Labour promises to keep single-sex exemptions

This will not be enough for the TRAs. They will not accept any restriction on their "womanhood" whatsoever.

And given Labour has willingly and eagerly bent over backwards to accommodate them on everything to date, there is zero chance they will suddenly find the balls to stand up to them and outright say they are not woman enough for x, y or z service.

How can single-sex exemptions be enforced when any individual can change "sex" on their identification documents at will?

They can't. If Labour, or any party, were serious about upholding sex based rights they would include a specific pledge that as part of GRA reform they would legislate for documents to retain actual sex and, for those who wish have an additional 'gender identity' marker and then clearly demarcate those areas when sex would take precedent and 'gender identity' be ignored.

With these two policies, women and girls will have to fight for our spaces continually.

My view precisely.

I think hospital wards would be a good question to probe.

This reads like Labour want the penny and the bun. They can’t afford to annoy women voters but they need all the woke students to win seats. I momentarily got my hopes up, but then saw the LGBT+ excerpt. I will be writing to my candidate with questions.

Is it possible for one or both OPs to ask for a merged thread or something?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3749325-Hang-on-Labour-manifesto-references-single-sex-exemptions

Ensure that the single-sex-based exemptions contained in the Equality Act 2010 are understood and fully enforced in service provision.

Whilst actively pushing for self ID? They clearly don't 'understand' do they?

The problem with the EA is that it allows female (actual female not 'bought a birth certificate female')facilities, spaces and opportunities when it is proportional. It's still open to interpretation and the onus seems to be on women and services providers to prove that they should be exclusively female.

With these two policies, women and girls will have to fight for our spaces continually.

Theoretically you can do both - allow more men to be treated as female under self ID and ensure that organisations can apply single sex exemptions on a case by case basis - except we know that organisations are already not applying these exemptions - the law needs strengthening in this area not just leaving as it is.

They clearly don't 'understand' do they?

They do understand.

They want to make self-ID for daily life but to avoid forcing women to wax balls or letting dodgy blokes man rape crisis lines, or penises in shelters.

Whether or not that's enough to make feminists hold their noses and vote for them remains to be seen.

It's not enough for me.

How can single-sex exemptions be enforced when any individual can change "sex" on their identification documents at will? Right now anyone can their passport with a doctor's letter. Self-ID would mean even birth certificate (which is not used in practice as a means of identification anyway) can be changed at will.

So in a hypothetical example, if an obviously male person shows up to a female-only service like women's refuge, how can the staff deny him entry when he has official documentation stating that he's a woman? They can hardly do a DNA test at the door.

It means absolutely nothing if they refuse to recognise accurate definitions of WOMAN and FEMALE.

They are trying to gaslight everyone who cares about honesty, respect and simple human rights.

What I posted on the other thread:

The manifesto is with regard to single sex exemptions in EqA. They're saying they'll make it easier to get a GRC but tighten up the limitations to the entitlements the GRC affords - so protecting refuges, rape crisis services, etc.

This is likely an outcome of the Parliamentary Committee that we spoke about at length here and lobbying by WPUK.

It's much better than I thought it would be - they're not in full denial like the LibDems and the Greens - but I would need much more detail on how they plan to extend, make robust, and enforce application of EqA's single sex exemptions before I put a cross anywhere near a Labour candidate on my ballot paper.

I find myself wondering if they actually mean what they're saying
Same
As for GRA ammendment plus upholding single sex cant see how they can do both. Will be emailing my local candidates

Ensure that the single-sex-based exemptions contained in the Equality Act 2010 are understood and fully enforced in service provision.

Whilst actively pushing for self ID? They clearly don't 'understand' do they?

Labour will put women at the heart of our government

So who's that then? Apparently everyone who feels like it.

A total load of meaningless nonsense, I hope the cookies are worth it Corbyn. 👏👏

To be honest it reads to me as if they are trying to fob off the uppity women.

There needs to be a much clearer statement making it clear that single sex means gender identity will be ignored in situations x, y, z and it needs to be repeated by all senior party members to make clear what the policy is and that they won't be swayed from it by woke bullies.

And the tiny minorities deserve inclusion and protection but not at the expense of the overwhelming majority.

"I'm not LGBT so therefore my needs will always be secondary. That's what I take from this."

Yes, that is how I view it. The rights of the overwhelming majority will play second fiddle to tiny minorities.

"I don't trust any politicians on this at the moment."

I don't trust politicians, end of!

Pleased to see no mention of the Spousal "veto".

I'll believe they intend to enforce single sex exemptions when I see senior Labour politicians all over Twitter stating their party will make single sex, as determined at conception and observed at birth, spaces a compulsory legal requirement in situations where people are vulnerable due to being in a state of undress a state of unconsciousness or where physical contact is involved.

And when they are questioned by trans privilege activists as to whether this means transwomen will be banned from the ladies they answer unequivocally 'Yes. Transwomen are not female and will be banned from women's spaces'.

Bet I don't see any such thing. They haven't even apologised to Linda Bellos yet.

The two aims are totally incompatible...it would be interesting to hear how they square them.

Mealy mouthed bullshit.

I wouldn't trust them any more than I would a pit of angry snakes.

Why do they need to centre LGBT+ people in everything they do? Why don't they just centre 'people'?

I'm not LGBT so therefore my needs will always be secondary. That's what I take from this.