To call for this charity to be sued under UK equality act ?!

[Sickleg]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1kwk1204jno.amp

They’ve got millions . Make them pay some of those millions to a women’s charity.

BBC STORY:

A charity run organised by the East London Mosque Trust has excluded women and girls aged 13 and over from taking part.
The Muslim Charity Run, which was held in Victoria Park in Tower Hamlets on Sunday, said on its website: "Our inclusive atmosphere ensures that every individual, from the youngest to the oldest, can take part and make a difference."
It added: "This is open to men, boys of all ages and girls under 12, but everyone is welcome at the park to cheer on the runners."

That’s not how lawsuits work 😂

you can’t expect some random body to sue someone because you asked them to.

Even so, you’re not even asking then, you’re asking mumsnet to “create awareness” (which doesn’t make legal action happen) and arguing with every poster who says you may not be right.

just spend a few hours researching it and start a claim in the relevant court.

The charities commission aren’t going to launch a legal case for lack of compliance with the equalities act ffs 😭

Unethical doesn’t really matter though because you can’t sue someone for that.

Calm down. If you can't answer the question then just say so. I'll try again - why do you think the definition of ' children ' being under the age of 12 apply to only the girls in this event?

The organisers argument will presumably be that this is a single sex event that allows children to also participate. Similar to how (as others have stated) male children in particular are allowed access to otherwise single sex services and spaces. They should have advertised it as a single sex event though.

It's the difference between "this group is for Chinese students only' and 'this group is for students of all ethnicities except Chinese'.

That document says the equality act applies to the criminal justice system, i.e. the police or court etc. is not allowed to treat you worse because of a protected characteristic. If they did you could take them to court and they may be ordered to pay you compensation but they would not be prosecuted.

So as this faith explicitly excludes women from some things to their obvious detriment, why are we allowing men with the same beliefs to be elected to positions of power?

The Mayor of Tower Hamlets (the location of this mosque) for example. A Muslim with some seriously anti democratic history was only prevented from standing for election for 5 years - a mere slap on the wrist.

From the article below:

Sensationally forced out of government seven years earlier, a specialist court found him guilty of vote-rigging and religious intimidation which resulted in 2014 local elections being annulled.
The election court in 2015 heard Mr Rahman made false statements about his rival Labour’s John Biggs, administered council grants in a way that constituted electoral bribery and spiritually intimidated voters.

He has now been ‘re- elected’ and by all accounts is doing a terrible job for those not from his Bangladeshi community. A study has found that people originating from Pakistan and Bangladesh are most likely to engage in electoral fraud.

Toxic” was the standout word from a recent damning report into Tower Hamlets council and how it is run under independent mayor Lutfur Rahman.
A secretive culture permeates a town hall where “many good managers" have quit as a result of "speaking truth to power”, was the thrust of a government ordered investigation.
One councillor told the Standard that the atmosphere inside the local authority was "often dysfunctional and, at best, childish".

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/lutfur-rahman-tower-hamlets-mayor-aspire-b1205024.html

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379417300811

😂
As a fat man in the same boat, I want to be banned too!

Not necessarily. So much of religion comes down to interpretation, and who has the loudest voice and can push their understanding of scripture into orthodoxy. Sects exist in most religions. Having a minority opinion to the orthodoxy does not stop one from being a believer or a practitioner of the religion.

Dunno who's trying to fight on behalf of the muslim women and girls but have you even asked if they have an issue with this?
I can tell you right now that this is many muslimwomen's preference
To not run with the men
So who exactly are u fighting for?

No. Those women were explicitly excluded.

They didn’t have the option to either ‘practice their faith’ or attend.

I guess this brings the wider problem which, if as you say, Muslim women ‘practising their faith’ means they are excluded from normal daily activities to their detriment, why are we enabling this ideology as a country of freedom?

Should we also allow Muslims to ‘practice their faith’ for forced or child marriage and FGM (not exclusive to Islam but widely practised in some groups)? Where do we draw the line?

It should we require all residents of this country to adhere to UK laws which we have in place for very good reasons?

Btw, a religion where the only exit route is excommunication or death doesn’t really foster freedom of thought or action. I was friends with a young ex Muslim girl. The price she paid for freedom of thought and expression was all contact with her family. They cut her off as if she was dead.

Yes. But the OP wants to ban a charity running event because it excludes women. This is an example of a charity running event that excludes men. I'd like to know if the OP has the same feelings about this one, or whether it's just because it's organized by a mosque that she's upset.

I've read an article about Muslim women taking part in the London marathon. It can't be assumed at all that Muslim women won't want to run.

Actually it isn’t. The example includes anyone who ‘identifies as a woman’ so would be problematic under U.K. law.

The reasons for banning men from a women's run are totally different than the reasons for banning women from a men's run.
They're not some kind of mirror image of each other.

Section 13(1):

(1)A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/2/chapter/2/crossheading/discrimination

This applies across the board unless an exception specifically makes it lawful to treat people differently.

There are a fuckton of exceptions in the EA but I can't find one they could use for the particular way this event has been set up and advertised. Can you?

They won't, that's not how the EA works. A case would need to be brought by an individual who is directly affected.

Charity Commission might theoretically help but they only seem to care about financial irregularities and occasionally safeguarding.

EHRC would likely be more helpful but they only have the capacity to bring action on a tiny minority of discrimination cases.

In any event, the first step would be a formal complaint to the charity.

Agreed. There has been a recent prosecution of an imam who ignored child marriage laws and married minors.

Teachers and people who work with children have training how to spot signs of forced marriage - girls being taken abroad to be married, often underage.

We have new laws to stop the practice of FGM (not exclusive to but the greatest proportion of nationalities are overwhelmingly Muslim countries bar one (Eritrea which is split Muslim and Christian).

We obviously have a line of what is acceptable behaviour for residents of this country - we just need to make sure it is in the right place. Why should we accept discrimination against Muslim women in the name of religion?

Countries with which UK residents are most likely to have links and which have a high prevalence of FGM, noting that estimates of FGM vary over time and between data sources
Change to table and accessible view
Estimated prevalence of FGM¹ (%)
Somalia 98
Egypt 87
Sudan 87
Sierra Leone 86
Eritrea 83
Gambia 76
Ethiopia 65

www.gov.uk/guidance/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-migrant-health-guide

You are acting as if the wrong here is blindingly obvious but I don’t think it is.

If you think a male-only run would be OK, who has been harmed by additionally allowing girls to run?

Women haven’t been harmed (they weren’t allowed before, which you were fine with, and aren’t allowed now).

Girls can now run when they couldn’t before (presumably a benefit).

Males have been deprived of a single-sex run, but they haven’t been deceived, and we don’t usually think of fun-runs as the type of service that needs to be single-sex. Even if we do, that wouldn’t impose an obligation on this specific fun-run to be single-sex. We don’t, in other words, expect all fun-runs to be single sex.

I get that EA2010 might make this problematic. But I still don’t think it’s as morally clear-cut as you seem to think.

What am I missing?

You seem to be missing the part where only female children over 12 are excluded. Male children over 12 are not.

Can you justify that?

Is this supposed to be a 'men only run but children (boys, and girls aged 12 and under) can also join' or is it specifically a 'run for men, boys and girls 12 and under'?

I think that would make the difference.

The former would be like a women only changing room but children (girls, and boys of a certain age) are allowed too.

Why are you working so hard to try and justify this?

Do you not think Muslim women should have equal rights (whether they choose to exercise those rights is obviously their ‘choice’) .

You may as well just say “I support the patriarchy”.

That sounds suspiciously like sensible and practical action but I think OP wants to screech hysterically into the internet to create awareness in a completely ineffectual way instead 😂

Because it's a slippery slope to our human rights being eroded. So, we let this one go under the guise of no one being particularly harmed or offended and it is ' only' a fun run, but then what's next? Where do we draw the line? or do you just want to do away with the equality act and the ehrc entirely and see what happens? I Quite like the protection it affords but if you think differently ...

So what are you going to do to not let this one go?!

I'm miffed at all this talking and not one person willing to actually do something about it