Labour clarifies trans women and AWS

[crispbuttyfan]

Apologies if it is already being discussed, I didn't spot a thread about it.

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/05/22/labour-trans-women-all-women-shortlists-nec/

This was entirely predictable, and not before time.

I'm sure everyone will agree it's good to have some sort of closure on this issue.

Sorry I don't agree that "transexuals" is an "outdated term".

This is obviously untrue as they have just suspended someone who self-identifies as a woman from the party for trying to get elected as a women's officer...

Similarly, women’s officers and minimum quotas for women in the Labour Party are open to all women, including self-identifying trans women.

Clearly not, given David Lewis's suspension.

Women only lists need to be scrapped - they aren't worth the paper raeya really written on anymore. Maybe they just need to make sure that any elected person actially works for all people and not only for a tiny minority of a minority (or for their own ego trip). Some people would just get very bored very quickly.

Labour promptly contradicted their position by suspending the membership of the male who identifies as a woman to run for women's officer.

Quickest U-turn ever - before the policy was even officially announced.

Yup, pretty unfortunate timing...

You can hear from her (as it's now Wednesday) directly on this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3256772-Guess-how-I-got-suspended-from-the-Labour-Party

Interesting. I presumed they were going to ignore the whole debate and simply get rid of AWS...

Either way, this is a sin for the tories. Nobody else.

Not till 6.50am

Seems very reasonable.

‘Closure’
Bahaha Hahahaha.
Total own goal labour. Perhaps some rethinking about exactly what their policy is, would be lovely.

Closure of the Labour Party seems to be what they're shooting for. Well, I wouldn't be sorry the way they're going of late, start again with the sensible ones.

It states: “We recognise that there is a diversity of views on what can be a complex and emotive issue for many members, but discussions within the Labour Party should never take the form of abuse or intimidation of anyone.

Except actual women. They apparently don't count!
I suggest they rename the AWS to the ATWS. There, fixed it for them.

So funny that this coincided with them then doing a complete u turn and suspending the lovely David Lewis. Labour are making themselves look ridiculous and unelectable over all sorts of things ATM this being one of them.

I wonder what @jenniferjames will now do with the money fundraiser to challenge this.

“In adopting this approach, the Labour Party has verified that it is acting consistently with both the letter and spirit of the relevant legislation, the Equality Act 2010.”

This is false. What they are doing is not legal. Here is the EA exception that makes AWS legal. The relevant wording is:

6)Selection arrangements do not include short-listing only such persons as have a particular protected characteristic.

I.e. it's not legal to have a shortlist made up of people who share a single protected characteristic ...

(7)But subsection (6) does not apply to the protected characteristic of sex;

Unless the protected characteristic is sex.

That means an AWS can be open to women + tw with a GRC (who are legally female). Self-ID's tw do not share the protected characteristic of sex with women, they remain legally male.

Labour are reinterpreting 'sex' to mean 'self-ID'd gender identity' and if they get away with it here, in this specific and unambiguous exception, then every other instance of the word 'sex' in the EA can be interpreted the same way.

Sex as a protected characteristic will no longer have any meaning. We will no longer have any sex based rights.

No one is surprised.

The Labour Party is now run by the genuinely thick. It is powered by t-shirt slogan, Che tat, needy brocialists.

Labour was always underpinned by a ‘working man’ approach. This just happens to be the worst version of that.

Labour, LibDem, women's Equality, Greens and Plaid Cymru have all made it clear transwomen rights come before women's rights. They honestly don't need to make it any clearer.

Why any woman would vote for any of these parties once they realise this is beyond me 🙄

Yes all the other issues matter too but if we want to ever have a voice on woman's issues we have to not let them pretend a transwoman can say it better than a woman can. 😡

We need to stop voting for parties that are actively working to erase our rights

Has there been any movement on WEP policy on what makes a woman? It’s just tjat with every other party centring self-ID and UKIP beyond the pale, we actually need a party that will consider women as well as TW so we have someone to vote for.

Labour, LibDem, women's Equality, Greens and Plaid Cymru have all made it clear transwomen rights come before women's rights

Conservatives have also endorsed these policies:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2993425-Maria-Miller-interviewed-by-Janice-Turner-full-text

boatyardblues as an active WEP member and gender critical feminist I can say it is a topic of ongoing discussion. I have been assured by both verbally by Sophie Walker in a members discussion webinar (and some posts of hers on Twitter indicate similar) and personal emails from HQ that a working party on the issue will be formed. No timescale as yet. Right now everyone is hard at work on the Lewisham East by-election campaign though, I won’t be addressing it further until after June 14th. We have conference in September so at the moment it’s a hopeful ‘watch this space’.

Sorry for appalling syntax there, bad brain day!

Back to the topic of the thread though

That means an AWS can be open to women + tw with a GRC (who are legally female). Self-ID's tw do not share the protected characteristic of sex with women, they remain legally male.

Labour are reinterpreting 'sex' to mean 'self-ID'd gender identity' and if they get away with it here, in this specific and unambiguous exception, then every other instance of the word 'sex' in the EA can be interpreted the same way.

Given this - who arbitrates interpretation of the EA? Is there a way to directly challenge this or would it take a specific case challenge? Agree we need Jennifer James to reappear now with the crowd fund that was raised to challenge exactly this with her legal team on what the next step is.

If all potential abusers of the new self ID law when it passes could kindly be featured in a Spectator article so we know who they are and can deal with them, that would be very helpful.
Oh wait, I forgot, people who want to abuse women rarely ever admit to it. That screening methods fucked then, we’ll have to think of another one. Oh, wait, we don’t have one. Oh well David is a woman then.
There’s a reason why one could disappear up one’s own arse trying to figure out this logic…

As per usual, Pink News has disabled comments on any article that touches on trans issues. That's because they know huge numbers of LGB people (especially the L) disagree with their stance on Trans issues.

Conservatives view is now much more open to listening to different viewpoints in discussions and on keeping sex exemptions in the EA.

(Although Maria Miller still denying reality and women's perspectives.)

Hopefully other parties will also swing this way.