An update to the WI Announcement thread. My DH just got a reply to his application to join them.

[Another2Cats]

This is not a thread about a thread, but recently there was a thread about the Womens Institute announcement that they would not be implementing the SC ruling anytime soon.

I was reading the thread at the time and, entirely jokingly, I suggested to my DH that he should apply to join the WI and see what they say.

So he did just that (he totally gets the GC point of view) and I posted about this at the time:

Another2Cats · 08/05/2025 19:45

I just got my DH to send an email to them:

Hello,

My name is Xxxx (very obviously masculine name). I just read your transgender policy and understand that you accept men.

I am a man and would like to join the local WI group in [xxxx city] (the nearest branch for me is in yyyy [suburb of xxxx city]).

Should I just turn up next Wednesday evening and sign up?

I'm really waiting with bated breath to see what sort of response there is.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5330297-womens-institute-announcement?reply=144143149
.

Well, it turns out that they sent a response this lunchtime.

This is their reply (although with contact details redacted):

Good morning,

Thank you for your enquiry. Our policy states that “WI membership is open to all women who live as women, including transgender women.” If you fit within this statement, you will be more than welcome to attend. I am afraid the WI is not open to men.

Kind regards,

[Redacted]

[Name Redacted]
Federation Secretary
[Two cities - well, a city and a town - redacted] Federation of WIs CIO
[Address redacted]
[Telephone number redacted]
Office hours: Tues, Weds, Thurs 9am – 1pm

Please note the new email address – [Redacted]
.

I don't know, is this something that DH should take up with the EHRC now that he has it in writing?

It's not wrong. It's entirely right to question why some men are allowed to join and some men aren't. It is discrimination and it needs to be addressed. There is no reason why OP's DH should be excluded from an activity he wants to do if other men are included.

I went to look at the Freemasons and they say

“A candidate for admission to Freemasonry under UGLE must be a man. Should a person who has undergone gender reassignment and has become a man apply to become a Freemason then his application must be processed in the same way as for any other male candidate.”

In other words the Freemasons is now a mixed sex organisation and we can all join.

My grandfather was a Freemason, I've got the paraphernalia in the wardrobe behind me. He joined so he could attend the Ladies' Nights.

Freemasons also allow transwomen if they were already a member before they transitioned. So the only people not allowed are the regular women.

Right. Which of us is going to apply to become a freemason then?

Not I!
Unless it's as a Freemoosen.

A quick thought - did your husband actually go along to a meeting and try to join and get formally refused? You will likely want to be able put in your statement of claim that you went along chequebook in hand and filled in an application form which was rejected. Did he do that?

I'm tempted to try the Freemasons - the Lodge is only a stroll away. But it's all rather more legislatively complex over here, so wouldn't be the best test case.

I'm definitely not going to try getting into the Orange Order (no idea what their policy is, or even if they have one; all I can find is that 10 years ago they wouldn't let TW into the women's lodge, so I suspect their 'men only' really is single sex).

'undergone gender reassignment'.

Oh let's pin that one down, what does that mean?

What degree of surgery?
What degree of medication?
Started when and to what affect?
Does personal appearance come into this?
Or are we down to a name and a gas bill?

The whole thing is fecking ridiculous.

And 'undergone'..... as a woman whose body has had a bloody hard time and distorted a lot via medical issues, if other women can be masons and we're adding up empathy points then I feel equally entitled.

"I declare you have undergone gender reassignment"

That's just as illegal.

Women who have or haven't undergone gender reassignment are still just women.

You can't have some women and not other women.

I can't wait for the court cases 🍿

Yeah, the difference between that and the WI is my local Lodge has some members who would be less than patient with a woman trying to join.

I think it would be unsafe, frankly.

It's rather like the difference between men forcing their way into lesbian groups, and women entering gay saunas or the Hampstead pool. The men just told them to leave. Because men are not sexually vulnerable to a woman in their space, they hold all the power and know it, and so does everyone else.

Yes. And I know from the double-yellow parking on lodge meeting nights that I couldn't rely on police backup if 'less than patient' took a sharper form than just being told to go away.

Plus the EA doesn't directly apply in NI.

I’m a woman but am I womaning enough to qualify as living as a woman? I am wearing trousers and a jumper, oh and socks with sandals…that sounds quite mannish to me. On the other hand I’ve got lipstick on and I’ve just picked some roses, is that womanly enough? Or merely Cecil Beaton in his garden?

Exactly this. Correct me if I'm wrong The Catses, but I think Mr Cats would be (maybe disappointed) but completely understanding if WI confirmed they were women-only, so they would be letting NO men join.

The current situation is that they are letting SOME men join, only if they claim they have lady-feels.

That is the bit that is wrong.

Christwo, what sort of socks do you have? Do they have a flower pattern? That could possibly swing it. Ducks are a bit more of a grey area.

He needs to reply

So just to confirm if I borrow my wife's dress, get a pair of heels from Oxfam and visit the boots make up counter I am welcome

Fantastic news. Looking forward to some girly chats

No, don’t despair, Dues. We can do it. I’m practising softer hand gestures right now. With a kind smile on my face.

I think DH is calling an ambulance …

So just to confirm if I borrow my wife's dress, get a pair of heels from Oxfam and visit the boots make up counter I am welcome

No, that's not 'confirming' as they haven't said that.

Much as I'd be eager to hear a single example of what someone needs to do in order to be 'living as a woman' putting words in their mouth doesn't help - far better to sit back and let them come up with it.
However, OP isn't going down this route, they're going down 'you're discriminating against a group of men because some are allowed in and others aren't ' (regardless of the criteria required for being in the first group).

Isn't it more that they are discriminating against all men because the membership requirements are more restrictive for men than women? Women can join regardless of gender identity, but men must have a female gender identity.

Good point. Ask if they allow transmen to join.

There are men's organizations that have a sort of associated women's wing. I don't see why they couldn't manage something similar. A kind of paralell organization. They could work together for certain things, where it made sense. Like jam competitions.

Ok, so ... we did a thing.

The claim form has been issued.

The WI instructed a firm of London solicitors who went on the record yesterday and contacted DH.

I'd never heard of them before so quickly checked on the Legal 500 to see if they were there.

It turns out that they are a Tier 1 ranked firm in the area of Charity & Not for Profit (so these are people who know what they're doing).

Given the size of the WI, I guess it's not at all surprising that they would use a firm like this.

Maybe, now that there are some grown-ups involved, things may get resolved.

I will keep this thread updated as much as I can but there is a set timetable by which different actions must be done that cannot be hurried.

As and when there is anything to add, I'll be back.