Law Society virtue signalling

It doesn't directly affect you unless you are a female solicitor. Are you?

I am a female solicitor and I think that opening up this award to those who have benefited from male privilege makes it rather pointless.

I am someone who has given up a high-pressured career in London to pursue a less prestigious career in the regions in order to have a better family life. I can attest to the fact that it is not easy to pursue a legal career as a woman.

I hope that someone born a woman, and who has faced all the usual discrimination rooted in biological sex, wins this. Whilst transwomen may have their own struggles for acceptance, they are fundamentally different from those that women face.

The irony of the Law Society acting to be ‘ahead’ of the law.
But looking to the positives... Does this mean I can now identify as a solicitor and enter myself?
I mean I know it’s a long shot to win seeing as how I am a boring old ‘actual woman’ and all. But I do stuff to help other women and I am good at my job so once I identify as a solicitor i’m at least In with a chance right?

I agree that it's probably going to wake up a few legal women to the unfairness of the situation if it is won by a Phil Bunce type. I don't think that in itself is a bad thing.

This seems like the perfect opportunity to try out an issue raised on another thread. I am presuming from your username Jon that you self-identify as a man. In virtue of what features about yourself do you see yourself as a man, seeing as how biology is now irrelevant and it's all about internal feelings of masculinity?

And for the record the comparison with gay rights is flawed. Can you imagine the outrage in the gay community if an award for best gay solicitor went to a straight bloke

Oh PLEASE let someone do this!

Men can identify as a women when it suits them, (and live as a man), why not identify as gay, and still be hetrosexual?

After all, language, and the precise meaning of words is open to any interpretation.

"Identifying" rules!!

Just showed this to my lawyer husband and he doesn't think it will go down well! In his words "lawyers are a litigious bunch" 🙂 it could get interesting if lawyers start arguing about the legal definition of a woman.

Jon, I am a female solicitor- it is a really tough profession for women to be in, once they have a family. I am currently struggling with balancing career and family. If a man wins this award because he “feels” like a woman,I will be beyond cheesed off- not least because I will be highly sceptical that he has done very much at all to help ‘other’ women-the criteria upon which the award will be judged. For Pete’s sake- it’s an award for women- there are enough of us in the profession that they should be able to find one. This virtue signalling is a slap in the face to all women.

Jon66 That’s great for you, but what do you mean? What is your point?

If I were a lawyer and I realised my cross dressing colleague who never had to take maternity leave won the award even though he was only a woman on Fridays I'd be livid.

No. I know you don't, and that's the shame of it.

There is real problem in the legal profession retaining women, and in getting women to more senior positions. This is in no small part because the profession is no family friendly, the burden of which falls primarily on biological women because they give birth and take maternity leave. Presumably this is in no small part why there is a woman solicitor award.

Very disappointed you don’t seem to acknowledge or care about this issue Jon.

looking forwards to the change in the law and pre-empting that

I love looking forward to changes in the law. I believe that in the future all property will be regarded as theft so I've appropriate my neighbour's new 60" 4G TV and left her a note welcoming her to the future.

Are you a female solicitor jon?

The law society are choosing not to apply the exemptions in the EA2010 that allow them to exclude trans identified men from their women only awards. They are fully entitled to do so and legally free to do so.

I believe they should limit women only to women only. Woman means something.

Again, john66 apart from accusing us of racism I don't get your point.

And for the record the comparison with gay rights is flawed. Can you imagine the outrage in the gay community if an award for best gay solicitor went to a straight bloke.

It doesn't directly affect you unless you are a female solicitor.

Well yeah that's the point.... It clearly DOES affect female solicitors which is pretty shit.

You are obviously the sort of self-centred person that doesn't care about anything unless it affects you. Many people here however do care about stuff that doesn't affect them. Hence the posts. And that's without mentioning the gradual erosion of recognition of biological females' achievements.

Just don't bother having women awards please if this is how they are going to be.

I will never, ever, ever, in my life take any of these seriously again, not since Phil Bunce got a top 50 women in finance award for cross dressing at work and taking himself in the ladies loos when he felt like it. Utter garbage rubbish. I just think the women that take part are as sad as the beauty show women now, part of a man's validation parade.

Vomit..

No, I'm following the charter on diversity and inclusion.

Jon66 So your point has nothing to do with the Equalities Act, you are just supportive of the possible change in the law and pleased that organisations are embracing that change before it is made. Why didn’t you just say so.

*If you want all legal women then just say women.

It reminds me of attitudes years ago toward homosexuals, and people of colour, ethnic groups etc etc. It doesn't directly affect you unless you are a female solicitor. Are you? Personally I think it's great the Law Society are being open and transparent and looking forwards to the change in the law and pre-empting that.

What's your point about the equality act?

I've read it.

There are exemptions that allow trans identified people to be excluded on the basis of biological sex.

There are situations that allow women only and male only shortlists/awards etc.

So what's your point?

There's no need for an award to be offered to women only when it allows men on the list. Why bother calling it a women's award? I don't care that it's "legal".

It's unethical.

Jon66. It allows for discrimination on the basis of sex in certain circumstances. This would mean that women (including transwomen who have a GRC - ii.e. all people who are women as a matter of law) would be eligible. That's not the same thing as anyone who identifies as a woman. If you all legal women to be eligible, then just say women.

Lots of assumptions on here. But what about my point re the Equality Act. Regardless of how you feel, the law says . . . well go and read it.