’Because you know, to me, therapy is political, and it isn't always seen as that.'
I haven’t seen anyone else comment on this last line in Wadhwa’s speech. There’s a reason why therapy isn’t always seen as political and that’s because therapy should never be political.
Also thank you to CharleyParley for another interesting post:
There remains a question about applying for a job as a legal male that quotes Schedule 9 of the Equality Act which normally limits a job to applicants of one sex, but ultimately it is up to the organisation to decide who they employ.
However, if a man had wanted to apply for the job, but was turned down and referred to the Schedule 9 Genuine Occupational Requirement restriction, such a rejected male candidate could argue that he'd been unlawfully discriminated against by RCS accepting another legal male while rejecting him, but I do not believe any such potential candidates exist.
Here is a clear demonstration of a situation where the framework of the Equality Act lets women down. It ought to be possible to legally challenge the decision taken by RCS. Women who are unable to use this service ought to have some kind of legal redress, but I can’t see any way the law could be applied to protect those women.
And so the only people protected here are men who applied alongside Wadhwa, but were rejected because of their sex. And of course no other man applied because the advert was specific about the requirement to be a woman. The only theoretical challenge I can imagine is a man who was otherwise well qualified for this job, but chose not to apply, because the wording of the advertisement suggested men were excluded, when in fact that proved not to be the case.
Either way, the women who should be protected by the law, the women who need that protection most, appear not to be covered, unless someone who understands the law better than me can clarifiy?