Women only tower block being built

[musicalfrog]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyjyyy2r5eo

What a good idea!

And I assume they mean real women this time- no small print!

Thanks, eyeballs.

'We will allow the following women to be nominated by the council or
referral agency, and join our public waiting list:

1. Any woman female by birth (Gender recognition Act 2004)
2. Any woman who holds a gender recognition certificate legally

declaring her female (Gender recognition Act 2004)'

(Will post in 2 halves, cant copypaste the whole lot)

/cont:

'3. Transgender women who meet the definition of a person
who 'intends to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone
gender reassignment' (Equality Act 2010).

1. Non-binary women who are either born female, or meet the 2 and 3 above.

3.2. We will not accept nominations from the council, referral agency or waiting list for:  men who cross dress  transgender men  anyone who we know has a history of male violence against women or children'

Dogs breakfast is correct.

So not women only in any way then? Such a shame because it’s a great idea.

Arghhhhh
So not actually for women then

I'm concerned that it creates a target - telling everyone where to find a large number of (potentially vulnerable or previously abused) single women without many men around.

I expect they drew up this policy before the SC judgment, and maybe haven’t thought it applies to them because of TRA misinformation in the media. It would obviously have to apply though, this place couldn’t have this policy without SSEs.

Men will only be able to live in the block if they become a tenant's partner…

So how will they screen out women who hide the fact that they are in a relationship until they have moved in?
Being completely cynical, this would be a great opportunity for a controlling male partner to gain access to a pool of vulnerable women.

It’s a good idea in theory but falls apart as soon as you start scrutinising the details.

My understanding is tenants who acquire a make partner are asked to leave

So basically, this place is for vulnerable women, vulnerable children, and men who like to break women’s boundaries and force their presence on an unwilling audience.

Yes, good, can’t see any problem there …

A screenshot up thread indicates it’s designed for single women, not single mothers.

If the flats are designed for single adult occupancy, it’s legitimate to exclude children.

If it is to comply with the law, they will need to remove the claim that it is ‘women only’.

If they want to provide for single mothers, they can be women and children only.

None of this is remotely complicated. The complications arise for the group of people who are upset and feel excluded by female only provision. As a ‘bleeding heart liberal’, I do care about finding a resolution for this specific issue, but I don’t think it needs be the concern of providers or users of female only provision.

I doubt they could do more than ask, as they must be subject to normal Landlord and Tenant law.

Non-binary women who are either born female, or meet the 2 and 3 above.

'Nonbinary' males can't meet criteria 2 and 3. They aren't recognised in law under the gender reassignment section of the EA, and there are no nonbinary GRCs.

I expect they drew up this policy before the SC judgment

They did. There was a thread a year or so ago when the development was first announced and it doesn't look as if there have been any policy changes since.

If it’s female only, those who are female and are willing to share this information will be eligible for inclusion. A provider couldn’t exclude a female because they have an identity they call non binary.

I am so thankful for the SC ruling. Back in March none of this seemed clear cut. The obfuscation grift continues but, each day, it is losing ground

No, it says clearly in the policy that women with children cannot apply. Someone pasted a screenshot above.

Thereby excluding a large proportion of the domestic abuse survivors they claim to want to help.

Call me cynical but I've seen far too much so-called feminism that excludes mothers.

No, not vulnerable children. Women with children are not allowed to apply. It says so in their FAQs.

"Applications submitted with a partner or child will not be accepted."

To be fair, male children grow to be men so it's understandable in a long term project such as this.

They will obviously need to reclassify it or change the ts and cs if they want to remain legal though!

Addressing the problem of mothers and children needing housing, I have long thought it would be good for councils to have a scheme whereby they can be situated together as a mutual support network. Not sure a tower block is the best place though.

That's ambiguous. It could mean a joint application made by a mother together with her adult offspring, rather than an application from.a woman who has (minor) children.

[Edit: I think they probably do mean both, but it's poorly written.]

To me it's not ambiguous at all. A child is...a child. They're saying women with a child mustn't apply.

Presumably this organisation fulfills a need because if you're a single mother with children living with you then you're at a higher priority for council housing, whereas if you're on your own then you probably don't meet the highest criteria, you've only one (low) income and you're still vulnerable. Reading the website it seems like they have a lot of properties, mostly studio flats on higher floors and this tower block is a new project idea.

It seems like they have a lot more applications than they have properties so they're quite strict about you taking any property they have available right then and there.

I think if you then either get a higher wage or a partner you're probably more able to rent a bigger property.

As PP have said, I'm not sure whether this whole tower block being basically vulnerable women would make it a target. Presumably you can also choose to rent to whoever you want as long as you're not discriminating by things like race so as a general thing I wouldn't see a problem if they decided to rent one of their properties to a transwoman (or any man - it's their property). I guess the problem is the whole "women" focus if they're including some but not all people who aren't women. Could a man claim discrimination? Could a transman? Probably. I think it would be costly legally. They're doing the thing where they apply the equality act separately to two categories - "women" or "transwomen".

Yes I thought this

Surely it would be simple to allow women of any age alone or with children under 12. The tenancy to end when a resident male child turns 12, or when the woman wishes to live with a male partner.
No males over 12 to stay the night.
A concierge / doorkeeper to allow entrance to women and children only; male visitors to sign in.
It sounds Victorian, but I would have loved that at some times of my life.
And needless to say, women = human females.

One and the same, as far as I can see.

As PP have said, I'm not sure whether this whole tower block being basically vulnerable women would make it a target.

Of course it blooming would. I'm very sorry that that's the case, but it's not rocket science, is it?!