Some good news - Primark!

Surely you mean the Starmer rulebook? People in glass houses, etc...

They follow the Trump rulebook.

To be fair lobby and inclusivity groups have been pushing the false ideas MishyJDI just posted.

I sometimes wonder if the TRA's on here have ever attempted a quick read of the single sex exemptions of the EQA 2010.

Hint, single sex changing rooms and an 'exception to the general prohibition of gender reassignment discrimination' being the pertinent parts -

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7

Datun · Today 13:54
Ah. It was my understanding that Willoughby wanted sue over the equality act protected characteristic, not the GRA.

You may be right, but I think the Equality Act and GRA end up potentially clashing, with the GRC getting trumping power specially because of the lack of fool-proof clarity in the Equality Act that “sex” means biological sex. That seemed to be what Dr Michael Foran said in the oral evidence to the HoC.

That’s why it is nonsense to say easier GRCs would make no difference. (Even though no surgery or hormones are necessary for a GRC)

Gender Reassignment with no GRC does not have the same power ( except it did in that NHS judgement regarding the natal male with the protected characteristic of ‘Gender Reassignment’ as a woman, who mentioned taking off their underwear because they were ‘hot and sweaty’, was seen naked from the waist down by women in the changing room, but felt discriminated against and embarrassed when, following this, the manageress asked them if they always took off their underwear. They brought a law suit against the NHS trust and won. Legal people on this board thought the judgement was wrong.

A Catch 22 seems to be is that those who say they have the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment ( no diagnosis of dysphoria, no surgery, not even a stuffed bra, wig and lipstick necessary), may not be asked if they have a GRC. So they, and potentially any man who lies, end up being treated as though they do have one.

Ah. It was my understanding that Willoughby wanted sue over the equality act protected characteristic, not the GRA.

And I still don't think they would. No one is going to thank Willoughby for cementing in law that the only men allowed, legally, to access female changing rooms are those with a gender recognition certificate.

But I genuinely hope it does eventually go to court. And yes, right after we get the equality act definition of sex sorted out.

Datun · Today 09:26
I'd bloody love Willoughby to sue. So much so, I'd contribute to their crowdfunder.

They won't tho. They know the law.

Unfortunately, if IW has a GRC they could win.
The original intentions of the Equality Act and GRC are no longer clear given the muddying of the word ‘sex’ the dreadful way the GRA was written conflating gender and sex, and Lady Haldane’s judgement.

If IW does not have a GRC she should lose - but only if the judge is not institutionally captured by Stonewall like the one in the Sheffield NHS changing room last summer.
www.legalfeminist.org.uk/tag/gender-reassignment-discrimination/

The lack of clarity over the meaning of “sex” was discussed during oral evidence given at the House of Commons at the beginning of the year. There are links in the OP here:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4758082-petition-to-update-the-equality-act-thread-3

This Times article mentions the effect of Lady Haldane’s judgement.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mps-to-debate-gender-petition-backed-by-jk-rowling-qh0h0bctk
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4534821c-bf89-11ed-b52d-512231a0c9aa?shareToken=a2be6368ec3ec1a7a1e413545f54b9d9

It would be good if there were a court case though. The law is a mess, everyone is confused, and this was not the intention.

Sorry, this is where to sign. I posted the wrong link even though that is relevant too.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/petitions_noticeboard/4758082-petition-to-update-the-equality-act-thread-3

Or, shop elsewhere.

So to be absolutely clear Primark is not providing female only changing rooms.

It now provides gender neutral/mixed changing rooms where decent men will go to try on clothes,

and so called “women only” ones for:

• (biological) men who identify as transwomen

• men who say they identify as transwomen

• and, of lesser consideration, actual women (biological).

Everyone here who has not signed this petition to clarify that sex in the Equality Act, (which allows the exclusion of men/natal males from changing rooms) means biological sex,
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/equalities-and-rights-conflict-and-the-need-for-clarity

Maybe we should all do this. I wonder if the Women's became the Transwomen's by default, how long it would take for them to decide they want to be in with the women again? 🤷🏻‍♀️
Not long, I suspect.

If its unclear use the gender neutral rooms

TW are men. They can use the men's changing rooms. They should not be excluded from all changing rooms, just from the ones that all men are excluded from.

If anything the Primark changing rooms are more dangerous for women.

At least when they were gender neutral there was a chance that there would be a decent man about to protect young girls.

If you are a TW , I can't understand why you desperately need to use the changing room in a shop?

Can you not just buy something and take it back?

Ultimately its what I will tell my daughter to do. She will be warned NOT to use the changing rooms in Primark. Hopefully in time she will realise that it's because Primark disregard her safety completely and she will chose to spend her money elsewhere.

I'd bloody love Willoughby to sue. So much so, I'd contribute to their crowdfunder.

They won't tho. They know the law.

Article in the DM here where Primark have clarified their position, with everyone's favourite transwoman, India Willoughby, threatening to sue if Primark dare to return to actual sexed changing rooms 😀and claims: "You know trans women are recognised in law as women - yes? Fact."

Tesco don't seem to have fitting rooms at all now . It might seem very obvious to everyone else but I thought it was a stroke of genius yesterday when I took my trolley to the ladies and tried on a couple of things in there . It's so annoying when.you have to rerturn stuff . Anyway might be useful idea for others I thought ?

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/equalities-and-rights-conflict-and-the-need-for-clarity

MishyJDI · 20/03/2023 13:34
It would be illegal to turn away a person undergoing gender reassignment or intending to do so under the equality act, unless they risk assessed each person entering the changing room against whether stopping them would be proportionate to a legitimate aim.

Rubbish.

This is not a win. Vikki Lax on twitter has it in writing from Primark that by women they mean anyone who identifies as a woman. Primark changing rooms are not female only and will still attract predatory men.
https://twitter.com/VikkiLax1/status/1638072975869071364?t=Svs9_vXdsdmDSncfzMQtKw&s=19

ALL the invasion of women's spaces is to do with men. Yes.

How the individual male person perceives and chooses to identify themselves has no bearing at all on their impact on female only spaces.

Primark are copying the Labour Party & many other disingenuous fuckers. Looks like they are supporting women, but anyone st all can be a woman in their eyes.

Agreed. But that has been the mechanism since 2010 and the Equality Act, and there have only been isolated incidents of problems. Most changing room invasions are to do with men!

Define "problem". I'd say many, many women have been made to feel uncomfortable and in my book that IS a problem - a big one.

Or if you mean sexual assaults, then there have been more than a few of those. But even if there was only one, is that acceptable collateral damage in your book?

Oh ffs, that didn't last long did it. Primark bosses still can't tell what a woman is 😤

Primark seems to be trending on Twitter, so at least people are talking and asking whether its fine for males to use women's changing rooms.