax is funding the bombing of these women, they want to live and also possibly jog with freedom not under an apartheid state.

I explained that I had worded the original response badly. Which is what I was trying to then clarify, also badly, apparently 😁. I wasn’t suggesting they were acting illegally, I just said they were challenged and at some point after that they changed their criteria.

The challenge of sex discrimination (brought by a man who wanted to run) was found to not be valid. Presumably, because there are exemptions to the act that they could provide good reason for using. I don’t know if that was actually why, I’d have to try to find the original judgement, but making an assumption.

But then there was at least one other challenge, this time by a woman who wanted her young male child to be allowed to run with her. I don’t know if it was just raised with the charity or if an official complaint was made so I don’t know if it was found to be in breach or not.

But (and this was my original point in the response), it was after being challenged (even though at least one challenge had failed) that the charity then decided to change the criteria. First to allowing male children, and then to allowing all males.

And your further point about the distinction - I already mentioned that in the previous post, and why the two scenarios may be found to be different. Because one was including young males in an otherwise single sex space by consent but the other is excluding older females because, well that’s the question. But I think that’s the bit you’re agreeing with. I suppose we will find out if the experts on the EA agree now it’s being looked into by the EHRC.

Maybe Khan will make a statement as surely he would if a ‘cis people only’ race was organised he won’t

Thank you for that update.

That's good news that the EHRC have picked it up. They can advise the organisation on their responsibilities under the EA.

This is now being reported on by the guardian. The ehrc have received numerous complaints so will be looking into it. The communities Secretary has confirmed its unacceptable and a breach of the equality act. I'll await the apologies from numerous posters who said it was ok, goaded people into submission, thought it was absolutely fine for women to be ' othered ' due to religion, stated that it was no big deal and in one especially charming post, was a fine example of 'our diverse society discriminating against women for the greater good '. Think I'll be waiting a long time.

I don’t really understand your point. Your initial post suggested that Race for Life changed policy because they were acting illegally. (You were responding directly to a poster who stated nothing they were doing was illegal). Now you’re saying they weren’t required to change. It’s an important distinction because some posters on here are saying that the very fact of including some girls means that the event is ‘illegal’ as it is not truly single sex.
I don’t actually disagree with you on the rest though. We all know why girls over 12 are excluded. The organisers would be hard pressed to justify it under the legislation and I suspect they thought they’d just slip under the radar and people would say “it’s just like women-only events”. Possibly the publicity has highlighted that single sex things aren’t just single sex because people feel like it. Although I doubt it.
I think you could conceive of different circumstances where a similar format would be justified. Maybe a men’s fun run where a focus was the role of fathers may be able to make an argument for their young daughters to also take part, But that isn’t this.

I find it interesting that women are welcome to watch the men run, and are presumed to be resistant to immodest thoughts about all these male bodies pounding past them. Whereas if men watched the women run they would be tempted to immorality.
I guess women are at a higher level of faith.