Watchdog threatened with legal action

[SlackJawedDisbeliefXY]

Equalities watchdog threatened with legal action after saying trans women must use men’s toilets | The Independent

More guff from the guff mill .. the SC ruling is very, very clear.

TransLucent have now sent a letter to the watchdog warning that the guidance “incorrectly states the legal position” of the court ruling

... criticises the body, saying it failed to consult with trans people before publishing its interim guidance ...

... campaigners argue the remarks have caused “immense distress to the trans community and confusion to both service providers and employers ...

... The worry for our client is that there has not yet been any consultation with trans communities and other affected groups ...

No consultation with other affected groups - like women

Whoever keeps putting money into the guff-o-matic, would they please stop

Weird, I'm remember the days when translucent meant letting the light through. 🤣

Well, good luck to them, if they want to piss over 100 grand up a rope.

Have the sodding consultation then, lads, the result will be the same.

I’ve read the judgement in full and the guidance reflects it clearly and accurately. If they want to waste their money on a lost cause that’s up to them.

The comments in the Independent article just seems to be about men demanding the right to use toilets of their choice. Surely the SC ruling was about more than that, it was about Women having their biological right to SSS recognised in law?
Toilets are just one small aspect…

criticises the body, saying it failed to consult with trans people before publishing its interim guidance

No one needs to consult you on what the law is matey. We consulted the supreme court.

Honestly the main character syndrome on these people.

It is very much a misnamed organisation.

I reckon a court case is probably needed the way things are going.

The TRA focus on toilets is a way of trivialising women’s fight for single-sex spaces. They don’t want to discuss serious issues like the need for single-sex hospital wards, prisons, rape crisis centres, or changing rooms because those facilities being separated by sex is very easily understood and justified by the public at large.

Helens Joyce's discussion today on WH asked men to be more welcoming to transwomen. I think this has to be the way forward.

Perhaps we need to be advocating for notices to be placed on the door of men's toilets saying "We uphold the law. Trans women (biological men) are welcome here, it's a safe space for all men"

I don't believe men would threaten other men, using male toilets, especially Robin, even if they are dressing as a woman.

Ah, I knew TransLucent rang a bell. The fragrant 'Steph' Richards is a leading light. Steph 'stepped down' from his position as CEO of an endometriosis charity after only 6 months citing transphobia/personal reasons depending on what report you read.

Steph still likes to post poetry about endometriosis. I suspect I will not be the only one to find this creepy.

https://x.com/PompeySteph/status/1921465894603026525

Oh I don't know... transparent means seeing clearly exactly what is on the other side. Translucent means seeing something, but it's too indistinct and unclear to see what it is.. 😏
You have a point, though, I think we would have suggested 'Opaque' if they'd asked us for advice

The ruling stated that sex is biological for all purposes relating to the equality act.

For the purposes of law, the definition of 'biological' will always default to 'what the average person will reasonably understand as sex'. So there is no fudging around with chromosones or whatever to be had there either.

I'm curious as to what they think the ERHC CAN say differently WITHIN the parameters of the law?!!!

The law isn't something you consult over the interpretation of. THATS THE POINT. To stop people finding loopholes and to have narrow definitions so there is no wiggle room or 'misunderstanding'. Thats what the ruling was all about doing - stopping the piss taking.

If you don't like the law you don't try and consult with those enforcing it. You try and change the law.

That means consulting with the law makers. For the thick, thats MPs. You take it up with MPs and get the law changed.

They are fuckwits.

Let them bring a legal challenge.

Steph still likes to post poetry about endometriosis. I suspect I will not be the only one to find this creepy.

You're really not <shudders>

Definitely has to be the way forward. Let men (and men-wanting-to-be-women) fight it out among themselves - not literally, I hope.

Agreed. And indeed it was even wider than single sex spaces. It was about sex discrimination protections still protecting female people from being treated less favourably than male people. While toilets are important, the SC case was much more fundamental than that.

Some people, usually men, can have the strangest kinks.

Just to be clear, this isn't poetry written by women suffering from endometriosis which Steph is bringing to a wider audience.

This is self-penned by Steph himself. It is long, graphic and really quite disturbing when you know it is written by a man.

It is also some of the worst 'poetry' I have ever read.

Why the hell do they think they get to be consulted? The ruling was extremely clear - it’s hard to see how it could be misinterpreted.

I suppose there’s the “I’m a woman and I’m biological so I must be a biological woman” level of analysis. But surely this just raises questions about whether it’s really appropriate to allow these people out unaccompanied 🙄

The level of entitlement and self-importance is off the scale. There are nearly 70 million people in this country. Why is it that a handful, with no mandate and zero consideration for other people think they get to write the laws for everyone else?

Hmm, that’s a very unhealthy interest isn’t it 🤢

I had thought their angle was that there was a need for consultation on the practical outworkings to ensure the guidance properly captured what organisations should do in situations where transmen could not use female toilets or male toilets. They still need a toilet (or changing room, or hospital bed etc) so there needs to be pragmatic guidance on how to deal with that situation.

That's where sensible heads might be.

There's a lot of people who aren't remotely interested that mindset.

And there's a question here about how long any 'interim' might be. That's got to be hard and fast in terms of when because the law HASN'T changed and allowing an 'interim' would be a step back.

I know, I was making the mistake of applying logic to the situation! 🤦‍♀️

When I read the explanation, I desperately wished there was a 🤢 reaction button on MN.

Agreed, the toilet issue is part of the TRA straw-manning attacks that go over well on social media and the BBC.

This morning's 'Woman's hour' 'gotcha' about a mother taking a male child into the women's loo is a new low in this regard.