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

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

Probably nothing at all but the social media coverage and news reports are essentially free and put the seed that the SC ruling is incomplete or not clear into the minds of the general public.

To actually proceed with these sorts of appeals is likely

• pointless - the ruling is clear
• expensive - nice work for the people who will take your money knowing they are going to fail
• TRA self-defeating - any case that makes it to court is likely to confirm that the SC ruling is clear

The next step might be for TRAs to start lobbying MPs to change the law so that it corresponds to Stonewall's interpretation of what it should be

I wonder how long such a change would take and how likely MPs would be to get behind it?

The government are going to try to make the law toothless via the Data Bill. If anyone can get official government approved ID saying the are a woman, how do businesses and services enforce single sex exemptions? All the clamour around ECHR etc is just a distraction and keeps the noisy TRAs busy. The backroom deal is the Data Bill.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/may/14/uk-equality-watchdog-to-extend-gender-guidance-consultation-say-insiders

“The UK’s equality watchdog is expected to give in to demands that it allow more time to consider its formal guidance on the supreme court ruling about gender issues, after what sources say has been a big backlash from staff and stakeholders.
Some insiders believe the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) may be forced into a U-turn on its initial response, which was criticised as overly literal in defining how organisations should respond to the court decision that “woman” in the Equality Act refers only to a biological woman.”

and

”Sources said there was particular worry about how well Falkner and her team of commissioners – all but one of whom were appointed by Conservative governments – will be able to justify their stance when they are questioned by the WEC next month.
One EHRC source said there had been significant disquiet among staff about the interim guidance and the way it was drawn up before being published on 25 April.
They said: “Most people, including some fairly senior ones, had no idea the interim guidance was coming until it was published late on the Friday evening.”

and

“
“The pushback has been really strong. Some stakeholders are saying they can no longer work with us. Loads of staff say they’re looking for other jobs. The approach from the chair and senior leadership has been really secretive and paranoid.”
The Guardian understands that at a recent EHRC all-staff meeting – a regular event, not one called specifically to discuss the ruling – questions from staff to Falkner and the chief executive, John Kirkpatrick, were dominated by concerns about the interim advice.
In particular staffers voiced concern that the imperative in the supreme court’s judgment not to treat the ruling as a victory for either “side” had been lost, and called for the commission to make clearer its initial affirmation that it remained committed to protecting transgender people from discrimination.”

Yes. This. This war is nowhere near over.

In particular staffers voiced concern that the imperative in the supreme court’s judgment not to treat the ruling as a victory for either “side” had been lost, and called for the commission to make clearer its initial affirmation that it remained committed to protecting transgender people from discrimination

Strange article from the Guardian - lots of people stomping about and throwing their toys around but the take away seems to be that the EHRC need to affirm that they remain committed to protecting transgender people.

The UK’s equality watchdog is expected to give in to demands that it allow more time to consider its formal guidance on the supreme court ruling about gender issues, after what sources say has been a big backlash from staff and stakeholders.

If staff (and stakeholders) feel that they do not need to follow the law, then perhaps the time is right to accept their resignations and rebuild the organization as something that is fit for purpose

We have ended up in this position precisely because staff within these organizations were prepared to accept, glorify and carry through the opinions of a lobby group rather than seek clarity of the actual law

The EHRC is only applying the law as the Supreme Court has defined it. The toddler tantrums are neither here nor there.

The pushback has been really strong. Some stakeholders are saying they can no longer work with us. Loads of staff say they’re looking for other jobs. The approach from the chair and senior leadership has been really secretive and paranoid

My guess is that we will be able to count the number of staff who resign over this on the fingers of no hands

Loads of staff say they’re looking for other jobs.

Would that be like aaaaallllll the posts on Reddit where people say they want to “leave TERF island” and flee elsewhere? I should imagine very few do, for lack of funds or any sort of transferable skill that would get them a visa elsewhere.

The SC said for all purposes sex is biological sex.

Not legal sex.

If you collect the data badly, this doesn't change biological sex. It just means you have willfully and deliberately tried to unfairly discriminate.

They could use the data bill as a vehicle to make a fudge only for there to be a legal case which blows up the data act and states that it's not compatible with the equality act and the human rights act as it leads to the dignity and privacy of women being violated.

So don't panic even if they get the horseshit through.

It ain't over.

And if they try and do that Reform will be all over it anyway.

Gave up with the Guardian years ago - started seeing articles where evidence was presented but then deliberately misinterpreted.

It is a shame, it was a place where you could go for well reasoned, informative journalism. It has become a place for 'activist journalists' to further their activism.

Not entirely their fault, the whole industry has collapsed into the clicks for money race to the bottom.

My point being, if your means of collecting data is shit, it doesn't absolve you of your legal obligations to uphold human rights. That still exists.

It might make it harder for you to enforce your legal rights, but it still doesn't mean you are being discriminated against if you can prove that your sex based rights have been violated.

Biological sex is ultimately something that can be verified without a bit of data. So that's your proof.

If you keep getting sexual abuse in 'single sex' spaces, despite your paperwork all saying it's single sex, it doesn't mean you aren't liable for failing to protect those under your duty of care. It just makes you look like you aided and abetted that abuse.

Dear God, that poem is like something written by the kind of "poet" who is published only in the letters page of a local newspaper.

Translucent are currently asking the most marginalised people to cough up £60,000, starting with the first £10,000. It's like a romance scam. You know they're going to back for more.

The meaning of biological sex was set out in Corbett vs Corbett (I think that's the name of the case anyway) which involved two men 1 who was trans and wanted a divorce whilst the other wanted an annulment as he married a man. If my memory serves correctly, the ruling states that chromosomal and gonadul sex (i.e., if you were born with testicle or ovaries). So that's a lost argument before they even start.

As for the EHRC not consulting with trans people before putting out guidance on the law that follows the law rather than saying what trans people want it to say. I don't think that the trans organisations realise that those days are long gone now, they over played their hand and forced us to go to the sc to get the clarity we now have and there's no going back. They can run around screaming that's not fair and nobody needs to follow the guidance all they like, some idiots will listen for now, less when the full guidance comes out and zero after the next few legal cases go against stonewall law.
I look forward to seeing the backlash from business and service providers when they get sued and forced to spend a fortune on replacing all the mixed sex facilities that stonewall et al advised them to put in and replace all their stonewall approved illegal guidance/policies.
The TRAs know fine well that the only way to change the law is by campaigning however they also know that anyone campaigning to remove all sex based rights from women will fail and any pretence that they just want to be safe/accepted etc will end and everyone will see exactly who and what they are.

The point of the Data Bill isn't that it will obscure data, though it will do that - for TRAs the point is what it'll do on the ground.

If Isla Bryson has a government approved ID which says he is a woman, how is the gym changing room/DV refuge/women's netball team going to keep him out? He can 'prove' he's a woman, the government say so,.so what's the gym reception/DV worker/team manager going to do in that situation?Hence all the straw men about genital inspections and butch lesbians being accosted in toilets, no one is going to argue in those situations if Isla's got government official ID that he's a woman.

If Isla has government ID saying he's a woman, women's single sex spaces are still self ID and for the purposes of the changing room/refuge/sports team, the supreme court means nothing.

Even if that happens, it won't happen for long.

One way or another it will be challenged.

He's still on the Endometriosis South Coast site as Parliamentary Advisor.

Yes, I noticed that. 😕