Britain's equalities chief intervenes after Labour insisted tightening law to protect single-sex spaces would be unnecessary

32 replies

IwantToRetire · 31/12/2024 23:13

Britain's equalities watchdog has intervened after Labour insisted that tightening the law to protect single-sex spaces would be unnecessary.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has demanded to see the transgender policies of hundreds of public bodies after concerns about them were dismissed by ministers.

Baroness Falkner, chairman of the EHRC, said it would examine these and decide whether the Equality Act – which allows organisations to restrict access to women-only spaces such as bathrooms to those born female – is being followed correctly.

Article continues at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14226447/Britains-equalities-chief-intervene-Labour-single-sex-spaces.html

Hope we can trust the DM is an accurate report.

Late last night I posted on another thread that the EHRC should stand up to Labour who continue to claim that the SSE are enough, and women should be grateful, that even though they prioritise TW they have allowed biological women a small concession!

Baroness Falkner is another women who could also have been named woman of the year, standing up to the trans bullies and now Labour!

Britain's equalities chief intervenes on single-sex spaces

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has demanded to see the transgender policies of hundreds of public bodies after concerns about them were dismissed by ministers.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14226447/Britains-equalities-chief-intervene-Labour-single-sex-spaces.html

OP posts:

Ereshkigalangcleg · 01/01/2025 10:51

I think it’s being ignored here because for some reason posters think it will only affect Scottish law - it won’t.

What aspect do you think posters are ignoring?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 01/01/2025 10:50

HermioneWeasley · 01/01/2025 09:48

I never for a second trusted Labour to protect women and unfortunately I was right

Same here.

EvelynBeatrice · 01/01/2025 10:17

The judgement ( expected soon) in the For Women Scotland case recently heard at the Supreme Court - have a Google - will impact this question. I think it’s being ignored here because for some reason posters think it will only affect Scottish law - it won’t. The court are looking at both the U.K. wide Gender Recognition Act and the Equality Act and the statutory definitions of woman etc.

HermioneWeasley · 01/01/2025 09:48

I never for a second trusted Labour to protect women and unfortunately I was right

ResisterOfTwaddleRex · 01/01/2025 09:42

The government isn't blind. They're doing what they said they would do. This is the party that gave us the mess of GRA and EQA, and they're proud of both.

illinivich · 01/01/2025 09:05

The government seems to be blind to the reality of what is happening.

SSE are not mandatory because its not always necessary or practical to provide them. But very often when SSE are not being provided, gendered services or opportunities are given instead. And crucially providers are using sex language to advertise them. For example, when i go into a changing room advised as women only, i dont know what the providers definition of women is.

If SSE are not necessary or practical in these situations, how are gendered services? If the argument is that its difficult to police sex segregated services, surely its even harder to police gendered segregated services?

Also, service providers cannot just make up a protected characteristic and ignore the impact of that new characteristic on legally protected characteristics. They seem to be assuming everyone has a gender or that they can include gender and sex into one new characteristics.

PurpleSparkledPixie · 31/12/2024 23:24

Thanks for posting, will have a better read tomorrow.

Unflip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread