Labour promises to keep single-sex exemptions

And culture shift - towards what, more science denial

That's how I read it too. The imaginary future time in which people have lost their supposed 'prejudices' and 'fears', and realised that there is no such thing as being female, and that being a woman is a state of mind, not about a sexed body. And that all trans people are lovely, misunderstood and uniquely vulnerable.

biological sex is what is referenced by 'single sex

But - it's still a concession. It's still signalling awareness there's a problem. This is a good thing

If that is true, and I'm not convinced at all it is...it has only been done last minute as a result of feedback from party activists still about how much this means to many women who would normally have voted Labour.

There is no real clarity that biological is referred to by 'single sex' provision. Until it is officially recognised that TW are not W, and certainly not female......then it will continue to be on the basis of gender identity.

Labour is committed to reforming the Gender Recognition Act 2004 to introduce self-declaration for transgender people, but we are not complacent about the culture shift required to make LGBT+ inclusivity a reality

What does that mean? Why does LGBT inclusivity require self ID?
And culture shift - towards what, more science denial?
I want to believe, but after the Brighton incident and Labour Party's (non)response to it I'm not sure I can.

That doesn't even mean they're going to disallow transwomen on women's wards, surely? This person has read a promise to get rid of wards that allow plain old fashioned men and women to be put in together and assumed it's targeting trans people because this person knows that nobody can actually change sex

I agree! It just means an end to mixed sex wards - as most people understand them. Until the Labour party shows it understands what sex means it will not necessarily exclude male bodies people.

There is really nothing new here; no new statements or reinforcements of single sex spaces, services or anything else.
And that is because they have been essentially dishonest all along, and now find they cannot turn back from saying that TWAW.

This is a long term battle.

The only thing that it will lead to is businesses and services providers making changing rooms and toilet really gender neutral as a result if customer complaints.

I suspect this is all but inevitable now and women will have to spend several decades highlighting all the damage it has done and fighting over again for a right that was first won a century ago.

It all seems like a non committal fudge to me; lacking in clarity and definitive statements which can be plainly understood by all. They are trying to keep all on side, and in doing so keeping no-one on side.

This is not enough to make me reconsider spoiling my ballot. It is not saying anything truly new. They've been saying they are going to retain single sex exemptions for ages - but if they are not clear about the differences between gender identity and sex, and the implications of Self ID then single sex is meaningless.

This ain't going to work for women.

It's not working now when we have the exemptions and a relatively robust GRA.

Service providers will default to letting anyone in for fear of falling foul of a subsequent legal challenge.

It simply can't and won't work in practice.

The only solution for women is repealing the GRA and enforcing single sex exemptions.

Third spaces where necessary, but there won't be an overwhelming call for them as it rather removes the rationale for many.

Labour are trying to win back women they haven't won this one back.

I know there are supposed to be exemptions that apply to someone with a GRC. But I don't know how that works in practice

I can see how it can work regarding a rapist in a women's prison, and a wax my balls' case.

But this isn't going to help women and girls on a day to day basis.

The only thing that it will lead to is businesses and services providers making changing rooms and toilet really gender neutral as a result if customer complaints.

Do you know how they enforce the exemption? As people have pointed out someone's birth certificate will say female. Where do you go from there?

The real unsquareable circle is privacy. Not GRC or no GRC, self-ID or gatekeeping.

That's what I meant when I said I'd need far more substantial detail before I change my vote.

Let's say you're advertising a job to work at Rape Crisis. It's advertised on the single sex (XX, not legal sex) exemptions. You'd need a method to confirm applicants meet the requirements but privacy means you can't have one.

Additionally, as we all know EHRC, which provides guidance on the exemptions, has been thoroughly captured and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to remove parts of guidance it put out that actually went contrary to legislation.

A tiny paragraph in a manifesto does not address how Labour plans to surmount these issues and, since the party and its candidates seem determined to avoid interrogation on this as much as possible, my vote's staying in my pocket.

But - it's still a concession. It's still signalling awareness there's a problem. This is a good thing.

Plus, there is absolutely no guarantee, whatsoever, that the Labour Party actually understand the law in the way that we think they might.

They could easily be saying they'll make it easier to get a GRC, and limit spaces to those with the GRC. That makes perfect sense in terms of what they might view as a 'compromise'.

I know there are supposed to be exemptions that apply to someone with a GRC. But I don't know how that works in practice

As people have pointed out someone's birth certificate will say female.

And both the EHRC and MoJ have said that legal sex is the only thing that matters.

From the Manifesto p68:
^Labour is committed to reforming the Gender Recognition Act 2004 to introduce self-declaration for transgender people, but we are not
complacent about the culture shift required to make LGBT+ inclusivity a reality^.

They say 'LGBT'. They mean, 'T'.

Presumably they’ve mentally changed the meaning of sex to ‘lady/man brains’.

Lang. Do you know how they enforce the exemption? As people have pointed out someone's birth certificate will say female. Where do you go from there?

@LangCleg (and others) I hope you're right, that this is a step in the right direction. Like you though, not sure if it's enough for me to actually vote Labour (which I normally do). I have to vote for someone though! Who? I feel so let down by the very politicians who should be championing women. I only came across the Labour Women's Declaration petition today and signed. Nobody I know IRL seems to even see the problem with self-ID.

The opposite, I'd imagine.

What on earth does the bit about 'review blood donations' mean?

One would hope it means that they acknowledge that sex-not-gender is the key point when donating (or receiving) blood.

The only purpose of those exemptions is to exclude TW from certain services and provisions.

Lang which exemptions do you mean? The single-sex exemptions are about providing different services for women and men (like single-sex hospital wards) or about providing services for only women or only men. Nothing to do with transwomen.

I think the thing to take away from this is that Labour have realized that their attitude was going to cost them votes from women and are therefore potentially open to being shifted further if it is made clear that this isn't enough. It's not the concession I wanted but clearly they've realized that they can't just ignore us.

Yes.

I've had a walk. Lang's right. This is a genuine concession, and I know why the AWAs are in such a tizz about it - they thought they'd sewn it up and that women had been entirely squashed by the ostensibly progressive parties. To see us being thrown a bone, however unimpressive, is a marker that actually, we don't count for nothing they way the AWAs have been spinning it. I do feel a teensy bit better, though I am still undecided. But it is a real, concrete thing.

Handy guide:

Oh yeah, I don't trust them one bit. But the fact that they've realized that "begone, witches" isn't going to work means that rather than giving up we should push harder.

I mean, this is better than the blatant fuck off that they were giving women before

But look at the absolutely ludicrous lengths women have had to go to to get to the stage of being given less of a fuck off than they (Labour) had been till now.

It's a cynical short term ploy to fool women into voting for them; and one they only conceded after a bitter battle for acknowledgement of the sex class of woman and realising we weren't just gong to shut up I suspect it will vanish into thin air soon enough.