For Women Scotland have lost their appeal

[ArthurbellaScott]

https://forwomen.scot/01/11/2023/court-decision-reclaiming-motion/

The court rules that in some cases, men with a GRC are women.

Does this mean that a trans man cannot claim sex discrimination?

Or make an equal pay claim if all the higher paid men they want to compare themselves to are considered legally the same sex as them?

FWS have 28 days to appeal this so we need to urge Westminster to clarify the Equality act ASAP.

This decision has been widely reported in Scotland so hopefully will make more people aware of the threat to women's rights.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-67289999

The terrible thing is that this will be changeddown the line - but it will be on the backs of countless abused, raped and harmed women and girls. As women know and the current crime stats demonstrate, too many predators take advantage of all this.

This is my belief, too.

Part of me thinks the GRA and EqA are designed to create chaos and push boundaries, forcing politicians to row back only when public outrage is politically unpalatable.

How many times do government ministers have to express confidence in the laws, only to have change policies later. Who would write policy allowing rapists into female prisons and not see a problem? Its inconceivable that it was a genuine oversight.

The terrible thing is that this will be changed down the line

x.com/judgejules75/status/1719345449134436522?s=20

Part of me thinks the GRA and EqA are designed to create chaos and push boundaries, forcing politicians to row back only when public outrage is politically unpalatable.

One might even think they were designed to dismantle all the previous progress made protecting marginalised or disadvantaged groups.

The bbc is all over the covid enquiry misogyny claims. But still men can't see when they are actively doing misogyny. Pretending a man is a woman is anti women and hate speech.

The BBC is fairly captured, as are other major institutions

It’s a big problem for women

Sex is scientific, comes from scientists and medical doctors, is backed by hundreds of years of data and research, is categorical and definable.

And yet we’re implementing a new system based on belief, that comes from personal
feelings, is backed by a picture of a gingerbread and some 50s stereotypes and asking what two spirit means legally and practically could get a girl fired.

This is a next level power trip.

😡 we will fight on women are not men

@AvacadoFieldsForever Its so much worse than it being based on feelings and gender stereotypes although that is part of it, the reality of what is really driving this is so much darker and disgusting but I don't believe we are allowed to be candid about it here.

Its odd that politicians and media talk about sexism, misogyny and women generally disadvantaged by policies when the same politicians and media believe woman can identify out of being a woman, by doing nothing but say that they are no longer woman.

If it was that easy, and no nobody can tell who is a man or woman without being told, how can politicians be so sure sexism and misogyny, or transphobia for that matter, exist?

By allowing people everyone know are male, be classed as if they are female, they arent changing perception or a persons sex, just enforcing compelled speech and forced teaming.

Out on the streets, everyone. This is outrageous and dangerous to women. More letters to SMPs, and anyone who will listen….women’s magazines, organisations .and how the hell it is supposed to work is anybody’s guess. Furious.

Twitter is just a sea of the FWS tweet and lots of repeal the GRA tweets tonight!

Yes, I am glad to see that many more people are supporting repealing it.

Could a tw , eg B Kardashian, use this as a legal precedent to try and get back into the women's estate? I know the legal system is different in Scotland but ....

He is in Ireland so a completely different set of laws,

Not Barbie Kardashian but I imagine it might be a higher bar to clear for others.

The government stated early this year that regardless of having a GRC or not, intact TW, or those guilty of violent or sexual crimes will not be held in womens prisons.

So, we shouldnt see any convicted rapists in womens prisons.

But they also said "There is currently no obligation to place a transgender prisoner according to their preference, and where individuals are held is based purely on risk."

Id love to see the risk assessment that allowed any male to be in womens prison. If there is no risk, there wouldn't be separate prisons in the first place.

Its what i said early - its two very ambiguously written laws and safeguarding fails are only dealt with when theres a public outcry, not when writing the acts.

The WM government. The rules are different in Scotland.

I'm very grateful we have Michael Foran's insight and expert input on this issue.

'Dr Michael Foran joined the law school in 2022, having previously taught at the University of Strathclyde from 2020-22. He completed his PhD in Constitutional Theory at the University of Cambridge and holds degrees from the London School of Economics (MSc in Law and Anthropology) and Trinity College Dublin (LLB).
He specialises in constitutional law with a particular focus on the rule of law, legal equality, and the common law constitutional tradition.
In 2022 he was a visiting researcher at the Common Good Project, University of Oxford. '

Not bad qualifications for a 'random man'.

I've found his take on the law very helpful. Legal experts often differ in interpretation.

Yes. Which is why we've seen all these court cases - expert legal bods trying to hash out exactly how the EA should be implemented. Or if it is actually possible to do so, especially given the UK/Scottish devolved issues.

This piece of TRA genius made me chuckle amidst all this shitshow.

Damn, your correct, ArthurbellaScott. I thought it was the same, but the scottish prison service are going to hold prisoners in the prisons of the birth sex initial, and then review.

Adding Michael Foran's article in Unherd:

https://unherd.com/thepost/scottish-feminists-lose-appeal-on-definition-of-woman/

"The key development that comes from this case is the unequivocal conclusion that sex in the Equality Act means biological (or birth) sex unless modified by a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). This means that, for example, trans women without GRCs are men for the purposes of the Equality Act, because they are male. The court was clear that they therefore have no right to use or access services intended for the opposite sex. This includes toilets, changing rooms, rape crisis centres and other sex-separated or sex-specific services.

In contrast, if one does have a GRC, the legal position changes. Trans women who have GRCs will be classed as women and trans men who have GRCs will be classed as men. They will have a presumptive right to use the services intended for the opposite sex because they are now legally classed as members of that group.

This does not mean that service providers can never exclude a biological male from a women’s service, however. There is an exception in the Equality Act which allows for this exclusion if it is proportionate, meaning it is more likely to be lawful to exclude a male with a GRC stating they are a woman from a rape crisis centre or a changing room than it will be to exclude them from women-only hair salon or leadership training course.
These exceptions do not apply to associations or educational institutions, however. Associations under the Act are groups of people organised for some purpose where admission is regulated and involves a process of selection and where there are at least 25 members.

The result of this case means that women-only associations, including groups organised for grassroots political advocacy or women’s support networks for victims of male violence will not be allowed to exclude males who have GRCs stating that they are women if that is why they are excluded. Similarly, associations of lesbians or gay men cannot exclude GRC holders on the basis of their biological sex. Any association set up on the basis of biological sex or on an understanding of sexual orientation which is tied to same-sex attraction is, following this judgment, unlawful" (continues)

Alessandra Asteriti has an interesting tweet about a part of the judgement where Lady Dorrian clearly shows she hasn't understood the arguments about lesbians needing to keep men out of their spaces:

https://twitter.com/AlessandraAster/status/1719749591485100182

It's quite depressing that this is the level of stupidity we're dealing with.