Do we need to hold a WomanFest (biological women only) to test the law?

[Shedbuilder]

I'm quietly organising groups and events for biological females only. We started with around 40 people, now up to more than 200. We have to keep things secret and insist that members don't discuss the group with anyone whose stance on transgender ideology they're not absolutely sure of.

We're little people with jobs and children and elderly parents to care for and we can't manage the stress of being picketed or taken to court or targeted in other ways.

After hearing Baroness Falkner on Woman's Hour, I wonder if with the combined knowledge and resources of all the women's groups (Resisters, Sex Matters, Woman's Place etc) we need to hold a Women's Festival and declare it biological women only to test the legal waters.

The reason so many women are reluctant to reestablish vitally-needed lesbian-only and women-only events is because they're scared of being prosecuted. If we could hold a big event and establish that the law allows single-sex events it might help women feel more confident in rebuilding the women-only community that used to exist.

Interesting idea. You'd need to actually have a case brought though to get any sort of legal precedent.

Maybe proceeds from the event could fund a male to challenge his exclusion from it?

Yes: it seems that the only way through all this nonsense is via the law.

FiLiA had a number of sessions marked women only and critics preferred to draw cocks on the pavement outside rather than attempting to bring any sort of legal challenge.

I think your more likely scenario would be that you set up an event, and that the organisers are personally attacked online to intimidate other women into not following suit, and that the antis harass the venue into cancelling - so you would be the one bringing the claim against the venue, rather than a male trying to bring a claim against you. The venue will just argue it was a security risk and arguments about women only space will barely get a look-in.

Also, I think if you get a favourable decision in the county court it wouldn't form a precedent until someone appeals, which carries more significant cost risks. If you win and they don't appeal you've gone through all that stress for virtually nothing (although I'm sure there will be plenty who would be willing to call it "groundbreaking" and "landmark" on twitter, first instance or not....) And if you lose, the TRAs will make hay with it.

It's not impossible, but it needs a lot of careful planning and risk management I would think.

Well, we know there will be unpleasant protests with masks, chalked obscenities and threats of actual violence.

On the other hand, it will get coverage and a picture peaks speaks a thousand words.

Perhaps some of our male allies would provide security? Several prominent gay men on Twitter are urging others to stand up for women.

Which is why I suggested that it's something that needs to be done by a group that includes people who know their way around the law.

It might be worth getting in touch with Legal Feminist for a quick check on the overall feasibility of such an idea. And also ask the other women's groups what they think of it.

It would be an immense help if it was crystal clear that women aka female only groups and events were allowed. As you say, at the moment the only options are do nothing for fear of harassment and litigation, or have secret underground networks which means many women, especially young lesbians, are unable to access them if they don't know about it.

You'd need to have someone who wants to go but you deny access to because they are transgender, that person would then need to sue the organisers for discrimination. Without that, not sure you can sue yourself for wanting to exclude transgender people, like that photographer who sued to have the right to not be hired for gay weddings, acting like there was a queue of gay people wanting them at their wedding.

someone who wants to go but you deny access to because they are transgender

No, someone denied access because they are male.

No, someone denied access because they are male.

In that case you'll need a man who wants to go. If you don't have any man who wants to go then you have no case.

You can apply to the courts for declarations about things so perhaps without even needing to arrange the event you could first ask a court for a preliminary decision that the event is lawful.

Isn't the Raquel Rosario Sánchez case about women being harassed and bullied by Bristol SU for daring to organise an all woman environment to discuss issues about women's discrimination without the supervision of men at Bristol? Will this case shed some light Shedbuilder?

And yes, it's been one of the great pleasures in the last few years of being able to access some all women groups as I used to back in the day. It's a pain that we have to keep them under the radar but I've met so many impressive women.

@BoreOfWhabylon

Well, we know there will be unpleasant protests with masks, chalked obscenities and threats of actual violence.

On the other hand, it will get coverage and a picture peaks speaks a thousand words.

Perhaps some of our male allies would provide security? Several prominent gay men on Twitter are urging others to stand up for women.

No need for men for security, there was a brilliant all-female, all/mostly lesbian security team at FiLiA. Check out this thread twitter.com/gettheloutuk/status/1450158612295393283?s=21 (and do not mess with Liane!)