Government response to the petition...

Bewilder
Thank you for your clarity of explanation.
I found certain posters quite worrying.
The goals thank you too.

“The Government has not yet decided whether or not to introduce a self-declaration model, and will not change the Equality Act 2010 provisions which support organisations to run single sex services.“

Interesting.

The case by case part didn't feel right though
It is exactly right. The exceptions do not allow blanket discrimination. You have to justify it on an individual basis.

Any GRA reform will not change the protected characteristics in the Equality Act nor the exceptions under the Equality Act that allow provision for single and separate sex spaces
Been saying this since forever.

I am not in a position to do this, I would help, is someone be up for leading a crowdfund to take Marks & Spencer and Topshop along with those that offered the training, to court for the EA2010 sex segregation, putting the dignity, privacy and safeguarding of women and girls at risk?
Not really sure what law you think M+S have broken. The EA2010 protects against discrimination. By allowing transgender people to use the appropriate changing rooms, M+S did not discriminate.

It will be impossible for a service provider to prove someone IS trans. On paper ALL their official documentation will match that of a natal female. We cant exclude on the basis of trans if we can’t confirm someone IS TRANS.
If you are unsure if someone is trans then it will never be proportionate to exclude them. If you know they are trans, but cannot prove it, and it is justified, then discriminate against them. If they are not trans then there is no liability. And if they are trans, then it fits into the exception.

And the organisation cannot ask if people have a GRC
Yes it can. But if you have a need to know someone's legal gender then it is good practice to ask for a birth certificate instead.

EA says there are sex exceptions even though they are useless
Not useless, they do the job. If you really need to discriminate you can. But casual bigotry is not allowed.

But even if not, the least discriminatory response, and therefore the one probably required by law, would be to make the space unisex. If that happens I, and may Y other women like me, are going to be very cross with any feminists whose campaigning brings that about.

Eh? Surely it would be transactivists campaigning that would be the issue. Given it was them that started this and feminists are simply trying to preserve the rights of women, to sex segregation (where appropriate)? It would make no sense at all that if, because of the actions of transactivists, all space changed to unisex...people were unhappy with unisex and thus blamed feminists when it is feminists wishing to retain spaces that are bloody sex segregated and are fighting AGAINST unisex! But its usual to blame feminists/women for everything regardless of if blaming feminists/women makes no sense at all (see also, feminists/women are to blame for male violence against transwomen) so, go fugure.

@Theinconstantgardener How will legitimate aim be justified. Who will decide? I can see that being challenged by TIMs detirmined to enter these spaces.

An organisation would decide their policy and if a TIM challenged it, a tribunal or a court would decide whether the complaint was valid. So a small org might not be able to afford to defend themselves.

As soon as ASN don't need to fund abortions, I'm taking the £30/month I give to them and putting it in an instant access savings account, to be donated to any female-only organisation that needs to defend itself against a TIM trying to get in.

Surely sex segregation in general is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim?

Yes. I think it will take a shift in perception of what is being asked for as an attack on sex segregation. Then it will be clear that the public in general think it is.

'Providers may exclude trans people from facilities of the sex they identify with, provided it is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim' needs to be publicised to schools.

Surely sex segregation in general is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim? The aim being the sexes having sace away from each other for various reasons when sex is actually relevant, and womens safety. Obviously sex segregating a chess class is very different to sex segregating an open plan changing room or a refuge.

The exemptions really are not publicized enough at all. Then you have trans pressure groups actively decieving companies and schools and such about this and making out that its illegal to have girls and boys changing areas and the only way to sort this is to have boy in with girls and shift girls (however many of them are uncomfortable) into the small staff changing rooms Along with companbies crapping thir pants at the first sign of a narcisistic male demanding entry to female changing rooms (possibly for fear of the numerous negative reviews that would flood in from many other narcisistic males once the twitter shitstorm was started), ala Travis Alabanza.

Given that the EA says there are sex exceptions even though they are useless it seems to me they had to pretend to be in compliance with that existing law.
It just seems like pretense to me.
Maybe it's just me being cynical. They know by now people don't want it but they are doing nothing and say they will get around to it eventually.

I agree, but also agree with others that it could have been worse. Oh the scraps!

How differently I read it.
To me it is another delaying tactic saying essentially that change is happening without any amendment to existing contradictory laws so after there are no more sex segregated spaces (except for men's) we will maybe get around to having a chat with the public about whether or not women still have too many rights.

Agree that the response could have been so much worse. They could have gone down the ‘transwomen are women #nodebate’ route and they haven’t. They’ve acknowledged that women’s rights definitely are affected by all of this.

It’s progress. We are being heard.

That response is 1000 times better than I feared it would be, even if there are still concerns about how it would operate in practice

Women with an opinion, who'd have thunk it. Poor Prick news will be apoplectic.

Pink News:
(extract)
"‘Man Friday’ campaigner Amy Desir, who recently staged a topless protest at a men-only swimming session to protest the inclusion of transgender women in women’s spaces, was behind the petition ahead of a government consultation on reforms to the Gender Recognition Act.
The government is set to consult on plans to streamline the gender recognition process to allow transgender people to more easily gain legal recognition – but the petition claimed it could “impact on women-only services and spaces” and challenge “the principle of single-sex spaces.”

The petition gained more than 10,000 signatures after heavy promotion on internet forum Mumsnet, which has become a “hotbed” of anti-transgender campaigning in recent months."

So far, the only media reporting on this seems to be:

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/06/05/government-response-petition-anti-transgender-feminist-campaigners

Harried Harman didn't help matters, wasn't it her who was one of the people that wrote the EA2010?

Basically, I think New Labour knew they were about to lose an election so rushed through EA2010. It's got all sorts of problems and is really - as women are finding out - rather toothless.

This business of asking for a TIM to show a Gender Recognition Certificate is a red herring when all it takes is a deed poll to get a DL with a new name, picture, and sex designation.
That is what people ask for as ID.
The irony is that what we call proof of ID will no longer be proof of ID because the UK government has adopted the 8th rule of misogyny.

The significant shift is that it now is a conversation, not Mara Miller telling women to STFU.

I'll drink to that. It's something. Feminist action accomplished that

The significant shift is that it now is a conversation, not Mara Miller telling women to STFU.
relevent thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2993425-Maria-Miller-interviewed-by-Janice-Turner-full-text

@GibbertyFlibbert are you now worried toilets will be unisex? What about girl guide camping trips? They are now potentially unisex, I'd say we should all be pretty angry about that and we certainly can't blame 'feminists' for that one.

@BarrackerBarmer do you blog, do you get on the telly? You should.

You are so clear, concise and wise, we need more of you and people like you; speaking out, making sense, you sum it up brilliantly (tragically so)

Yes it's made the elephant in the room that is the contradiction somewhat pink and sparkly, hard to ignore and it has got to be clarified

What Barracker said. That is what needs to be explained and sorted in the upcoming conversation. The significant shift is that it now is a conversation, not Mara Miller telling women to STFU.

This is a very well written statement and I'm glad that it is giving due credit to the concerns stated in the petition. It's an encouraging move.

I suspect that this is going to be our next fight. Woman as in natal, biological, born woman is going to have to be strengthened in law. This mish mash of legislation is going to implode soon and guess who will be at the forefront?