Domestic violence shelters ‘defy trans court ruling’ - Telegraph article

[IwantToRetire]

Before anyone gets really wound up by this, it is so badly written it is impossible to sort out which groups are providing trans services in addition to women (biological) only. As opposed to "inclusive" services ie a service that is both for trans women and actual women.

And goodness knows why the used the word "shelter". In the UK we have refuges.

And why the religious correspondent was commissioned to write it I dont know.

Its bad enough that there is a lack of clarity, but really would expect a paper like the Telegraph be able to publish something with some attempt at proper journalistic standards!! ie facts rather than implications

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/04/28/domestic-violence-shelters-defy-trans-court-ruling/

Can be read in full at https://archive.is/2rlz7

I can't work out if any of the refuges mentioned are actually saying that they will allow men into women's single sex groups/spaces

I think some of them might be saying that they're still going to be trans inclusive meaning that transwomen will still be able to use the service but just not the women's groups

Or trans inclusive meaning trans men can access services?! Agree impossible to tell, just someone trying to generate column inches. There's plenty of those to be had with the actual developments!

Well I was just thinking I had posted in haste and went to re-read.

I just cant make it out, so am glad that others found it confusing.

Honestly its bad enough Stonewall etc., being woolly with their language, but for a "reporter" to be so muddled.

And surely the roll of the editor is to pick up on nonsense like this!

Although I was interested to see that Karen Ingala Smith and Shonagh Dillon have written a letter to "organisations".

And whilst as an individual I would want services for women to be in an exclusively women only setting, as each refuge or RCC has their own constitution not sure how anyone can tell anybody else you have to do it this way.

Isn't the main issue to be sure that any users know right from the start whether they have access to a genuinely women only service or only to a trans inclusive service.

And although I dont think sorting it out through the pages of the Telegraph is the best approach, one way or another this has got to be agreed so that users are always told the truth.

Each RCS and women’s refuge service is independent and will have its own constitution.

Except for Refuge a London based charity who was/is happy to bid competitively against local independent women only services as an expansionist policy

Refuge as an organisation are a bunch of shits who have already stated they will continue to provide trans women services (cos imo that is where the money is)

women’s aid affiliated services are usually for and by women.

although I am planning to do a knottyauty survey to see if this is always the case.

Most Women’s Aid services and RCS grew out of second wave feminism and I have been part of that movement as a volunteer worker, trustee and rep for many years

Except for Refuge

I think if you read the article you will see it is more that Refuge. As a corporate entity there comments aren't surprising.

What is sad is some of the refuge services that were set up in the era of a feminist foundation have apparently been captured.

Who knows how many they are.

Irrespective of my personal opinion, I just wish they would all grow up and stand by their decisions and not hide behind vague wording.

It should be clear from the very first paragraph on a web site or leaflet, which type of services they offer.

It will take a while for it to become clear what they are proposing. But legally, they have to choose between
(a) a service restricted to women (biological women)
(b) a service that is offered to both women and men (including all men, not just those identifying as women)
and if they choose (b) then this has to be compatible with their stated charitable objects, etc.

Also if they choose (b) they have to be upfront about it, they can't say that they're providing services for women but then in fact the service is inclusive of trans women ie. mixed sex.

I think this is the core of the issue.

Even at the time of the does it have and SSE, or does it not, the services providers should have said in plain english (and which ever other languages they translated into) this service is for:

• biological women only
• biological women and trans women with a GRC
• mixed sex
• biological men and trans men with a GRC
• biolocigal men only

Not sure about starting a new thread, and although I hate to do so, have to compliment Women's Resource Centre for making a statement that is simple and straight forward.

If only front line services like RC or WA could do the same.

https://www.wrc.org.uk/blog/sex-as-biological-and-the-impacts-on-the-womens-sector

Just came back to say having re-read the WRC statement, I am more than a little surprised that they started by saying:

There has been a lot of talk and fear of compulsory trans exclusion, which may be alarming to those women's organisations that are trans inclusive

If this is true then it shows that in the "women's sector" there is ignorace of the EA and the SSE, and the existing guidelines produced by the EHRC.

Or they are all so captured by the trans narrative that they are acting like helpless victims.

How depressing.