Judicial review of City of London's decision

[ConfessionsOfTeenageDramaQueen]

Does anyone know if this is in the offing? I'd be happy to contribute to a crowdfund (or even photocopy some bundles).

this is good news, if any Jewish sisters reading this, know you have (this) humanist support
just tell us how we can help

Absolutely. I don't have any religious leanings whatsoever but I do believe that any woman should be able to set her own boundaries, (individually or collectively for reasons of faith) and I'll fully support any action taken by those in Hampstead.

Also, if the report doesn't set out the specific reasons for dismissing a huge number of representations it's well worth chasing that down. If the person leading the management of the consultation has been blocking huge numbers of people and resisting meaningful engagement in any sense (online or not) that's also worth picking up on.

I think it is actual not a positive step for a campaign fighting to maintain women only services and facilities based on the reality of biological sex.

If we cant argue and win on the basis that women need and want safe women spaces, it will not help to have women from particular religious groups maybe win that right as it implies the need for single sex spaces is based on and only for those with (fundamentalist) religious beliefs.

Won't they have to consider the legal definition of male and female regardless of context/protected characteristic though stumbledin?

I want boundaries for women whether it's in grounds of sex, religion, disability or anything else to be honest. Each protected group will have reasons to require clear definition of sex and gender.

This is a piece of data that may help with the legal challenge (and will be interesting even if it doesn't).

Who does Edward Lord block on twitter? The survey was mainly circulated via his twitter account @EdwardLord , and news of the policy being adopted also was mainly promoted by his account. But he blocks thousands of people - probably through one or more block lists.

As an elected representative this seems....inappropriate.

If you are on twitter check to see if you are blocked by him, and if you are fill in the form so we can build up some statistics about who he blocks (e.g. by sex...)

forms.gle/WjbiGpVLwM84uqJu5

As I said in my earlier post, The judicial review should be about the way in which the consultation was carried out and the way the decision was made, rather than the decision itself. If the process was flawed then any decision made is unlawful.

The key to this is in the way the consultation was carried out. The Gunning Principles set out what should have been done - and in this case, was not done. The challenge shouldn't be about the outcome, but about the process. A decision made via an unlawful process is an unlawful decision. IANAL, but from my reading of the Gunning Principles, this is how the judicial review process works.

There are three ponds: A women's pond; a men's pond; and a mixed pond.

But that is not good enough for some men. They have to force themselves into the women's space too.

What is wrong with these men? And why isn't the Equality Act 2010 being applied and enforced?

And why isn't the Equality Act 2010 being applied and enforced?

They're misinterpreting the Equality Act, so they're telling people that they're applying it, when in fact they're not.

10. The Equality Act requires that people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment are not discriminated against in the provision of single-sex services and are able to access services aligning with their gender identity.

democracy.cityoflondon.gov.uk/documents/s113890/2019.04%20Gender%20Identity%20Policy.pdf

Stonewall and other organisations have helped with this, by convincing many organisations and government bodies that having the protected characteristic of gender reassignment means that you should be treated the same as the opposite sex. This is not what the EA2010 actually says. All it says is that you shouldn't be discriminated against or excluded from all services. A transwoman should not be treated any differently from any other man - i.e., someone who is the same sex. Transwomen should only be treated the same as women when they have a gender recognition certificate, and even then there are exceptions in some circumstances.

The City of London Corporation and many other bodies are acting as though gender self-ID is already law.

If anyone has any salient info on Lord please feel free to PM me. Not for purposes of the Judicial Review - something else.

Dear Jewish sisters we atheists are with you

It’s kind of disgusting that we have to have a legal case for women not to be forced to validate men by having them next to us when we are changing, swimming whatever. This situation only shows that the ‘gender neutral’/mixed swimming option is never too to be enough. Men want into the women’s. This is just one canary in a very deep coalmine.

You know what's funny is he used to be the Chairman of the Amateur Swimming Association:

"Almost half a million women in England have given up swimming in the past decade amid fears about how they look in the pool, according to research.

[...]

Edward Lord, the chairman of the Amateur Swimming Association, also admitted he would “not be surprised” if that had been part of the problem."

Link: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11378695/Body-image-worries-make-half-a-million-women-give-up-swimming.html

The real eye-opener is that men, even educated and cosmopolitan men who run the City, don't care about women. Not even enough to ask them what they thought about giving up their spaces.

To them some TRA sitting in Florida has views that are more valid than a conservative Jewish long-term Hampstead resident.

How did that happen, or was it always like that and we did not notice.

Just thinking that in all the reports that I’ve read about this decision, it has all been about the Womens’ Pond. Does the men’s pond have to admit women in the same way or has that been allowed to stay men only? Because if it doesn’t - then why? And if it has then why hasn’t it been mentioned? I’m guessing that if ManFriday was anything to go by it would mean that there would be a load of men complaining too...

Excuse typos there

gender neutral options are never going to be enough

Edward Lord watches mumsnet, judging by his latest tweet

I think we need another invasion of the men’s pond...

It looks like the penny is beginning to drop with Lord that using twitter as part of a way of notifying about a consultation while having an extensive block list is a good way to undermine the consultation. Not clever. But he still has a fair amount of power and believes he has enough of it to disregard due process, and fair process for that matter.

Solidarity with those Jewish women. I hope they strengthen their case by encouraging other religious groups to join them.

Crowdjustice.com? My former nspcc monthly donation is now reserved for women-centred campaigns...

Just thought I'd share this. Beautiful www.huckmag.com/art-and-culture/photography-2/braving-the-cold-with-hampsteads-women-swimmers/

I'm blocked by Lord but the screenshot halfway down this thread will be useful as Lord says your reply will only count if your first answers pass:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3400894-city-of-london-corporation-gender-survey-results?pg=1#prettyPhoto/1/

I'm not blocked on Twitter by EL, but I never post, and have lots of privacy settings in force. I do a huge amount of likening of GC posts though.

I meant to say that I agree women in general should fight this, not just let the religious objectors get on with it because it's easier.

Wonderful pictures FreeFreesia