FWS v Scottish Ministers will be handed down Weds 16th April at 9.45am

[IDareSay]

The Ruling in FWS v Scottish Ministers will be handed down next Weds 16th April at 9.45am It will also be streamed via the UKSC website, so you can watch live.

https://x.com/ForWomenScot/status/1910272949350695371

What we need is for JOB to say to a woman, on live radio, 'do you think I'm a rapist?' and for the woman to reply 'I don't know, James. Are you?'

Because that's the only correct answer to that question. We've spent too long being shamed into silence over this, into backing off and apologising because men get hurty feels (which so often express themselves as raging fury, don't they?) when we talk about the fact that women need single sex spaces because of the things that men do.

Okay, thanks. I didn't think it was actually something that was going on

Also the BBC:
"But Scottish Green MSP Maggie Chapman, a prominent campaigner for trans-rights, said: "This is a deeply concerning ruling for human rights and a huge blow to some of the most marginalised people in our society."

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg7pqzk47zo

I would say the most marginalised of society are people (especially children and women) who are homeless, victims of DA, poor, with a disability or chronic illness, or also elderly women, children in care when they do not have decent foster parents, children in children's homes that are not safe for them..
(Also marginalised are many politically voiceless and economically powerless poorer people in countries with difficult economic or political situations.)

This is shown clearly by the scandal about carer's payment and the ease with which financial aid is cut - there was one person who needed extra electricity for his wheelchair, how do you cut out that financial necessity? The most disadvantaged are also those who are in a corridor in a hospital or waiting for hours in an ambulance.

But yet, healthy people, often with male priviledge are often willing to undergo medical or surgical treatments which make them more physically ill (as taking unnecessary hormones or blockers will do that to you, or experimental surgery) and take people protesting against men in a female sports team or people who can't wrap their head round obviously wrong pronouns as "marginalisation".

And how are they so marginalised if they managed to shove women out of their safe and respected places and groups? How do they not have rights if they've managed to undermine legal understandings and employment policy of so many organizations? How are they marginalized when they managed to cancel and hound out GC academics and women and events and debates are cancelled and no-one must mention that the emperor has no clothes, because they are the most oppressed victim ever?
They've tried to take over everything and delete women's rights and still talk about marginalization.

Absolutely right. No James, I cannot say either way whether you are a rapist/ sexual predator. I don't know you. And even if I did know you, I still couldn't say whether or not you might rape a woman or a child in any given situation. And that's the whole point of safeguarding, you pillock. You exclude all men from these spaces to ensure the men that might harm can't get through the net.

The latest 2023 DfE design added a point of having a toilet ‘identified as gender neutral’ on each floor of secondary school. Weird phrasing as in the rest of the document, and in previous versions, toilets are known as unisex if they are mixed sex.

If the toilets are self contained (with a sink) they can be kept mixed sex. They can be converted to only serving single sex with a sign.

If the toilet cubicles don't have a sink in them, they can still be called whatever they like, except single sex, if both sexes can use them because, I believe, that falls foul of 1974 (?) legislation, but I am not 100%.

There needs to be a massive look at toilets now in the education estate. It’s a mess. I was quoted the Health and Safety at Work 1974 legislation when badgering the DfE on 2023 guidelines. I bet schools and designers don’t know this!

My concern is privacy. Because it’s not compatible with safety. Mixed sex, gender neutral, unisex = more risk as they are private.

We don’t want more mixed sex toilets in schools but even the single sex ones only have a 5mm gap (for privacy) according to the DfE designs guidelines. Hopefully this ruling will mean toilets become single sex leading the way back to having these toilet cubicles having door gaps again. Any mixed sex toilets (including disabled toilets) should be as few as possible and rigorously checked and surveyed. It will benefit girls and those who are having a medical emergency most.

Meetings all morning, finally free and catching up

Well done FWS, thank-you for standing up

'For women's rights are human rights'

The only way they are ever marginalised is in not conforming to other males’ narrow expectations of manhood. That is quite literally the only problem they face.

I just shake my head at women, WOMEN, like MC who spend their time fighting for this cause. Why? Just why? You’re supposed to care about environmental issues!

I agree, that's actually the area which does not get enough light.
Why is it such a problem for men if a TW uses their changing room or toilet?
If TW do not feel safe in them, the campaigners need to go to the root of the problem which is toxic masculinity - I can even imagine some TW like to escape that by changing their appearance.

PS. but this is a problem for men to solve, not for women by making themselves meaningless.

Absolutely!

Late to the party today but YAY!!!!!!

I’m so relieved, I was bracing myself for bad news and I can’t quite believe it, or how emotional I feel. Had lovely texts from my sister and daughter who know how much this means to me, and them.

Finally a moment of clarity and sanity in this mad, mad world.

"Nevertheless she persisted".

Very, very well done to FWS and the other wims who have worked tirelessly behind the scenes!

Like many here, I was repeatedly bunging cash into the crowdfunders for the earlier cases - and starting to wonder if I was missing something as I couldn't see why the lower courts seemed to be consistently getting it so wrong. So it is wonderful to see that, by their dogged persistence, taking it all the way to the Supreme Court - and by not taking No for an answer - we've got the best outcome for all UK women, which might not have been the case if it had concluded earlier...

Not that all the gardening hasn't been worth it, but this gardening in particular has grown a field of splendid blooms, blossoming in the sunlight.

I agree none of our political parties come out of this smelling of anything other than shit. I am looking forward to the Lib Dems statement in particular.....🙄

Here's the thing.

I'm not sure it is a problem for other men. I am sure there are a small number of men who might make comments, but the majority of men would shrug it off and carry on business as usual.

From the illegal porn fan and domestic violence excuser Jane Fae

''any space that you might associate with women can now be used to exclude trans women... it means we can’t participate in society"

Not a word about being made to use the male facilities. Fae is 6'3 and built like a brick shithouse, as my nan used to say. People that size and build tend not to have a lot of people trying to start trouble with them.

It is all about being denied access to the female facilities. About the rights of a select group of men to use the facility that women are using and for women to have no way to deny them access.

I wonder how much the SG will have spent on this. Will they be made to pay costs?

I am way back on page 11 (been at work, trying to catch up now) but saw this just now, don't know if already posted, Helen Joyce and Michael Foran being interviewed about the SC decision:

Has Nicola Sturgeon commented at all yet?

Paging @REALFEMINIST

@CheekySnake

Do you think it's an exaggerated problem as TW are as strong as the average man? If we take the arguments from the sports discussion, and combine that with that men might not care as much as the stories say?
Odd or curious looks are probably not nice, but they are not "violence".
It's another possibility, for sure.

In that case, it would be even easier to dissemble the argumentation of unsafe spaces for TW.

I think it probably depends on the area, at an everyday place probably not, after a football match the risk might be higher. But still, these problems need to be dealt with men.
And the risk in public areas are higher for women in some cases, too, however, they are not the same and that does not make them the same category of vulnerable groups, and the common denominator is the attacking man.

As a disabled woman, I'm pretty pissed off with the statement from disability rights uk

Yes please, would love to hear from her!

Must remember not to have a full mouth of tea when I read that one...

Busy day at work so catching up and have the full judgement sitting here to be read this evening. Bloody well done FWS.

And in the nicest possible way, I hope that Naomi Cunningham, Ben Cooper, Akua Reindorf etc find all their cases settling/drying up and they have to look to specialise in other areas of law. I know reality will take a while to catch up so there will still be tribunals, but hopefully the clarification of law means that they are more slam-dunk and the Big Guns don’t need wheeling out so often.