Labour destroyed the value of the EA for women with the GRA which over rides women’s protected characteristics – they didn’t care then, they don’t care now

[IwantToRetire]

Sex is the only protected characteristic that is required to prove that providing appropriate services for that characteristic has to be shown to be "proportionate".

Even if you want to trust Labour, how can you when they have shown through their legislation that they just dont understand / dont care / dont empathise with women?

Dangerous times.

fully agree.

the GRA preceded the EA2010

Sex is the only protected characteristic that is required to prove that providing appropriate services for that characteristic has to be shown to be "proportionate".

To be fair, that works both ways. It also means that designating anything "men-only" has to be proportionate.

Yeah agreed

Well obviously otherwise the EA wouldn't have had to take it into account!

To be fair, that works both ways. It also means that designating anything "men-only" has to be proportionate.

Agreed, but generally with the way society is still patriarchal and women are more vulnerable to dangerous men, than men to women, women are more disadvantaged.

Wanting a men only space to be able to chat about manly things unimpeding by females, is not the same as women needing same sex spaces because of vulnerability to male violence and perverts wanting to ogle and worse.

yes, agreed. But I've given up on this. KJK will get my vote. I just can't stand the cynicism of the Labour Party thinking they can baffle us with bullshit.

Men wanting men only groups and rape crisis services etc... no one wants to stop them or take that away from them.

I'm afraid that is because almost no woman gets excitement from being around men getting undressed, receiving intimate care or discussing a highly distressing and violent sexual experience. And it's rare to find a woman so insensitive and selfish that they would wish to deprive those men in those vulnerable situations of their privacy, their dignity, and make those situations worse for them because they want to use those men and that situation to meet their own needs.

And there, in a nutshell, is how disempowered women are and why they need men excluded by law. Regardless of how they feel about it. Because it is not relevant.

And there, in a nutshell, is how disempowered women are and why they need men excluded by law.

And why having to rely on men to bring in that law has shown that we cant rely on men and their male dominated systems.

Which is why the male culture of politics just didn't grasp how undermining women's rights in the EA by the GRA was so misogynistic - basically anti woman.

Starmer refuses to rewrite Equality Act despite trans U-turn

When Sir Keir was asked whether Labour would change the Equality Act in the light of his recent change of heart, he said: “I don’t think the Equality Act does need to be amended in that regard.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/07/03/starmer-refuses-rewrite-equality-act-despite-trans-u-turn/

Also available at https://archive.ph/Tx9LC

I don’t trust them in the slightest. Especially with todays news that they will put TWAW harman in charge of the EHRC

This except I think of her as Harriet Pie Harman 😏

So in fact what he said was meaningless waffle that he had no intention of standing behind.

I can't stand this man, he's all over the bloody place and everything's pouring out of both sides of his mouth.

I'm not knowledgeable about this at all. However, my understanding from people with disabilities (protected characteristic) is that even straightforward accommodations can be withheld if they're not deemed 'proportionate' and the interpretation of that is decidedly variable.

Do other people have a different impression? Some of this has been shaped by the complete shambles of the NHS' implementation (or lack of it) for the AIS (Accessible Information Standard). (About to be relaunched, still in inadequate resources, in the hope that This Time It Will Mysteriously Take.)

Indeed. Safeguarding? What safeguarding?

Labour always knew who women were, that's why when they wrote the GRA they made sure men could still inherit titles even if they got an GRC, and that women couldn't inherit even if they did get a GRC.

However, my understanding from people with disabilities (protected characteristic) is that even straightforward accommodations can be withheld if they're not deemed 'proportionate' and the interpretation of that is decidedly variable.

You are probably right.

Will try and see what it actually says - but much much later tonight.

Thanks

“Men wanting men only groups and rape crisis services etc... no one wants to stop them or take that away from them”

There’s just been a successful campaign to force the Garrick to accept female members. I know it hardly balances out, but these things do happen to men too. There are transmen using male facilities, and transmen winning gay beauty contests. Trans ideology is bad for everyone.

From a quick skim read the word seems to be "reasonable"

Starmer spins so fast he could replace a generator turbine. May help us achieve net zero but does nothing for women

They are called "reasonable adjustments".

What is your issue with the Equality Act? The EA states that service providers shouldn't discriminate on the basis of protected characteristics. For example a landlord shouldn't deny people housing because of their sex / race / age etc. The exemptions are to allow discrimination in certain circumstances, where proportionate. For example, a women's refuge can refuse entry to men, to protect women. There isn't a problem with the EA.

That is not what at least two judges and the EHCR have said.

There isn't a problem with the EA.

Well that's us told.

Hundreds of threads on FWR about the problems with the EA.

Many groups like Sex Matters issuing briefings.

Petitions to the HoC which lead to a debate.

Promises from KB to amend the EA

And then suddenlty after these years of discussion and newspaper articles, a well informed and well read (of FWR?!) poster has arrived to tell us there is no problem.

And to think we have spent all this time discussing something that doesn't actually exist.

We must all have been living in some dream, but now we can wake up and realise how silly we have been to get so worked up about it.