is this legal

[javyd]

is it legal for the RSPB to advertise this women only walk and then say it’s for anyone who identifies as a woman or anyone who is non binary? So basically a mixed sex walk:

https://events.rspb.org.uk/events/96479?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwK78EFleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHuuR3UtdrATGnTTt5ySxJ2WYamEz4NDR_kaGslT5fzD6KXb0R73aBSl4iXxp_aem_Tl1LwIsISF5qJxKMiI80Bg

Seriously?? You are comparing women politely contacting the RSPB (a huge charity) to let the RSPB know that they would really like to go on one of their "Nature Walks for Women" but they can't because they are not just for women and also advising them that they are acting unlawfully and could be subject to a discrimination claim with . . .

An unwarranted seek-and-destroy attack initiated by activists in the USA on a tiny UK Bunny Rescue charity which is being

• bombarded with abuse and death threats
• publicly accused of transphobia
• reported to the Charities Commission with the aim of getting them closed down

It is now having to spend scant funds on getting legal advice.

All of those attacks are then also being targeted at other tiny Rabbit Rescue groups that have supported the original Bunny Rescue charity.

It's laughable when you get on your high horse because, as they say, the higher the monkey climbs the more it shows its arse!

I hate using activist language, but in this case I would be very happy, if not relieved, if they just called it ‘For Cis Women & Trans Women’ as then at least everyone normal and sane would know to stay away.

So you're saying that it was fine for women only events and spaces when some men were included, but now they have to be properly women only, we must rethink the need for them?

Here is that dismissal that we have come to expect from this poster.

The abuse that has been directed towards bunny charities has now been compared to polite letter writing as if they are the same. Letter writing informing a charity that they need to take legal advice so that an event they are hosting will not leave them open to legal action under the EA. So, in effect, letter writing that will assist them to protect themselves.

But letter writing now becomes an attack.

The charity absolutely had no obligation to provide the walk. But they chose to offer a service. And they seemed to have missed the law clarification that means that they are at risk here.

And yes, women choose to spend time to get organisations to understand the law and act accordingly. That you deride women's actions just shows the misogyny that cannot be hidden.

But the two situations are not comparable. Because on one hand is a bunny charity receiving actual abuse and all because they have a very common social media policy of following those who follow them and on the other is the RBPS receiving multiple letters pointing out where they have not followed the law ie. not abuse.

Yet in this poster's mind they two situations are the same.

Yes, that's right. Women want their women only stuff back. And they've had to go to the Supreme Court to get it.

And we will continue spend all our time and vast sums of money to keep it.

You might as well pack up and go home.

And while you're at it, here's a bit of advice, tell your fellow transactivists to stop threatening animal sanctuaries, ffs.

There really are no depths too low, are there?

I read the thread. No evidence of "trans people attacking bunny rescues" just accusations.

But we've got still visible posts from gender critical activists and GC orgs on social media with a lot of views to harass a bird charity which any regular member of the public is going to read and think this is all unhinged lunacy.

oh, I didn’t know that Maya had picked it up. Fantastic! Thanks so much for the heads up Chris!

Oh well done Maya!

So polite letter writing and posts warning that there is a problem and that an event will potentially leave them open to a case to defend in court is now ‘harassment’ ?

RBPS is not an activist for gender identity. They have made an error and people are alerting them. Not trying to get the charity closed down.

The bunny charity is being threatened with a potentially bankrupting case all because it refused to unfollow people who have followed them. A completely common social media engagement growth strategy. There is no chance at all the Charities Commission will take a complaint seriously.

Again, the poster is trying to convince people the two situations have any symmetry at all. The only thing they share in common is that they have a social media presence.

The thing these people have in common is their feminine gender identity.

Anyone can have one of those, so, it seems perfectly legal.

On the contrary, the RSPB are currently trying to advertise the walk in a way that could lead them open to a discrimination case, but I am suggesting a way for them to achieve their aims within the law.

the RSPB haven’t replied to my email. Has anyone else had a reply?

No.

@javyd glad you can now post on your thread again.

I would expect RSPB to be getting legal advice and that can take time.
I would give them a week at least.

I know with email etc. we get used to instantaneous responses but not all organisations are staffed with that capacity.

yeah, i think there’s a 24 hour delay rather than 90 days, thankfully. Although I can see the benefit of doing a 90 day delay as we know some TRA come on with the express purpose of aggressive misogyny.

I actually think there will be more consideration of when sex segregation is necessary, but I don't think that is a bad thing. Women have spent enough time campaigning to have access to men only things like voting!

In this case, talkinpeace has explained the rationale for a women only event, but the RSPB version as it stands always seemed a bit supspect. It was basically 'women and men who we don't think are that manly, but only those who are happy to claim a non-male identity'.

lol.

Which ever spiral you're going down Chris, I don't think it's a healthy one.

Interestingly I've been looking at rspb women's events and some do make it clear transwomen are included, some don't. It seems to depend on the actual site rather than a top down edict

Any update now the walk has taken place?

Did anyone here attend? Were there any trans women there also? Did everything run smoothly? All that aside any interesting wildlife photos to share?

How would any attendees have known if any transwomen were there? 🤔

it’s blindingly obvious when you meet someone. As human beings we’ve evolved to instantly click someone’s sex: it’s about evolutionary survival. I’ve spotted transwomen in toilets and they probably think they pass cos I don’t stare or ask them to leave. They don’t pass, I’m just scared of questioning them.

no update from RSPB but it’s irrelevant if no males were on the walk.
What’s relevant is how it was advertised and how many women chose not to attend because it’s a mixed sex rather than women only walk. And what’s relevant is how a walk described as run by females but open to anyone identifying as a woman is taking the piss at best, messing with the SC ruling at worst.

Exactly.

But we have been told TW blend seamlessly in and no one can tell. However, Chris seems to think the attendees would have known?

People and organisations are going to continue to play this 'inclusive' game for a while yet: the one in which we are supposed to pretend that males are actually females.....but by this time next year I'm pretty certain there will be a lot less of it. Once the bigger institutions and organisations have started to fully implement the ruling, then others will inevitably follow.

There is, of course, no compulsion for the RSPB to have women only sessions........but if they do then that is what they should be. Why bother to advertise a group as being for women only.....but then make it open to men too. It is clearly a ridiculous virtue signalling pretension.

The RSPB is a multi million pound organisation with on tap legal advice.
They have no excuse to have not read and implemented a ruling that is now over two months old.

If they want to encourage more female members
(the founders were women after all)
then GOOD
but do it properly