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."

Sure — but my question is not about the law. My question is about the logical/ethical principle.

If two groups defined by their PCs (women, and same-sex attracted people, say) share a common goal, or are prejudiced by the same social ill (TRA ideology, for example), is it really obvious that it should be illegal for them to form a group or offer a service without admitting all others?

I guess you would have to be clear what the legitimate aim of that grouping was and whether the exclusions (non disabled men) were a proportionate way of achieving that aim.

I can’t think of a reason where such a grouping would be justified but maybe you can? It may be one of those points that is arguable.

I’m not a lawyer so don’t want to push this too far, but my understanding of EA2010 is that you can’t run that test together and it must be done separately. Then the need for females to exclude males is disproven by the fact that some males are included, and the need to exclude non-disabled people is disproven by the inclusion of some able-bodied people.

I’m agreeing that it’s not necessarily obvious on the surface.

I think that would become apparent when you look at specific scenarios, the reasons behind them and how that justifies excluding the certain groups. It’s very hard to generalise here.

I think that is also my understanding but I’m not a legal expert.

I haven't forgotten that.

My point is that focusing objections on the exact language they used to specify the restrictions (ex. 'men and boys plus girls under 12' vs 'men of all ages and all children under the age of 12') and trying to argue that's where the problem lies is not actually addressing the very important issue of women and girls' representation and opportunities in Muslim communities.

If you structure your attack in a way where the most obvious solution is to either exclude all girls (which is where the 'it would be fine if they had actually made it single sex and hadn't included girls under a certain age' claims in this thread lead) or to keep the same restrictions on teen girls and women participating but change the syntax of the marketing to make it less open to legal critique then what do you think that's accomplishing?

I grew up in an extremely conservative Christian community in the US that taught 'traditional' gender roles and actively restricted opportunities for girls and women, and I left for a reason. I care deeply about this issue. But I don't agree that trying to use the EA and language parsing to attack this event is a productive way to address that very genuine problem.

Shocking statistics. You hit nail on head saying :

Why should we accept discrimination against Muslim women in the name of religion?

That is exactly the point. Basically Handmaid’s Tale.

I can see situations where that might work for positive action.

As you say, the test can't be run together but you could identify two different groups which are disadvantaged or underrepresented and for each group the proposed activity is a proportionate means of overcoming the disadvantage or increasing participation, and running a single activity for both groups does not undermine that aim for either group.

So for example (completely hypothetical), a cycling charity carries out a survey and finds that over 50s and women cycle less because they don't feel confident. I think it would be lawful to run extra cycling activities for those groups aimed at increasing confidence and participation, and I don't think it would be unlawful to combine the groups for the same activity.

But I am also not a lawyer and from what I understand there is not a huge amount of case law around positive action.

I do see what you are saying.

I think to zoom out a little bit, this case is being discussed in detail because it is a clear cut case of exclusion of Muslim women at a particular moment in time, in writing so it can’t easily be denied by those desperate to hide this misogyny.

The wider picture here is that the UK Muslim population has increased by 1 million to 4 million since 2011, we’ve got a lack of control of our borders with many would be immigrants from Muslim countries, some of whom are known terrorists and some Muslim leaders have stated that they want more power and control over all of us and are working with the government to gain that.

Combine that with the predictions that the UK will be majority Muslim in 75 years and ongoing attempts from certain parts of the left to silence and prevent any discussion about the issue and we have a situation where people are bursting to get this out in the open and start dealing with it.

Do you have a reference for that*? Everything else aside, I'd be hugely cautious of pushing for questioning the legality of allowing some opposite sex children access to single sex spaces or services. This would hugely impact the mothers of boys (particularly lone parents) who rely on their sons being allowed in some female only places up to a certain age. I think some refuges for example allow young sons, but no other males.

• 'interestingly ' I believe fragrant Labour Women's Officer Lily Madigan started their campaigning career questioning why males couldn't take part in the Race for Life, back when he was plain old Liam.

And what a strange way you have of looking at things. You don't care about discriminatory, misogynistic unlawful behaviour - odd, but your prerogative. Fortunately we have laws which agree with me. They're there for a reason.

My sister was pretty high up in CRUK marketing until 6/7 years ago and I don’t recall any legal challenge. They had constant complaints about their women’s only events and shut them down with a party line they stuck to (they set up men’s events…hardly any men came 🙄)

I think it’s most likely that they are hugely less popular post Covid and we’ve all just moved on from R4L really

We should not be tolerant of this in this country.

Then….. we go back to why you haven’t started legal action, what with it being such a clear cut case and the law backing you up so strongly.

Who'd you think I am?! 😂 sure, I'll start legal action immeduatejy , right this minute ma'am, is that swift enough for you? You're deliberately being obtuse. As a collective, we can email the mosque in question, write to the m.p, notify the charity commission, raise concerns with tower hamlets council, question London marathon involvement - all achievable, realistic actions. How do you think citizens go about affecting change? Any of that good enough for you?

As an individual you could challenge why you, as a woman, couldn't take part and claim unlawful discrimination. That's how the Act works

Well it does. Because the Equality Act says that religion is a protected characteristic.

In Islam, adult men and women don’t generally exercise together. That is their religious right. Females under 12 are not seen as reaching the age of maturity that’s recognised in Islam as 12 (average puberty), therefore they are allowed to mix.

You wouldn’t sue a religious event based on gender discrimination in the same way that nobody sues the Catholic Church for not allowing female priests.

Someone upthread said that it’s not an inclusive event. The inclusive (as we see it) part is based on the spectator side - anyone is able to make a day out of it, cheer on and observe, just like you would with the London Marathon.

I don’t understand why you don’t think you can’t sue the mosque. You know the law, you know it’s on your side, you’re passionate- it’s literally just filling out and submitting forms??

It's not a religious event though. You don't have to be Muslim to take part

But @TY78910 Muslim women ran in the London Marathon, which is a mixed sex event.

Exactly. Its appalling.

I think it constitutes a clear breach of equalities legislation and I should imagine will be investigated. We haven't heard the last of this one

Religion is a protected characteristic. That doesn't mean that religions have carte blanche to discriminate. It's still unlawful conduct unless there is a specific EA exception they can use, such as the one which permits the catholic church to exclude women from the priesthood:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/9/part/1/crossheading/religious-requirements-relating-to-sex-marriage-etc-sexual-orientation

Where are the lawyers when you wanf them ?!

Because the London Marathon isn’t organised by an Islamic organisation 🙄
Islam, like any other religion has several denominations. Some that will be more and some less conservative. There are parts of the world like Bosnia where Muslims drink for instance, but in the Middle East that wouldn’t be the case.

At risk of sounding like a Reform voter, we don't recognise Islamic law in the UK. What matters is the laws passed by Parliament, not the made up laws of people's various sky pixies.

Even Muslims have to comply with the Equality Act.