Hampstead Heath Ladies Pond - considering the SC judgement

[QuetzalTerfLus]

Apparently the CoLC is considering its position

https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/25109343.equality-ruling-affect-hampstead-heath-swimming-pond/

Yes that's what we were told. That encouraging people to breach the equality act, is a breach of the equality act.

Absolute idiots

edited to add, and I hope the guidance makes that absolutely clear. That you are breaching the act itself, if you don't immediately abide by it.

In the Explanatory Notes to the Equality Act 2010.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/8#:~:text=or%20inducing%20contraventions-,Effect,to%20attempt%20to%20do%20so.

Section 111. Instructing, causing or inducting contraventions

Effect 363. This section makes it unlawful for a person to instruct, cause or induce someone to discriminate against, harass or victimise another person, or to attempt to do so.

Looks like it, which means they were organised by the CoLC presumably, not park keepers who erroneously took it on themselves. Dear, dear, one rule for women identifying into the men’s and another for men identifying into the women’s CoLC. How discriminatory!!

Maybe the devil is in the detail. The CoLC have been apparently discriminating against women for ages, and are now apparently instructing their staff to keep doing just that.

This is what Allison Bailey's case v Stonewall is based on, isn't it?

Yes, they didn’t even apply to supposed ‘belief’ that ‘gender id’ trumped sex when it came to women entering men’s sacred spaces. Then it was ‘eff off, you bloody woman.’ My own words describing their (to me) disingenuous pretence that they applied ‘gender id’ instead of sex.

They just enabled men to enter women’s spaces - for whatever reasons the men wanted to do this. And, it appears they are still enabling these men to do that, and instructing their staff to let it happen. All the while letting women know (by blanking) that ‘bloody women should eff off’ (my words) if they dare to do the same to the men’s sacred spaces.

Gosh, some woman hating individuals must be driving this sort of thing.

Date is wrong…😂

I wound like a journalist or the local MP or Sadiq Khan to ask the Met police why their officers attended. I am always staggered how many officers seem to be free when women are simply going about their day. The women were not demonstrating they were simply going into the ponds. I assume they were told ‘no’ by the staff and then they stood their ground but why would the police get involved and block the gate?

I wonder if there were any men in the pond when th way went in or if they waited until they had left?

I don’t think they’re allowed to talk to us on this subject whatever pond we use

And how tediously predictable.

Rule one of gender ideology: whatever the burble, men win, women lose.

Then if they can't talk about the subject, surely they can't stop people going into the pools or they'd have to explain why?

As last time Man Friday demonstrated: when men fuck about, everybody enables them - or are made to enable them - and earnestly pretend that no one is fucking about.

If women fuck about, then men and those supporting men have absolutely no truck with it, and it's called all kinds of names.

Double standards? Yes of course. Because it's sexism. Pure and simple. On a binary, sexed basis, making very clear that no one believes anyone has changed sex. If they did, they'd be happy for it to work both ways. And be as firm that men have to accept mixed sex invasion as they are with women.

This is the patriarchy on steroids and in a bikini.

Amy Desir has posted about today's protest: Twitter thread

So, what did we learn today?

1. It is astonishingly easy for @cityoflondon staff to identify members of the male and female sex.
2. Men may go to any of the @CityCorpHeath ponds, while women, no matter how cunningly disguised, or how vociferously they identify as male, are barred entry from the mixed-sex Mens Pond. Yoohoo, @EHRC ! I believe you have enforcement powers?

Yes it is, but I don't think this is what's happening with it's staff.

The staff are agents of the CoLC so the CoLC is directly responsible for their actions (in these circs).

AMY DESIR - you are a STAR!!!!

Fab twitter reporting - fab photos - Huge congrats!

Totally. And Hannah. And I'm sure I saw Venice there in the pic. Dripping in costume jewellery. Fucking love it

Bravo that woman.

I put funny emoticon as there isnt a shock one. That is disgusting. What a waste of police resource. So when COLC finally concede that their stance is illegal - I wonder who pays the bill for that.

I know you have to go through the complaints process first, but surely if the City of London corporation do not comply, it is a case for the Local Government ombudsman?

Indeed. But they've had time to write that notice up, and laminate it, to force their staff to monitor users. The individual responsible for this at COLC should be sacked. I commented on this, or another thread, about his refusal to accept feedback from women several years ago. I dont actually want to post on here what I think his motives are - I am aware of a gay male mafia in the City. But this conduct is next level.

You make a good point, but who can complain? The consultation on access to the pools from a few years ago allowed those who lived in the City of London (ie very few people relatively), worked in the City of London (me), and something else (cant remember - perhaps employed by?). So if you are a visitor from outside - can you complain if there are illegal restrictions?

I found it curious that they were in such a rush to laminate and post their little notice that they didn't pause to ask anyone to proofread it first. The date isn't the only glaring typo.

You'd have thought they might have wanted to take a little bit longer to consider things before reacting to an important legal development.

Amy Desir's protest is fantastic! While I don't usually mind sharing with genuine transwomen, her point is brilliantly made: If a man can self-ID as female and get into the women's pond, what possible defence can there be for women not being able to do the same thing at the men's?

I haven't been to any of the ponds. I assume the men's pond is much bigger and better than the women's?

The Interim Guidelines from the EHRC post the Supreme Court ruling are in immediate effect.

The Supreme Court ruled that in the Equality Act 2010 (the Act), ‘sex’ means biological sex.

This means that, under the Act:

• A ‘woman’ is a biological woman or girl (a person born female)
• A ‘man’ is a biological man or boy (a person born male)

If somebody identifies as trans, they do not change sex for the purposes of the Act, even if they have a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).

• A trans woman is a biological man
• A trans man is a biological woman

This judgment has implications for many organisations, including:

• workplaces
• services that are open to the public, such as hospitals, shops, restaurants, leisure facilities, refuges and counselling services
• sporting bodies
• schools
• associations (groups or clubs of more than 25 people which have rules of membership)

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/media-centre/interim-update-practical-implications-uk-supreme-court-judgment

It just needs someone to get a solicitor to write a letter to them, or as now seems to be the way to get Sex Matters to write a public letter!

(In case it doesn't show up but I have added bold in the organisations list to leisure facilities

‘Do not talk about trans ruling’, staff at Highgate Men’s Pond told
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/05/not-talk-about-trans-ruling-staff-told-highgate-mens-pond/

Can be read in full at https://archive.is/C46cT