Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

An update to the WI Announcement thread. My DH just got a reply to his application to join them.

966 replies

Another2Cats · 12/05/2025 19:49

This is not a thread about a thread, but recently there was a thread about the Womens Institute announcement that they would not be implementing the SC ruling anytime soon.

I was reading the thread at the time and, entirely jokingly, I suggested to my DH that he should apply to join the WI and see what they say.

So he did just that (he totally gets the GC point of view) and I posted about this at the time:

Another2Cats · 08/05/2025 19:45

I just got my DH to send an email to them:

Hello,

My name is Xxxx (very obviously masculine name). I just read your transgender policy and understand that you accept men.

I am a man and would like to join the local WI group in [xxxx city] (the nearest branch for me is in yyyy [suburb of xxxx city]).

Should I just turn up next Wednesday evening and sign up?

I'm really waiting with bated breath to see what sort of response there is.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5330297-womens-institute-announcement?reply=144143149
.

Well, it turns out that they sent a response this lunchtime.

This is their reply (although with contact details redacted):

Good morning,

Thank you for your enquiry. Our policy states that “WI membership is open to all women who live as women, including transgender women.” If you fit within this statement, you will be more than welcome to attend. I am afraid the WI is not open to men.

Kind regards,

[Redacted]

[Name Redacted]
Federation Secretary
[Two cities - well, a city and a town - redacted] Federation of WIs CIO
[Address redacted]
[Telephone number redacted]
Office hours: Tues, Weds, Thurs 9am – 1pm

Please note the new email address – [Redacted]
.

I don't know, is this something that DH should take up with the EHRC now that he has it in writing?

Women’s institute announcement | Mumsnet

Published earlier today.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5330297-womens-institute-announcement

OP posts:
Thread gallery
32
CheshireSplat · 31/05/2025 14:23

Yes, Bates Wells are a leading charity firm.

I've just looked on their website to see what guidance they've issued since the Supreme Court judgment. Looks like they're waiting on the further ECHR guidance:

"Unfortunately, the EHRC Update does not sufficiently clarify the position for employers and service providers. It is hoped matters will become clearer when the EHRC publishes further statutory guidance in June 2025, following a period of consultation with relevant stakeholders from mid-May 2025."

bateswells.co.uk/updates/uk-supreme-court-unanimously-rules-legal-definition-of-woman-in-the-equality-act-2010-is-based-on-biological-sex-for-women-scotland-ltd-v-the-scottish-ministers-2025-uksc-16/

misscockerspaniel · 31/05/2025 13:32

According to the annual accounts, the legal advisers are Bates Wells

2023_24-Trustee-Report-and-Financial-Statement.pdf

https://www.thewi.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/723821/2023_24-Trustee-Report-and-Financial-Statement.pdf

TheSlantedOwl · 31/05/2025 13:12

Good luck, Mrs and Mr Cats!

BonfireLady · 31/05/2025 11:34

Another2Cats · 31/05/2025 09:02

Ok, so ... we did a thing.

The claim form has been issued.

The WI instructed a firm of London solicitors who went on the record yesterday and contacted DH.

I'd never heard of them before so quickly checked on the Legal 500 to see if they were there.

It turns out that they are a Tier 1 ranked firm in the area of Charity & Not for Profit (so these are people who know what they're doing).

Given the size of the WI, I guess it's not at all surprising that they would use a firm like this.

Maybe, now that there are some grown-ups involved, things may get resolved.

I will keep this thread updated as much as I can but there is a set timetable by which different actions must be done that cannot be hurried.

As and when there is anything to add, I'll be back.

Editing to say well done! It'll be interesting to see what happens next 👀

Unfortunately even big tier 1 firms can have an interesting take on the law on this whole subject.

One such firm told my children's school that a whole subsection of a statutory guidance document wasn't statutory - they actually told the school that the paragraphs in question were "draft". Even after I sent the school confirmation from the DfE that the whole document was statutory, and that none of it was draft, the school went back to the law firm... who again said that this subsection wasn't statutory (they repeated their assertion that it was draft, so didn't count as statutory)🤦‍♀️

Statutory guidance is secondary legislation but it's still part of the law, with "musts" that have to be followed by law (because they tie directly back to primary legislation) and "shoulds" that need to be followed unless there is good reason not to do so (because it's been validated as the best way to practically apply the law). It beggars belief that a law firm would say that any legislation doesn't need to be followed - and of course that an organisation would even ask a law firm if they need to bother following the law - but we do live in odd times whenever the subject of gender identity is involved.

The EA is primary legislation, so is very clear on its absolutes in law, but it wouldn't be too much of a surprise to find a big law firm advising its clients that it's all very complicated and they need to wait for final EHRC statutory guidance etc (or any other variation on the "kick it down the road" theme), therefore delaying any actual change in its clients' policies. Don't-do-anything-yet seems to be all the rage when it comes to organisations making changes so that they comply with the law. Even in the Houses of Parliament where laws are actually created.... FFS 🤦‍♀️

(I'm now in some very bizarre conversations about it all - but obviously that's somewhat of a derail here! I'll post about it separately at some point but probably not in full until after my daughter has finished her GCSEs as I don't want my increased risk of being doxed to add stress to her at what is already a difficult time)

Chersfrozenface · 31/05/2025 09:48

I'm sure gardeners would plant some veg for a worthy case brought by a man.

Original poster
Another2Cats · 31/05/2025 09:45

ArabellaScott · 31/05/2025 09:36

There is a fund that may be able to help, OP.

https://jkrwf.org/

Thanks for the link but that is just for women and it is DH who is bringing the claim.

In this case, the whole point is to prove that DH would not be eligible for support from that fund!

There is another thread here about a witch that got banned from witching because of her GC views (it was reported in The Times last night). She is exactly the sort of person for the fund.

OP posts:
TangenitalContrivences · 31/05/2025 09:38

Another2Cats · 31/05/2025 09:30

Yes

Show quote history

#LEGENDS

ArabellaScott · 31/05/2025 09:36

There is a fund that may be able to help, OP.

https://jkrwf.org/

Original poster
Another2Cats · 31/05/2025 09:33

NoBinturongsHereMate · 31/05/2025 09:29

Wow. Yes, let us know if gardening is needed (or should it be flower arranging, in this case?). Although you'd hope a lawyer looking at this would just tell the WI to sort themselves out and get with the supreme court ruling.

I would imagine WI national has a standard legal firm that they will use for everything, and you'd expect that to be a big one. They won't be bringing the big guns in specially for you.

"They won't be bringing the big guns in specially for you."

That was exactly my thoughts.

They're a national charity and this is most likely the firm that they go to for any of their legal stuff.

"Although you'd hope a lawyer looking at this would just tell the WI to sort themselves out and get with the supreme court ruling."

You would hope so indeed.

OP posts:
Original poster
Another2Cats · 31/05/2025 09:30

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 31/05/2025 09:17

Wow! Hang on a mo.... WI have got a team of expensive solicitors on this. Are you and DH going it alone?

Yes

OP posts:
NoBinturongsHereMate · 31/05/2025 09:29

Wow. Yes, let us know if gardening is needed (or should it be flower arranging, in this case?). Although you'd hope a lawyer looking at this would just tell the WI to sort themselves out and get with the supreme court ruling.

I would imagine WI national has a standard legal firm that they will use for everything, and you'd expect that to be a big one. They won't be bringing the big guns in specially for you.

Chersfrozenface · 31/05/2025 09:24

Should you need to pay for your own big guns, Mr & Mrs Cat, I'm sure help would be forthcoming.

Davros · 31/05/2025 09:23

@Another2Cats what an update! This is really serious, you and your DH are amazing. I’m ready to garden

TopographicalTime · 31/05/2025 09:22

Amazing! We really need this to get picked up by the media, it's an ideal headline maker

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 31/05/2025 09:17

Wow! Hang on a mo.... WI have got a team of expensive solicitors on this. Are you and DH going it alone?

Bluebootsgreenboots · 31/05/2025 09:08

Wow. You and your DH are amazing, following with interest.

Original poster
Another2Cats · 31/05/2025 09:02

Ok, so ... we did a thing.

The claim form has been issued.

The WI instructed a firm of London solicitors who went on the record yesterday and contacted DH.

I'd never heard of them before so quickly checked on the Legal 500 to see if they were there.

It turns out that they are a Tier 1 ranked firm in the area of Charity & Not for Profit (so these are people who know what they're doing).

Given the size of the WI, I guess it's not at all surprising that they would use a firm like this.

Maybe, now that there are some grown-ups involved, things may get resolved.

I will keep this thread updated as much as I can but there is a set timetable by which different actions must be done that cannot be hurried.

As and when there is anything to add, I'll be back.

OP posts:
TempestTost · 24/05/2025 15:13

lcakethereforeIam · 15/05/2025 10:05

I suspect there might be a few Hayley Cropper-type tw who are probably valued and even loved members of their WI. These men might be genuinely vulnerable and may lose a major part of their social lives. On a case-by-case basis it could be genuinely, emotionally difficult to tell these men they are no longer welcome. However, if the law says they have to go then go they must.

I'm sure there are many lovely men who would benefit and benefit from an organisation such as the WI. It seems discriminatory not to also let them join just because they're not prepared to put on a skirt and lippy and....soften their hand movements, whatever the fuck that means!

The WI should signpost these men to other organisations that could fill the void in the event that they are told to leave.

There are men's organizations that have a sort of associated women's wing. I don't see why they couldn't manage something similar. A kind of paralell organization. They could work together for certain things, where it made sense. Like jam competitions.

WallaceinAnderland · 24/05/2025 13:49

Good point. Ask if they allow transmen to join.

Merrymouse · 24/05/2025 13:39

potpourree · 24/05/2025 13:33

So just to confirm if I borrow my wife's dress, get a pair of heels from Oxfam and visit the boots make up counter I am welcome

No, that's not 'confirming' as they haven't said that.

Much as I'd be eager to hear a single example of what someone needs to do in order to be 'living as a woman' putting words in their mouth doesn't help - far better to sit back and let them come up with it.
However, OP isn't going down this route, they're going down 'you're discriminating against a group of men because some are allowed in and others aren't ' (regardless of the criteria required for being in the first group).

Isn't it more that they are discriminating against all men because the membership requirements are more restrictive for men than women? Women can join regardless of gender identity, but men must have a female gender identity.

potpourree · 24/05/2025 13:33

So just to confirm if I borrow my wife's dress, get a pair of heels from Oxfam and visit the boots make up counter I am welcome

No, that's not 'confirming' as they haven't said that.

Much as I'd be eager to hear a single example of what someone needs to do in order to be 'living as a woman' putting words in their mouth doesn't help - far better to sit back and let them come up with it.
However, OP isn't going down this route, they're going down 'you're discriminating against a group of men because some are allowed in and others aren't ' (regardless of the criteria required for being in the first group).

LeftieRightsHoarder · 24/05/2025 13:24

DuesToTheDirt · 12/05/2025 20:27

Arrgh, kill me now!

Show quote history

No, don’t despair, Dues. We can do it. I’m practising softer hand gestures right now. With a kind smile on my face.

I think DH is calling an ambulance …

forgotmyusername1 · 24/05/2025 13:14

Another2Cats · 12/05/2025 19:49

This is not a thread about a thread, but recently there was a thread about the Womens Institute announcement that they would not be implementing the SC ruling anytime soon.

I was reading the thread at the time and, entirely jokingly, I suggested to my DH that he should apply to join the WI and see what they say.

So he did just that (he totally gets the GC point of view) and I posted about this at the time:

Another2Cats · 08/05/2025 19:45

I just got my DH to send an email to them:

Hello,

My name is Xxxx (very obviously masculine name). I just read your transgender policy and understand that you accept men.

I am a man and would like to join the local WI group in [xxxx city] (the nearest branch for me is in yyyy [suburb of xxxx city]).

Should I just turn up next Wednesday evening and sign up?

I'm really waiting with bated breath to see what sort of response there is.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5330297-womens-institute-announcement?reply=144143149
.

Well, it turns out that they sent a response this lunchtime.

This is their reply (although with contact details redacted):

Good morning,

Thank you for your enquiry. Our policy states that “WI membership is open to all women who live as women, including transgender women.” If you fit within this statement, you will be more than welcome to attend. I am afraid the WI is not open to men.

Kind regards,

[Redacted]

[Name Redacted]
Federation Secretary
[Two cities - well, a city and a town - redacted] Federation of WIs CIO
[Address redacted]
[Telephone number redacted]
Office hours: Tues, Weds, Thurs 9am – 1pm

Please note the new email address – [Redacted]
.

I don't know, is this something that DH should take up with the EHRC now that he has it in writing?

He needs to reply

So just to confirm if I borrow my wife's dress, get a pair of heels from Oxfam and visit the boots make up counter I am welcome

Fantastic news. Looking forward to some girly chats

StellaAndCrow · 24/05/2025 11:42

Christwosheds · 24/05/2025 10:47

I’m a woman but am I womaning enough to qualify as living as a woman? I am wearing trousers and a jumper, oh and socks with sandals…that sounds quite mannish to me. On the other hand I’ve got lipstick on and I’ve just picked some roses, is that womanly enough? Or merely Cecil Beaton in his garden?

Show quote history

Christwo, what sort of socks do you have? Do they have a flower pattern? That could possibly swing it. Ducks are a bit more of a grey area.

StellaAndCrow · 24/05/2025 11:36

GrannyAchingsShepherdsHut · 22/05/2025 20:46

If it's wrong for Mr Cats to try to join then they can simply say they are single sex and women only.

If they're not single sex then it's wrong to allow some men to join but exclude this man who just wants to join the asparagus growing/blacksmithing group or whatever it is he's interested in.

They need to pick a lane, cos sitting in the middle and flapping about being kind while being absolute arseholes to women is not going to wash any longer.

Show quote history

Exactly this. Correct me if I'm wrong The Catses, but I think Mr Cats would be (maybe disappointed) but completely understanding if WI confirmed they were women-only, so they would be letting NO men join.

The current situation is that they are letting SOME men join, only if they claim they have lady-feels.

That is the bit that is wrong.