Guardian briefing against Baroness Falkner & the EHRC

[GreenUp]

The Guardian's TRA journalists Libby Brooks and Peter Walker have today published two articles briefing against Baroness Falkner and the EHRC.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/may/26/uk-equality-watchdog-months-sign-off-gender-guidance-mps-fear

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/26/splits-labour-supreme-court-gender-ruling

It's concerning that they are still suggesting Harriet Harman will take over.

But there are lots of men who might be uncomfortable using the mens, and they could have a whole range of quite legitimate worries and vulnerabilities. They might be old, or young, or disabled, or gay, or belong to an ethnic minority in an area of high racial tension.

They might just be hygiene freaks who find the state of men's public toilets disgusting.

I have a friend who, well into adulthood, avoids public toilets when he can because he was accosted by a nonce in one when he was a boy. Should his trauma response entitle him to a special government pass allowing him to pee in the ladies?

Of course not, and because he's a decent man who understands how women would react to an unexpected man in the toilet, he wouldn't dream of asking for one. After all, you've only got my word for it that he's lovely and harmless.

Two things:

• The existence of vulnerable men requires provision for vulnerable men; it doesn't require women to budge up and admit vulnerable men to women's spaces.
• There are lots of different groups of men with different vulnerabilities, but only one is asserting that it needs to use women's spaces.

If it is possible to go back to the intention of the thread, here is (in the DM of course) an article pointing out the slant of the Guardian article.

The problem is of course those making the trouble will just dismiss it because it is the DM and will follow the Guardian line.

Anyway at least one paper is not just accepting the TRA line.

John Kirkpatrick, the EHRC’s chief executive, added: ‘We do not recognise the views attributed to “insiders” as being representative of our staff.’

Baroness Falker’s comments since the ‘unambiguous’ Supreme Court judgment are likely to have put her at odds with transgender activists who see the ruling as an attack on trans people.

Earlier this month she wrote: ‘I regret any uncertainty among duty bearers and the public that has been fuelled by misunderstanding and distortion, particularly across social media. The judgment is a model of clarity.

‘The law it sets out is effective immediately. Those with duties under the Equality Act should be following it and taking specialist legal advice where necessary.’

It is not the first time she has faced internal hostility. In 2023 she was cleared of allegations of bullying, discrimination and transphobia by trans activists among her own staff which led to an 'ideologically motivated witch-hunt'.

The apparent plot to oust Baroness Falkner was fist expose by the Mail after she was said to have angered the trans lobby by defending women's rights. In October 2023 the EHRC closed the inquiry following the findings of an independent legal review, ordered by then women and equalities minister Kemi Badenoch.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14754311/Trans-guidance-Supreme-Court-woman-limbo-EHRC-chair.html

So as I suggested earlier in this thread need to keep an eye out for those targetting Falkner and what happens at the WEC on 11 June.

Your argument was that he 'had to' use the womens. You didn't mention him using a unisex space, I don't believe anyone here would object to that, why would they?

And absolutely no one said if he passes it's fine for him to carry on. PP said that he would carry on and not get caught, but just like a HCP successfully concealing his sex from a patient who asked for a woman HCP, that doesn't make it ok. He's still taking women's single sex spaces without their consent. Him being successful in his deception doesn't make his theft of single sex spaces from women ok.

I guess this is where we fundamentally disagree. I don’t believe my TW should be treated or seen as a male anymore.

Isn't that a bit like saying it's OK to shoplift if you know you can do it without being caught?

I don't believe I should be treated or seen as a middle aged woman. But I am, and I am.

Your friend is male and will always be male, it is not possible to change sex. And none of us can expect the world to bend around how we wish to be viewed or to see ourselves. Reality exists, and other people exist, and also have wants and needs and rights.

I'm not being disparaging here. Wanting to show solidarity with a friend isn't a bad impulse in itself. And maybe you don't know that many of us here have trans people in our lives.

But as tempting as it is to say "I want to keep the flashers and fetishists out, but I know this one TW who's really nice and passes quite well and would go out of her way not to cause distress" - it's not possible to make rules that way. You need an objective standard, as hard as that might be on the individual who falls on the wrong side of it.

Because everyone else has only got yours or my word for how harmless they are.

Seriously - there are so many threads that this ding dong between a few could be going on, why are thinking it is okay to post on a thread about the potential political attack on a woman who is trying to stand up for women's sex based rights.

Its just so frustrating, but also a sympton of so many threads on FWR that when it comes down to talking about what we could actually do, ie be proactive towards political action, threads just become some sort of dilettante debating society.

No. One of those things is a crime and the other looked down upon by some people.

Men in women's spaces are in breach of the law and are also possibly committing the offence of harassment. It's not about 'looking down on', both are unlawful acts.

Edited fat fingers

The word possibly is doing the heavy lifting here. Has there ever been a prosecution for this or is it just cooked up here?

You're free to suggest what political action any of us can take about this, but don't thread police. The discussion came about from a quote in the article in the OP about an ambulance worker being 'outed' as a man and discussion of whether he has a right to conceal his sex in that role. It's relevant to the article. What direct action would you like is to be taking just now?

Has there ever been a prosecution in respect of an unlawful act which was only confirmed by the court as being unlawful in the last few weeks?

What about before the Equality Act? It’s always been illegal

You seem to be saying that if someone 'passes' as the opposite sex, it's OK for them to continue to behave as though they were the opposite sex in all circumstances.

Is that a correct interpretation of your argument?

It is so transparent what those briefing against Baroness Faulkner are up to. it is classic TRA playbook of trying to undermine and oust people from their jobs for not kowtowing to their demands. They already tried it and failed in 2023.

If the Guardian wasn't so pathetic, it might try and write a balanced piece that gives some insight into what is actually going on at the EHRC. This is what the DM has done, yet so many Guardian readers sneer and look down their noses at the DM.

I’m suggesting that if someone passed they should continue as they did before.

Before you put words in my mouth, I’m not suggesting the person never needs to disclose their trans status. For example, romantic partners have the right to know. But otherwise I don’t see how it’s anyone’s business.

Getting back to the OP, at the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I do think that Whitehall insiders (junior ministers and civil servants - this is not just about MPs) have too cosy a relationship with TRAs like TransActual etc, and may be trying to do a number on the EHRC. First they bullied them into extending the consultation, then they slag them off for taking too long, and they feed the narrative to the credulous nitwits at the Guardian every step of the way.

They could even be aiming to replace Baroness Falkner early, with someone like Harman, who - at least initially - interpreted the ruling differently from the EHRC.

The EHRC is being attacked from outside, in other words. By elements within government. I wonder where Starmer stands.

Is it when someone thinks they pass or when other service users don’t complain, they think they pass? And that feeling about themselves confirms to themselves they are entitled to break the law?

they know they are the opposite sex. They know the law. They choose to break the law and they can tell themselves anything they want, but their behaviour is illegal, nasty and narcistic. I have zero sympathy left for them.

And this is why you can't base rules on whether a trans person passes.

Firstly, because the number of trans people (let's be honest, trans identified males) who pass well - not perfectly, but well - is really tiny. Even with the lower standard of "passes at a glance in the loo", it's still a tiny minority.

There are a lot more who have talked themselves into believing they pass when they really don't. Honestly, I think their real fear about going into the gents is that they won't be challenged.

And there's a specific demographic who know they don't pass, but then transgressing women's boundaries is how they get their rocks off.

How do you set objective rules that distinguish between those groups?

I agree.

Yes, we do disagree. Your friend is a man, he knows he is a man hence the oh so considerate lip service to “not making women uncomfortable” until he felt that was inconvenient to him, which is also revealing as pp said. He isn’t welcome in women’s space, and you can’t consent on behalf of the majority of women and girls who want female only space.

What you are saying is you feel it is ok to deceive women that a man is secretly in their space. It’s not ethical.

Exactly.

Is it a tiny minority? Or is the number of trans women in the UK is so tiny that this is a completely overblown issue? The way people talk here you’d think they’re clocking trans people left and right all day long. In the last six month, I think I wondered about someone once in-person.