To think it is not at all sad that the Women's Institute is now only for actual women?

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

“Incredibly sadly, we will have to restrict our membership on the basis of biological sex from April next year,” Green said. “But the message we really want to get across is that it remains our firm belief that transgender women are women, and that doesn’t change.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/dec/03/womens-institute-no-longer-accept-trans-women-members-april

Tellingly - they still think women can have a penis.

It is just another Transman Gotchabot, isn't it?

There is - they're men!!!

Yeah that's cool. I'm just curious and asking questions.
But, obviously that would be discrimination. How would that be fair? Are y'all going to fight for their rights? That wouldn't be going by the sex, but by the gender (although I think this movement thinks it's the same?)
From a bureaucratic point of view I would guess a birth certificate would need to be provided. I'm sure most people would be against physical examination.
Plus what would be the passing metrics?

"Y'all"?

Yes.

What would be discrimination?

Is it just me or does anyone else have no idea what this poster is saying?

I'm also fed up with the 'how will 'butch' (horrible expression) lesbians be affected? They won't. They're women and many are members and would carry on being welcome.

The SC judgement specifically protected the rights of women who ID as trans by ensuring they are covered by maternity and pregnancy protections.

And the 'gender critical' movement bases thinking on sex, not gender. Gender is just arbitrary social constructs, or sex stereotypes.

She's stood by him.

No idea why.

But he's now doing a 'call to arms' for trans allies and the 'sisters' are falling over themselves to rally round and sign up

We've been fighting for all women's sex based rights for years and that includes transmen. If it makes you feel better, I've never known a transman who passes as a man so I think they're most unlikely to be excluded if they suddenly decide they want to join the WI despite claiming to be men.

This is the law as outlined by the SC. It makes perfect sense to me and it's in line with other safeguarding rules in other areas. If you want to make extreme physical changes, that will bring consequences and your doctors should ensure you know about these because they're a problem you created and you therefore have to solve.

The WI wants sex and gender to be the same but has finally conceded that they are not.

Respectfully, if you are being sincere in these posts then I'm not sure you follow the issue sufficiently to have a discussion. You apparently read my full post explaining the Transman Gotcha but didn't understand a word of it, you don't understand what's just happened with the WI regarding sex and gender and you don't understand that women's sex based rights include transmen.

😂

When men enter a space, they do tend to take over.

Oh, honey. Bless your heart. As per the Cambridge dictionary.

I believe you’ve said that you would be cool with excluding transmen if they pass though. I would find that discriminatory as you would be basing the decision in gender, not sex.
Plus what would be the passing metrics?

I suspect that the question was not 'what does Y'all mean'? I think it was 'are you American?'

Going by your post after the dictionary reply, I would like to know if you have read the FWS Supreme Court clarification?

I believe you’ve said that you would be cool with excluding transmen if they pass though.

That's the law. It's a consequence of safeguards. Sometimes you get the wrong person. A woman who has made every effort to look like a man will have to find a solution for when she is taken to be one.

You are just bringing up the Transman Gotcha again and again, and I'm done with pretending that I think you might be sincere. We don't want knobs in the ladies' and we have legal protections to prevent it. Deal with it.

So you would throw them under the bus I see. No explanation needed, just excuses. Fair enough I guess.

No, the decision would be based on her appearance not her 'gender'. The passing TM isn't excluded because all of a sudden her 'gender' takes precedence over her sex and people accept she IS a man. It's simply that if she's made herself convincingly look like a man, women might be uncomfortable/distressed around her.

So, you've not read the judgement yourself then?

But according to law, they would need to be treated according to the sex assigned at birth. So basing the rejection on visuals (since you don’t want to call it gender) would be discriminatory. I think it’s a logic conclusion.

Have you?

A woman who has taken such extreme steps to be deemed indistinguishable from a man has thrown herself under the bus. But in fairness, such a woman is also likely to understand that her presence in a female single sex space is likely to cause distress to other woman and therefore would have the decency to self exclude.

You definitely have not read the judgement. Come back when you have.

The relevant passage :

Oh and sex is not assigned at birth. It is determined at conception and observed at birth.