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/

I’ve been having conniptions since picking up the latest issue of a local paper last Thursday. I posted upthread photos of two letters in the previous issue. I’ve only just managed to force myself to read the letters this week having scanned them on Thursday and feeling extremely upset. There are THREE letters from TIMs/allies and NO others! I sent one myself so I know they had them. I’m sorry these photos are not great, I hope you can read them

I see!

There was a thread on here recently though where a Jewish woman was explaining the different roles that men and women had (baking challah versus teaching boys to swim I think) and posters were saying it was sexist to separate roles in that way so isn’t it two sides of the same coin?

Or is more nuanced and that you can think that gender roles are sexist but still respect the rights of those who hold different beliefs, and that’s the difference between TRAs and GCs?

@EweSurname

That poster thought that a man could become a woman by performing a stereotypical “female” role.

Most people would disagree. Men don’t belong in all female spaces for a variety of reasons. Some women are less comfortable with them being there than others, for a variety of reasons. One of those reasons for many Jewish women is based on their religious belief. I don’t have to share that belief, but I absolutely share not wanting men in my female spaces, for different reasons.

I do like the picture. Clearly the man on the right is the most manly of them. Just look at that beard.

The photos are phenemenal! As is the video on the Daily Mail site.

So beautifully done.

There are belief systems that hurt their own adherents, proselytise dishonestly, and seek power over non-believers. They're non-WORIADS and may need acting against (eg the proscription of Holocaust denial in post-war Germany)

Religious trad wives are at the mild end of things. What can we do about them, other than offer a public good example of female equality, and the protection of the law?

Yes that makes sense, thank you

As I said in my later post I do kind of get why people do it. I'm sure a part of it is visibly wearing religious clothing like head scarfs, covering hair etc.

But it really doesn't mean Christian or atheist women regardless of how much flesh they want to show off are happy to actually change in front of men.

All women should be afforded dignity to have single sex spaces.

I don't think anyone is saying Christian or atheist women as a bloc are?

The poster who said, 'But there are many religious Muslim and Jewish women who like the single sex space', I understand her spot to mean 'But there are many religious Muslim and Jewish women who can only use the single sex space'.

And as belief is a protected characteristic, they could bring discrimination cases if they wanted to.

Yes, you can agree or not agree, but it's not about the religion, it's about it being protected. You can't discriminate on the basis of it. I don't know self exclusion would come under that tho.

That photo is an absolute joy.

What a contrast between pissing, statue defacing, violent transactivists, and these women making the most crucial of points with the lightest of touches.

Absolutely bloody delightful. And I bet no-one has ever say that about a single TRA. Evah.

What with that and JKR puffing on a stoagie, necking a glass, and imitating the A-Team, it's no wonder we're winning. Sheer genius will out in the end.

I think it would.

If you make a decision (allowing men) that will disproportionately affect some protected groups (women whose religion doesn't allow them to swim with men), you're in indirect discrimination territory. They are choosing to self exclude as a result of.your policy.

Of course they couldn’t use that, that would be to easy a solution

Wonder if trans men are trying to get into the men’s only pond

Well, there were a lot of transmen there yesterday. The police blocked the entry of these transmen into the pond which corresponded with their gender identity. The management had requested they do that.

The management (CoLC) apparently chooses to not recognise gender identity only when it comes to women, irrespective of how women declare they identify. So maybe management of CoLC are just straight up woman haters. And only recognising ‘gender identity’ when it comes to men intruding on women single sex spaces. This would make it appear as if they are happy to enable an environment where women are more likely to be stressed, harassed, and open to male exposure and voyeurism.

On the other hand, the CoLC seem to be determined to create a hostile atmosphere for women who identify as transmen every bit as much as women in the women’s pond. Bit of a feature there. Outside of breaking the protections afforded to single sex spaces in the Equality Act 2010.

Indeed, and they pay council tax along with everyone else and should have swimming facilities that support their requirements. They might have a case for indirect discrimination but I imagine the City of London would claim they "couldn't" discriminate against "trans" women and / or that they did meet this requirement with the ladies pond and transwomen aren't men. They'd end up in legal spaghetti, especially before the Supreme Court judgement was made.

It is an inconvenient truth not yet tested in court that to 'include' men in a women's space means you can no longer 'include' 100% of the sex class that resource was intended for, as it is no longer accessible.

Either DEI matters or it's just a word to leverage men's interests. Either people being excluded and feeling uncomfortable matters and provision is required, or it's just another emotive line to leverage men's interests. Either tax payers can expect equality of accessible provision in return for their taxes, or they're funding men's political interests.

I find the Chump Lady's comments on cake deeply relevant here. But yes, it would be hard to make sense in a court room where 'I wanna' (and I'm bigger than her) doesn't cut it.

Just to quote myself since the court ruling not reverting the pond back to single sex is breaking the law. No need to exploit religions. This is about women's sex based rights. Man Friday just needs to get a solicitor to write a letter.

What a shame the neither Rights for Women nor Women's Centre for Justice are in any way engaged with helping women get their legal rights.

@SwearyGodmother was on TV this evening!

And she was great! It was at 8.45 - I’d guess it will become available on catchup.

Oh fantastic ❤️ lovely to see her 🥰

Wonderful stuff. Go Sweary!

Or should we say him?