HoL debate on Monday 24th Feb on communal changing and toilet facilities

[MrsSnippyPants]

From comments under one of the Times articles (Labour leadership candidates)
Lord Lucas has a debate next Monday in the House of Lords:
"Ensuring that at least half of the communal changing or toilet facilities in public buildings are reserved for women only"

Which is usless if Woman doesn't actually mean woman.

Ah, but how is women defined...

Can we contact him and give our input?

House of Lords
London
SW1A 0PW
Phone: 020 7219 4177
Email: [email protected]
Twitter
twitter.com/LordLucasCD

I see he's just retweeted Bea Jaspert - the link to an article she's just published.

Labour's Betrayal of Women Children & Homosexuals medium.com/@BeaJaspert/labours-betrayal-of-women-children-and-homosexuals-90c724c1c0d0

I think we can be hopeful :)

Thanks - I have emailed him thanking him for bringing up the debate and asking him to ensure that the definition of "women" is clearly understood to be those born female at birth.

Me too refuse, pretty much the same.

Fingers crossed (and I hope he doesn't get too much of a battering on Twitter!).

He's also retweeted this:
White people shouldn’t decide what constitutes racism.
Straight people shouldn’t decide what homophobia is.
Cisgender people shouldn’t decide what transphobia is.

How about 'men shouldn't decide what women are'?

if women includes men who self ID its always a circular argument...no matter what spaces are reserved for women, if men can self ID then there are no female only spaces and so we go on....

though having had a quick look through his comments in the Lords he does seem to at least get some of the issues

If I recall rightly there are some very powerful misogynistic left wing gay men in the HoL who have no truck with women's rights and children's safety? I'm sure they'll be all over this.

Lucas is GC 👍

Just started a new thread as Lord Lucas has replied to me with a question - all help in answering it on new thread much appreciated!!!

Baroness Nicholson (who’s GC) has confirmed she will be attending.

And does he realise that most people distinguish between sex and gender and that most of our laws are widely understood to be sex based because most of the discrimination is sex based and gender neutral

Although thinking this through, I suspect men receive more gender related violence than women. Ie an effeminate or gay man will be bullied because of his gender appearance. So perhaps that's why men don't always get it?

Baroness Barker. Predictable that she wouldn’t let any debate about provision for women pass her by. It’ll be mixed sex if she has her way.

The thoughts of Lord Lucas
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1227664630652243968.html

'I would like to see Stonewall lay aside its kimono and baseball bat, '

Men presumably don’t know how often women open toilet doors on each other - I have had a door opened onto me at least twice (once because the woman opened the door from the outside ) and have opened (unlocked doors) onto other women a couple of times - mortifying but mother compared to it being a man on the other side of that door.

That made me laugh too frogs!

The kimono/baseball bat is class. An interesting read.

Well reading his starting position doesn’t feel me with confidence! Apparently we can’t tell If a woman is really a man when they are fully clothed....

Women know when they see a male in ‘women’s clothing’. It’s millennia of evolution to keep us safe. Many women wear supposed men’s clothes (jeans, shirts, trainers) we can still instantly be recognised as women. I think Lord Lucan gets it (I hope)

I've just told him that Happy

If you read his whole thread though. There are some bits which are good:

Safeguarding children and vulnerable adults should always outrank integration, and the government should state that clearly.
Serious competitive sports should be segregated by sex, not gender, wherever male physical advantages mean that females could not, without segregation, hope to win consistently on a par with males.

Commenting on safe-guarding, I've just sent him a list of 25 incidents.

On the sports - that's a huge huge thumbs up from me (it's how I got here in the first place). He doesn't use the word 'elite' (which annoys me as that's too vague). How about a 14yr old girl playing football - for her that's seriously competitive but not elite.

So, I think he is mis-guided, but he is clearly trying to think things through.

Safeguarding children and vulnerable adults should always outrank integration, and the government should state that clearly.
Serious competitive sports should be segregated by sex, not gender, wherever male physical advantages mean that females could not, without segregation, hope to win consistently on a par with males.

^^ that's his text, not mine

I would like to see Stonewall lay aside its kimono and baseball bat

Excellent quote!