Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #68

Actually just realised someone might be reading bed time stories atm then doing lunch boxes, sorting laundry, and all that jazz

Of course

Sorry Hedgehog.
Mind you, I'm not going to hold my breath that the answer will be forthcoming.

Yes. Well good luck with that one

Well i know that but I want an answer from @Lacksie

And disruption of the Sandie Peggie threads.

It's all about casting doubt.

@Lacksie do you not think that coming on here complaining about the LAW (the ECHR guidance is a simple guide about the law, not the actual law) is such a pointless activity, on your part.

Tell me please what is the point of your presence here.

Although not without exception - of course. My apologies. Of course, if you want to exclude a trans person from a facility or service, in that case, other factors are definitely relevant regardless of birth sex . But only if you want to exclude them.

Sure, but genitals are the main basis on which we register sex at birth - and that is what the latest rules say- don't they. Regardless of any other factors, we must legally enforce the organisation of people according to their birth sex, without exception, in a whole variety of different contexts.

Are you aware the genitals aren't the only difference between men and women?

Lacksie, genitals are just shorthand for the fundamental physiological differences between males and females, regardless of whether or not some people have surgically altered the genitals they were born with.

Speaking as a woman, I really do NOT want to have to use public sanitary facilities which are also routinely used by men, however those men identify. To put it bluntly, men can be messy in toilets, whether inadvertently or deliberately - certainly messier than women on average. in addition women have other needs in toilets which men don't share. All this is separate from the fact that sexual assault is more frequent in mixed sex sanitary and changing facilities. Society developed single-sex spaces for good reasons and those reasons haven't changed just because we're now living in the 21st century.

If only one sex didn’t use their genitals to oppress the other sex, then maybe sex segregation wouldn’t matter.

Until men stop using their physical strength, or threats of physical strength, against women, and until men stop putting their penises into women’s bodies without women’s consent, we will need separate spaces for women and men.

🤷🏼‍♀️

Pull the other one…..

you so very give yourself away as the biological male, and TRA, that you are.

.It’s bonkers that you think I must be male simply because I disagree with you. Just because I have XX chromosomes and reproductive anatomy that has enabled me to give birth to several children, that doesn’t mean I’m obliged to agree with you. Women are individuals with their own thoughts, beliefs and opinions. We don’t all share one collective brain.

I'm simply contributing to a conversation that plenty of other people are having . People talk about a subject for a while - no one complains- as soon as I comment - I'm suddenly " derailing" . Even if I am discussing the SP case I'm apparently "derailing". It's entirely transparent.

I am surprised to learn we are segregated by virtue of our genitals. Based on that assertion, then people who have had there ‘genitals” surgically altered, should go in to services according to a genital inspection. Oh yes!!! I am following the TRA argument now.

but of course we are not “segregated” by virtue of that, we can expect separate sex services, where appropriate due to our biological sex which is more, than just our genitalia.

@Lacksie you so very give yourself away as the biological male, and TRA, that you are.

Well said @nauticant

@Lacksie start a thread based on whatever is your opinion. This thread relates to Sandie Peggie. Nothing you contribute has any bearing to Sandie’s situation. It is really easy to start a thread of your own.

I cannot understand if you have so much opinion and passion why you do not start a thread of your own.

Can you answer that please?

No, they are not advocating for policies akin to the EHRC guidance.

The policies we are introducing in the U.k are no males in spaces designated for females only. Why is that regressive? What is the alternative? .

Yes, yes they are. Single sex spaces for women where no males are allowed. They are actively campaigning for toilets especially to be single sex. So are they wrong in your opinion?

I doubt oxfam are advocating for the kinds of policies we are currently introducing in the UK.

The Equality act doesn't allow for "sex segregation " in all contexts just when it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

Separate sex Prisons, hospital wards, changing rooms, rape therapy groups and toilets are all considered a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim.