EHRC on Woman’s Hour 21/5/25

[SabrinaThwaite]

Kishwer Falkner from the EHRC will be interviewed about the SC judgment today.

But there is nothing stopping them including all men.
If they promoted themselves as 'Lesbians and anyone who identifies as a lesbian' then, yes, any man could join. It doesn't mean that every man would want to join, so they would probably end up with a group of like minded people and everyone would be happy. I mean, they'd probably end up with a group of just men who were unhappy about there being no lesbians, but nobody would have been discriminated against.

Organisations presumably can say "whilst we are open to anyone joining, this organisation is aimed at X and events, wording and discussions will be arranged around the needs of X"

'Lesbians and anyone who identifies as a lesbian' then, yes, any man could join.

I dont know why this is still going on on this thead.

This is about the EA.

Identifying as something has no legal status.

That is just pure Stonewall poppycock.

No, that cuts across protected characteristics.

It's not a single-sex organisation, because some men are included (and some women excluded). It's not an association for people who are same-sex attracted, because some people who are opposite-sex attracted are included (amd some who are same-sex attracted are excluded).

It's exactly the sort of nonsense grouping the supreme court said made the alternative interpretation of the EA unworkable.

If you want to have a lesbians and straight men identifying as lesbians picnic you could I think do the following:

You can have a lesbians' society (female + sexuality pcs)
You can have a straight men with gr status society (male + sexuality + gr status pcs)
Each society involves an intersection of protected characteristics so is allowed.
The two societies can decide to team up and run a joint event.

I'm not against people doing this if it's what they want to do. By having the lesbians' society without any men in, they are free to decide democratically (or indeed despotically if the society is so constituted) if they want joint events or not. And other lesbians are free to say they want to have their own society without all the joint events with males in. And everyone is free to decide which of those societies they want to join.

Its irrelevent to the EA. Identifying as something has not status.

So is not a protected characteristic.

Why is this still clogging up this thread?

If you think it is a serious discussion why not start a thread about potential problems for clubs and associations and the Equality Act.

And then it there ever are any actual relevent points being made more would see them?

I've just started to catch up.
right at the beginning they're doing the intro - supreme court judgement...
"it decided that the terms women and sex in the equality act..."

Is this how they see it?
decided. ie: invented, made up, changed the law?

Rather than "restated, reconfirmed, made clear"

I don’t think so, but then I don’t agree with your definition of ‘decide’ either. Anyway, here’s a screenshot from the summary at the end of the judgment which might clarify for you. supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2024-0042

It is a legal decision. The decision of the court. Standard wording for a judicial determination.

A conclusion reached after an evaluation of facts and law.

https://thelawdictionary.org/decision/