Cambridge University ignoring the Supreme Court ruling?

I was quite happy at university aged 19-22. I look back and see things that could/should imo have been different.

On these MN threads you see a lot of concern dramatically expressed for university students who will have to cope with having fellow students or even tutors who are trans (horror of horrors).

In my long experience of university teaching and acting as personal tutor to undergraduates, I've never seen students express any discomfort about this.

Students in general are tolerant and not bothered about self-id (as the student body votes you mention indicate).

On these MN threads you see a lot of concern dramatically expressed for university students who will have to cope with having fellow students or even tutors who are trans (horror of horrors).

In my long experience of university teaching and acting as personal tutor to undergraduates, I've never seen students express any discomfort about this.

Students in general are tolerant and not bothered about self-id (as the student body votes you mention indicate).

On these MN threads you see a lot of concern dramatically expressed for university students who will have to cope with having fellow students or even tutors who are trans (horror of horrors).

In my long experience of university teaching and acting as personal tutor to undergraduates, I've never seen students express any discomfort about this.

Students in general are tolerant and not bothered about self-id (as the student body votes you mention indicate).

On these MN threads you see a lot of concern dramatically expressed for university students who will have to cope with having fellow students or even tutors who are trans (horror of horrors).

In my long experience of university teaching and acting as personal tutor to undergraduates, I've never seen students express any discomfort about this.

Students in general are tolerant and not bothered about self-id (as the student body votes you mention indicate).

Yes, there's a good case for a genuinely fully single-sex women's college, where there are restrictions even against male staff and visitors in accommodation spaces. Muslim women who wear the hijab feel constrained to keep it on if there's a possibility of a man seeing them, whereas in a single sex environment they can relax and take it off. And it would be interesting to know how many young Muslim women don't attend university at all unless they are able to live at home, because they or their parents want them to avoid men.

I saw this piece of advice on an advice page for Muslim students. I suspect that the universities who are offering "single-gender" accommodation define "single-gender" to include transwomen, and that some Muslim women don't realise that.

"Most universities allow you to specify your accommodation preferences during the application process. If living in single-gender or alcohol-free halls is important, make this request clear. Some universities offer female-only or male-only flats, while others can place you with fellow Muslim students. Even if you've already received your room assignment, universities usually permit room transfers if you're dissatisfied.
Don’t hesitate to contact your accommodation office—they've likely handled similar requests before. For instance, Manchester University accommodates lifestyle preferences such as alcohol-free or single-gender housing upon request."

Brilliant post @TeachWithMissM , I agree entirely.

Newnham and Murray Edwards are both wonderful wonderful places that promote females in education and are hugely accepting of people from all backgrounds. They are also both built on the premise of making education accessible to people who have historically been disadvantaged due to gender. They are safe havens for people who may previously have felt unable to be themselves in education for fear of discrimination or even abuse. As a cis person, I never once felt threatened by any members of my college (which is one of these two) and would be much more upset at the thought of studying somewhere that excluded others who identify as females and quite frankly are significantly more marginalised and disadvantaged than myself. I don’t know any trans females at either (that’s not to say they aren’t there - just that the numbers are INCREDIBLY low and that their presence has never made an ounce of difference to anybody else’s life). The media is selling a belief that trans people are inherently dangerous but there is ZERO empirical peer-reviewed scientific evidence for this (and lots of evidence suggesting they are more likely to be victimised). The Newnham and Medwards communities voted on the issue and voted in favour of self-ID - the student body accept trans students and are happy to share their college with them

Newnham and Murray Edwards are both wonderful wonderful places that promote females in education and are hugely accepting of people from all backgrounds. They are also both built on the premise of making education accessible to people who have historically been disadvantaged due to gender. They are safe havens for people who may previously have felt unable to be themselves in education for fear of discrimination or even abuse. As a cis person, I never once felt threatened by any members of my college (which is one of these two) and would be much more upset at the thought of studying somewhere that excluded others who identify as females and quite frankly are significantly more marginalised and disadvantaged than myself. I don’t know any trans females at either (that’s not to say they aren’t there - just that the numbers are INCREDIBLY low and that their presence has never made an ounce of difference to anybody else’s life). The media is selling a belief that trans people are inherently dangerous but there is ZERO empirical peer-reviewed scientific evidence for this (and lots of evidence suggesting they are more likely to be victimised). The Newnham and Medwards communities voted on the issue and voted in favour of self-ID - the student body accept trans students and are happy to share their college with them

There's also a counter-argument that there are women who, whether for religious, cultural or personal reasons, would actively avoid a residential educational environment (and Cambridge has strict residency rules) if it were effectively mixed-sex. You can argue that those women are currently being discriminated against by MEds and Newnham.

I haven't RTFT so apologies if this point has been made before.

I can't see why any trans identifying man would want to be accepted to either of these colleges for any reason other than validation. This isn't a single-sex space in the same way that toilets are, where the argument is that TW need to use these spaces to be 'safe away from men'. I assume no one is arguing that Cambridge University is some kind of backwater where they just wouldn't be accepted for their 'true selves', there are lots of transpeople all over the university. Indeed it seems compulsory to pick one for your University Challenge team. Honestly, if you wanted an example of women's things being used to validate men, you could hardly pick a better one.

Newnham claims to be using the Schedule 12 exemption that permits single-sex educational establishments to admit opposite-sex students 'exceptionally'. (This enables sixth-formers, for instance, to access a wider range of academic subjects within daily commuting distance.)

It's less clear why they don't consider themselves bound by their own founding instrument, which, having been ratified by the King at the time, has the force of law. But they can, of course, change it, as many colleges did in order to become mixed-sex.

They did recently advertise a female-only fellowship. Ordinarily an occupational requirement tied to a protected characteristic in this way must be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (Schedule 9). They were exempt from this criterion because their founding instrument predates the Employment Act of 1992 (which outlawed arbitrary occupational requirements, even those introduced by the women's colleges in the interests of advancing women's education). So they are still slightly less misogynist than your average academic, by a hair's breadth.

There remains the as yet unanswered question of whether they are illegally discriminating against male candidates by applying to them more onerous admission criteria than those applied to female candidates. Swift J has commented on this in the context of Schedule 3 services, but I don't know how this translates to educational establishments (which presumably are governed at least partly by regulations outwith EA2010).

Newnham and Murray Edwards are both wonderful wonderful places that promote females in education and are hugely accepting of people from all backgrounds. They are also both built on the premise of making education accessible to people who have historically been disadvantaged due to gender. They are safe havens for people who may previously have felt unable to be themselves in education for fear of discrimination or even abuse. As a cis person, I never once felt threatened by any members of my college (which is one of these two) and would be much more upset at the thought of studying somewhere that excluded others who identify as females and quite frankly are significantly more marginalised and disadvantaged than myself. I don’t know any trans females at either (that’s not to say they aren’t there - just that the numbers are INCREDIBLY low and that their presence has never made an ounce of difference to anybody else’s life). The media is selling a belief that trans people are inherently dangerous but there is ZERO empirical peer-reviewed scientific evidence for this (and lots of evidence suggesting they are more likely to be victimised). The Newnham and Medwards communities voted on the issue and voted in favour of self-ID - the student body accept trans students and are happy to share their college with them

Isn't Newnham where Germaine Greer taught ? I think there is/was a trans (TIM) professor there too.
I imagine they're busy working out what the SC judgment and EHRC guidance mean for their policy. They might have to stop calling themselves women's colleges.
Presumably if a boy applied and was rejected on the grounds of sex, he would have a claim of sex discrimination if another boy who identified as a girl was considered eligible.

Men in general have never been disadvantaged from receiving education, so when allowing some of them to attend women's colleges solely because they have chosen to start calling themselves women, all that is doing is taking places away from women who would benefit from this and imposing their presence on women who expected a female-only educational environment.

Newnham and Murray Edwards are both wonderful wonderful places that promote females in education and are hugely accepting of people from all backgrounds. They are also both built on the premise of making education accessible to people who have historically been disadvantaged due to gender. They are safe havens for people who may previously have felt unable to be themselves in education for fear of discrimination or even abuse. As a cis person, I never once felt threatened by any members of my college (which is one of these two) and would be much more upset at the thought of studying somewhere that excluded others who identify as females and quite frankly are significantly more marginalised and disadvantaged than myself. I don’t know any trans females at either (that’s not to say they aren’t there - just that the numbers are INCREDIBLY low and that their presence has never made an ounce of difference to anybody else’s life). The media is selling a belief that trans people are inherently dangerous but there is ZERO empirical peer-reviewed scientific evidence for this (and lots of evidence suggesting they are more likely to be victimised). The Newnham and Medwards communities voted on the issue and voted in favour of self-ID - the student body accept trans students and are happy to share their college with them

@EnjoythemoneyJane there definitely are frequent statements that trans people are higher risk for undesirable behaviour than others out in the media. It’s disingenuous to say otherwise in my view. I also do think boys who have transitioned are vulnerable, because policing of masculinity hasn’t gone away. It certainly has quite a presence on Mumsnet.