We’ve just lost our space — 2 days before our event

[LCommunity]

We applied back in May to hold a small lesbian social at Potters Fields Park.
The Temporary Event Notice was approved.
Today, with only 2 days to go, they’ve pulled it.
Why?
Because the word lesbian appeared.
They’ve now called it “political”.
It wasn’t a protest. Just a chance for women to meet, sit outside, and build some safe space.
Their lease bans “religious or political” events. Somehow, a lesbian meet-up has been put in that category.
We’re not cancelling. We’ll simply move to the public pavement just outside the park.

If anyone’s curious or wants to understand more, full details are here: https://thelcommunity.com/pavement-bar/

Thank you this is really helpful and you're absolutely right. We’ve been very clear from the start that it’s a simple, private social gathering for lesbians, no political banners, no campaigning, nothing of that nature. Their reasoning seems extremely shaky under the Equality Act 2010, especially given the Public Sector Equality Duty and protections around sexual orientation. We are actively looking into all legal and procedural options now, including whether this constitutes indirect discrimination. Really appreciate you sharing your experience every bit helps right now.

Exactly. The double standard is glaring. If it was any other group, there’d be no issue but lesbians gathering privately is suddenly “political”. This is exactly why we’re pushing back. The Equality Act doesn’t permit councils to pick and choose whose social lives they allow.

This was never meant to be political just a safe, simple social space for lesbians. But the pattern of targeting is undeniable. Even councils are now echoing the same discrimination we’ve seen from TRAs for years. The Supreme Court ruling makes our legal position clear and we’re standing on it.

We’re fighting it. No proper justification was given. We’ve pulled legal and procedural levers already and if needed, we will escalate further. Thank you for standing with us it means more than you know.

Good point we’re already preparing FOI requests to both the council and police to flush out exactly what was said behind closed doors. If there’s been misrepresentation or back-channel pressure, it’ll come out.

Exactly. The exclusion is the heart of this and we’ve always been clear: we don't block, we don't obstruct, we gather quietly and respectfully. But somehow even that gets policed when it’s lesbians. That tells you everything.

we’re building the full record. The EHRC, local MP, Bridget Phillipson — everyone relevant is being put on notice. This isn’t just about one event, it’s about an ongoing pattern that the Supreme Court ruling should have finally ended. Thank you for the link added to the file.

Yes actual lesbians. Adult human females who are same-sex attracted. That’s who the event is for, and who we exist to support. The 7% claim is a distortion that’s been fully debunked elsewhere in this thread.

Thank you for posting this so clearly. The level of deliberate misinformation out there is staggering and exactly why so many lesbians now have to fight even for basic social space.

Exactly they know the facts, but the misrepresentations serve the agenda. Fortunately, most people are getting very tired of the constant bad faith.

It’s not an honest conversation when one side refuses to engage with truth. The repeated smears prove how little they have to stand on.

Fully agree. This isn’t about debate it’s about protecting lesbian boundaries and rights. The more oxygen trolls get, the more they attempt to distort what’s actually happening. We hold the line.

Thanks for your work and energy on this OP - you’re helping all women’s groups with this

No problem. I would have thought direct discrimination. Have you been to Southwark Councils parks department? Even though it's run under a lease councils in my experience often get involved in issues in these areas - parks, community centres, allotments etc. No experience with Southwark sorry.

I don't know if political is defined in the lease but I would have thought this would mean arranged for political organising or protesting etc. (holding banners, balloting the public etc). Not if you are holding it there because you have been turned down by Southwark for a space elsewhere - community groups are turned down for I.e. planning permission, leases and use other spaces. Or if some might want to discuss politics.

Do as you probably are keeping a rough record of all you can including things like how you felt. Honestly, the Met have better things to do than investigate why a bunch of lesbians are having a picnic! Very good luck 🤞 🍀

The LGBA website has figures from a 2022 survey of their subscribers and supporters showing 34% described themselves as lesbian, 33% as gay men, 12% bisexual and 20% heterosexual with 1% preferring not to say. Chris, however, likes to quote 7% despite knowing full well it’s wrong because he doesn’t argue in good faith.

I’m straight, and I’m nowhere near London. However, thank you for your work which will help everyone in the long run.

I keep doing a mental double take at the regression of rights I’d taken for granted. That lesbian has become an out of favour word again, that authorities and organisations think they can discriminate against you… appalling. Unthinkable. So thank you for fighting back. In the long run, perhaps they are doing us a favour- more sunlight and clarification. But it’s hard work, and dispiriting.

Thank you really appreciate you saying that. It’s exhausting at times but worth it if it helps protect space for all of us. Every bit of support like this keeps us going.

Thank you that’s really helpful, and I completely agree with your read on the lease language. That’s very much how we’ve been approaching it too there’s no public campaigning, no organising, no banners, no balloting, no protests. It’s literally just lesbians meeting for a drink. The fact they’re trying to apply “political” to a private social space feels like a major stretch.
We’ve not spoken directly to Southwark Parks Department yet but we’re compiling everything carefully, including the full timeline, decision chain, and who said what. The indirect discrimination angle is definitely one we’re looking at hard but as you say, there’s a strong argument this is direct discrimination too.
Appreciate you taking the time every single bit of shared experience helps as we build this.

Exactly. Thanks for clarifying it here important to keep the facts on record.

Thank you honestly, it helps hearing this. It’s exhausting some days, but as you say, maybe the long game is that all of this forces things into the open where it’s harder to deny. The word lesbian shouldn’t be controversial in 2025 and yet here we are. Grateful for your support.

Remind me why it’s ok, indeed encouraged, for trans people to have straight “allies” but not ok for me as a straight person to be an “ally” to LGB people? I can’t help but feel the continuous recycling by Chris and other TRAs of the 7% figure is to deter LGBA straight allies and that’s why it keeps getting rolled out.

I am appalled at this situation. I know Southwark prefers to deal with organisations which they can recognise as "democratic" rather than an adult version of William Brown and the Outlaws, with AGM minutes and so on, and will say no more on that score, but they may have thoughts along those lines here. And feel that the word "lesbian" is itself political. That you can't be lesbian without adhering to some sort of political stance. A bit warped in thinking.
At a park I know, you can sometimes see picnic parties from some organisation or other, and I haven't seen them being officially checked in any way. Church youth clubs for example. I'm guessing the youth club, but there's something about a church group that marks them out. Without in any way proselitising.
I wonder if you could have an event under the radar, just turning up, eating, chatting and then dispersing. You might be a works outing or anything. But I can see you have to pursue this under discrimination laws, because it's just wrong. And I have a bit of my mind heavily influenced by Richmal Crompton, and in RL, behaving like William would not work. Or Violet Elizabeth.
Who else are they excluding?

Yup, I think it was pointed out when this first arose that Stonewall must have a hefty percentage of straight allies. Chris, I think, is trying to suggest that the LGBA is full of straight “anti trans” types and that lesbians are absolutely fine with all the TRA arguments.

Oh yes, I know what he’s overtly suggesting. But I think the ulterior motive is to try to deter straight allies of the LGBA, to reduce their reach and power.

Thank you you’ve summed up exactly the issue we’re running into. The word lesbian itself is being treated as inherently political or controversial, while other groups quietly meet with no questions asked. That double standard is precisely why we’re pushing this. If authorities can redefine who gets basic access to public space, they can exclude anyone. Appreciate you taking the time every voice helps.