Edinburgh Women's Aid is to use the equality act exceptions

That was the man who claimed to be a woman and attack two girls in a supermarket toilets in Fife. Unsurprisingly the ‘process’ involved didn’t put him off as there is no process just a statement, should he be questioned, that he is a woman.

There have been multiple instances of men accessing (and in several cases then causing trouble in) both women's refuges and rape crisis centres. In the UK and other countries.

This is not a never-happens situation.

ETA example specifically of a Women's Aid refuge: www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/politics/sex-offender-stayed-in-leeds-womens-refuge-for-71-days-as-campaigners-protest-leeds-council-over-scandal-3920683

Haven't got to the end of this good news thread but...
Even if a male has a GRC, they can be lawfully excluded on the grounds of Sex or GR from women's single sex services and spaces in situations where women's human rights of privacy, dignity and safety are engaged. That is, RCCs, refuges, communal changing rooms and toilets, etc. This will not be affected by an adverse SC ruling. (What that would affect is the right of women to associate in women only groups -this would affect lesbians worst of all.)

IMO insisting that all or most services have to be trans inclusive (including males) would be unlawful discrimination against women as the group which needs these services most and because it is a situation in which our rights to privacy, dignity and safety come into play.

ETA: IANAL

Yes quite. If they claim discrimination due to sex ( because female) then the refuge can correctly claim that they accept females. There is no discrimination.

If they claim discrimination due to gender identity then they are admitting they are male and the equality act allows for exemptions in the case of GRC.

The only thing they could say is that they were turned around 'for done reason' which isn't really going to hold my water.

What the Peggie Vs Upton case shows however that no one ever needs to admit to having a GRC or not even in bleedin COURT! So what's the actual point if you aren't allowed to ask to see it/if they have one.

For those asking if this is new...

Many WA centres in Scotland have tried to the best of their abilities to operate on a single-sex basis. This has been made exceptionally hard because SWA continues to present as the mouthpiece to Government and is very TWAW.

There is also the issue of younger staff - many of whom were very radicalised.

The clear, public statement is a massive breakthrough and represents a great deal of hard work (for years). Most critically, it's fantastic news for the women of Edinburgh.

That really is appalling.

So, Cameron Downing:

1. Claimed to be 'non binary' and used that as a reason to access a Rape Crisis centre.
2. Made a false accusation of sexual assault.
3. Was apparently welcomed at ERCC.

Just for anyone who thinks that a man identifying as trans to access women's services is unlikely to happen.

'In terms of the risk assessments specific to sexual offending, you scored in areas including hostility towards women, lack of concern for others, sexual preoccupation and deviant sexual preference. You have been assessed as being at a high risk of sexual reoffending. You have relationship deficits, and have been manipulative as well as showing a callous disregard within your friendship groups. Your offences are likely to have caused significant psychological and physical harm to all your victims, and their psychological recovery from your actions could be prolonged.

You present with a high likelihood of causing serious harm, both sexual and violent, as well as controlling behaviour within the context of intimate relationships. The likelihood of reoffending is not exclusive to men you are in an intimate relationship with, but includes adult women known to you. You have the capacity to cause physical and sexual harm as well as emotional and psychological distress. Your risk is not currently manageable in the community. '

https://judiciary.scot/home/sentences-judgments/sentences-and-opinions/2024/07/16/hma-v-cameron-downing

https://news.sky.com/story/ex-snp-equalities-officer-cameron-downing-who-wanted-to-beat-up-terfs-jailed-for-sexual-and-physical-assaults-13178930

'A former SNP equalities officer who once told how he wanted to "beat the f*" out of gender critical feminists has been jailed for a string of sexual and physical assaults.

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) branded Cameron Downing a "dangerous individual whose predatory and manipulative behaviour has inflicted unimaginable trauma".

The 24-year-old, who is non-binary and uses he/they pronouns, targeted six male and female victims at addresses in the Edinburgh, Glasgow and Falkirk areas between 2016 and 2023.'

https://archive.ph/9aRUo

'A male sexual predator who harboured “hostility towards women” accessed services at a controversial “trans-inclusive” female rape crisis centre, it has emerged.
Cameron Downing, a former SNP equalities officer who was <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/9aRUo/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/16/former-snp-equalities-officer-jailed-sexual-assaults/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">this week given a nine-year sentence for a catalogue of attacks, claimed to have received extensive support from Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre (ERCC).
At the time, the centre offered services only for women, but under its inclusion policy also welcomed biological males who said they identified as female or non-binary.
Downing, who identifies as non-binary and was found by a jury to have falsely accused one of his victims of raping him, said in January 2022 that the ERCC was the reason he was “able to keep going” and that he “cannot put into words how much they’ve helped me.”

I wonder what the forthcoming Radio Scotland programme mentioned in the article is? Don't see anything specific on the schedule so might be part of a Sunday morning "moral issues" type programme?

"An internal government communication sent to the Presiding Officer says Edinburgh Women’s Aid had flagged its policy position ahead of taking part in a BBC Radio Scotland programme due to air on March 9."

www.bbc.co.uk/schedules/p00fzl8d/2025/03/09

The Times article: Edinburgh Women’s Aid has now explicitly stated it will prohibit trans women or males who identify as non-binary from attending its group support services or refuges even if they hold a gender recognition certificate.

Group support services - so presumably they could offer individual counselling to trans people who identify as female?
That’s Being Kind without affecting women in group meetings or refuges, who (very reasonably imho) might be distressed by having men there.

Not quite the same as The Times’ headline and second paragraph One of Scotland’s largest women’s aid charities has said it will not allow trans women to use its services, in opposition to the organisation’s umbrella body.

But would they deny funding on the basis that it doesn’t comply with their requirement to be ‘trans-inclusive’?

I think it's a risk, but as we all know most trans people don't have GRCs, and actually I don't think that many trans people at all would go through the process of sharing (real or imaginary) sexual trauma in bad faith AND repeating that they were born female when they clearly weren't.

How many men need to intrude into female spaces before you think it matters? Does it matter when one man tells a female nurse he is a woman and complains when she doesn’t undress in front of him? Does it matter when a man states he is a woman, leads a rape crisis centre that denies women single sex spaces and despite having no counselling qualifications takes sessions with raped women where he listens to them recount their trauma? Does it matter when a man tells a young girl he is a woman to persuade her to take a lift and then kidnaps her subject her to horrific sexual assaults? Does it matter when a man tells a college he is a woman and therefore must be allowed to help apply fake tan to a young female classmate?

Through gritted teeth….

Well, I don't know. It depends what the Supreme court say. The Scotgov argued that a man without a GRC remains a man and can be excluded, but also suggested that a man with a GRC has become a woman for all purposes. So I'd assume he no longer has a 'trans' status.

It's not like any of it makes sense.

But also, if they have a GRC then they are a trans woman and WA can legally exclude them using the SSE.

Very very good news. And yes, I too hope other Women's Aid services watch, learn and copy. There are over 300 dedicated trans charities many of which are extremely well funded. They don't need to muscle in on already stretched women's services

Discrimination based on their gender transition would have a comparator of any other male. So if males are excluded, they're not being discriminated against.

And sex discrimination of course would be based on their sex. Not gender.

The only way it would fly is if they've had a GRC, and if the Supreme court decides that has actually changed their legal sex. Because ... and here I am unsure ... if a GRC changes legal sex, the comparator becomes that of a woman? But then, if a GRC changes legal sex and if that sex has been changed, then surely a male with a GRC is legally no longer 'transitioning' but has now become, legally, female for all purposes.

This nonsense is where we are at. A man cannot become a woman, whatever certificate he holds. Repeal the GRA.

I agree. This is good news, whether it’s a recent policy change or not.

And the Scottish government response— what a welcome turnaround from Sturgeon’s slavish allegiance to trans orthodoxy!

I’m not sure but if they are claiming they’re female à la Upton, then how would they be able to claim unlawful discrimination? Discrimination would be on the basis of them being female but frightening (disconcerting?) looking to other service users. Being frightening looking to other service users isn’t a protected characteristic. Women’s Aid are allowed to refuse service to anyone provided it isn’t on the basis of a protected characteristic, aren’t they?

Indeed, @ArabellaScott and I think it's extremely useful.

I think this is the first time I've seen an organisation specifically lay out what using the SSE actually means. Excluding males.

I think it's a risk, but as we all know most trans people don't have GRCs, and actually I don't think that many trans people at all would go through the process of sharing (real or imaginary) sexual trauma in bad faith AND repeating that they were born female when they clearly weren't.

Also I imagine that women's services are pretty good at identifying potential female clients who they felt they wouldn't be able to work with and kindly signposting them elsewhere. So hopefully they could follow the same process here.

But agree that there is a small risk of a really difficult situation.

It's great news, isn't it? Now I want to see other Women's Aid services and their affiliates taking the same stance. (And preferably the sacking of all those who argued to accept men).

This suggests it certainly wasn’t the standard operating policy of refuges in Scotland

It's been a while since I encountered a writing style quite as irritating as that one @BackToLurk