A thought about 'cis'

Gender reassignment discrimination is things like trans people being sacked on the grounds they are trans. Trans rights aren't more important than those of other groups in law and competing rights exist between them and other protected groups.

To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination

Unless you have a GRC the comparator for an MTF trans person in terms of sex based rights is another male without the PC of gender reassignment. This isn't new information, Dadjoke.

Yes

No. Gender reassignment is a permanent process, not something that happens a few times a week, like many of the people under the trans umbrella according to controversial organisations like Stonewall.

We were talking about the law. So, no "people saying things" does not establish what the law is.

The law makes clear provision for single sex spaces.

No, because trans men are not women, and they can get pregnant.

Because they are female. In my world an adult human female is a woman. Men don't get pregnant, because they are male. So as I said, thanks for acknowledging their sex.

because trans men are not women, and they can get pregnant.

Only women can get pregnant so this makes no sense

No, because trans men are not women, and they can get pregnant.

What a load of bollocks. Transmen are women.

Transmen may not want to be women, yet they are.

Your distortions of language and biology make no coherent sense.

"In the Equality Act it is known as gender reassignment. All transsexual people share the common characteristic of gender reassignment.

To be protected from gender reassignment discrimination, you do not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery to change from your birth sex to your preferred gender. This is because changing your physiological or other gender attributes is a personal process rather than a medical one.

You can be at any stage in the transition process – from proposing to reassign your gender, to undergoing a process to reassign your gender, or having completed it. "

Who's for a sandwich of bombay duck and prarie oysters between two slices of sweetbread, with a sea cucumber salad on the side?

You can call things whatever you want, it doesn't make them that thing.

I asked my husband about that - he agrees

The testimony of any female people about their experiences must be independently corroborated by some male people neutral observers.

Because some mere women saying it could never be good enough on its own.

That bit always gets me too.

Females: this is a female only space, it needs to include all females, we wish to set our own boundaries here for our own needs as a sex class.

Males: hmm. We must hold a poll, an inquiry or check research to ascertain the objective validity of your claims and then we will see whether or not we grant you permission for your 'boundaries'.

Females: Thank you for sharing that example of why women need single sex provision: because male people have this massive issue in seeing them as equal and competent humans.

Males: You're not being very ladylike in your stridency about all this which makes us less inclined to listen to and grant your requests.

Females: ffs.......

Because some mere women saying it could never be good enough on its own.

There are multiple contexts in which it is known to all except the ideologically blinded that some women will self-exclude, i.e. be driven away, if adult male humans are also there. Refuges, rape counselling services, swimming sessions and so on.

YY. And for the record, plenty of refuges and rape counselling services do provide a different service to males than they do for women, because of the risk of the women they are set up to help self excluding. Lisa Townsend, Surrey PCC made a very moving statement about women in the sector she had spoken to. How dare male people of whatever gender identity presume to speak over them.

I don't know of any case law which establishes that women's dignity, privacy or safety are undermined by the mere presence of trans individuals.

Case law, eh?

Because some mere women saying it could never be good enough on its own.

There are multiple contexts in which it is known to all except the ideologically blinded that some women will self-exclude, i.e. be driven away, if adult male humans are also there. Refuges, rape counselling services, swimming sessions and so on.

If I want to welcome those women, males must be excluded. I do not need "case law" to prove to me that those women exist. Talking to them myself is quite sufficient for me to be aware of their existence, on account of me not being a raging misogynist.

Obviously, a group for pregnant people

Why should they be exempt, by your logic? "Pregnant people" and cervical cancer sufferers are women, all of them. Thanks for acknowledging that.

(Gender reassignment incorporates all transgender individuals).

No.

If you are accessing a service provided for men-only or women-only, the organisation providing it should treat you according to your gender identity. In very restricted circumstances it is lawful for an organisation to provide a different service or to refuse the service to someone who is undergoing, intends to undergo or has undergone gender reassignment"

"Very restricted circumstances" is not part of the law, this is scope creep. They've changed some of their guidance in response to feminist campaigning. They've also acknowledged that males without GRC are all male for the purpose of the protected characteristic of sex. But the fact that they are institutionally captured is well known. Here's to more sunlight in the media, starting with the brilliant Nolan reporting.

I don't know of any case law which establishes that women's dignity, privacy or safety are undermined by the mere presence of trans individuals.

It has nothing to do with individuals being trans. There is plenty of evidence that women's dignity, privacy and safety are undermined by male individuals. I'm sure there is case law, but even if there isn't, it is the reason we have any single sex spaces at all and clearly provided for in equality law.

The EHRC guidance says:

"If you are accessing a service provided for men-only or women-only, the organisation providing it should treat you according to your gender identity. In very restricted circumstances it is lawful for an organisation to provide a different service or to refuse the service to someone who is undergoing, intends to undergo or has undergone gender reassignment"

(Gender reassignment incorporates all transgender individuals).