Good Law Project's latest claim - fact check?

[teawamutu]

I'm sure there must be some arrant bollocks in here somewhere, because Jolyon.

But is there anything worrying in this?

goodlawproject.org/ehrc-backs-down-on-single-sex-toilets/

Keep going, your efforts to compare the societal worth of JoMo v JKR is more enlightening than anything else you've posted so far.

After your last comment you expect a substantive exchange? On what basis? I thought you “regret taking me seriously”.
I offered to share with you an explanation of sex, gender, transness but you didn’t seem interested , particularly if it wasn’t simple enough to be understood by an 8 year old child, so , again, im not sure why the further questions?

TBF, we're not interested in your dreary circular arguments. We've heard, and countered, them all before.

That peaked a long time ago....

Nobody is going to pay for the ghastly trans training any more. Look up that horrible cool2Btrans organisation where his training includes him talking about wearing his sister's knickers.

That appalling nonsense we actually paid for as workplace training. Believe me, that actually had the opposite effect on the vast majority who had to endure that sleaze AT WORK!

So this growing understanding as a result of all the trans exposure money has been lavished on has led to people deciding the opposite to your beliefs.

No thanks. No-one in business is going to be bullied into submission anymore.

It's truly over.

I'm looking forward to observing part 2 of Dr Beth Uptons tribunal now we have this judgement.

It's going to be the best show of 2025.

The stuff about JKR, talent and the Worst Witch is straight from the TRA playbook.

This poster may actually be what they claim - but they've somehow obtained all their talking points from Stonewall, Reddit and the other reservoirs of TRA cult fantasy, either first hand or by proxy.

I'm going to metaphorically sit on my hands and stop engaging.

Ok….what is gender? How many genders are there?

yes but it allowed for some circumstances where gender / sex transition might lead to different treatment or application of provisions:

Are you saying that you don't believe traumatised women should be allowed to have single sex rape crisis services?

And this is a feminist viewpoint, is it?

Oh, I am interested.

Please explain sex, gender and transness to us.

The stuff about JKR, talent and the Worst Witch is straight from the TRA playbook

is it? It’s also straight from my own brain/ personal opinion/ experience. I loved the worst witch books, was bored to death by Harry Potter, didn’t even make it though the first book. Films were equally dull.
Interesting that others have drawn the same conclusions- not surprised.
None of this really matters of course- it’s not the actual issue I have with JKR, I even followed her on twitter before she suddenly decided to start laying into trans people which later became her entire obsession

No, afraid not. Apparently it will 'out' Tandora

I think this is referring to excluding some females (transmen who pass) from female only services if their presence is likely to cause distress due to people thinking they are male.

This coheres with the rest of the ruling and the principles underpinning single sex provision.

Call it rhetorical then.
Take your sneering at rape victims and people trying to help those with chronic conditions somewhere else.

I offered to share with you an explanation of sex, gender, transness but you didn’t seem interested

What did you think "feel free" meant?!

Feel free, although I agree it would be better to post it here.
There have been hundreds of posts assuming that when you say "trans" it's the commonly used current meaning of "individuals whose gender identity differs from, or is not comfortable with, the sex they were assigned at birth".
So would obviously be useful to correct that.

You got from that that I didn't want to hear your 'explanation'?
Why constantly make up this shit?

This
It's just pigeon chess.

Anyway, I'll bet that at some point this summer the number of TRAs who are doubting the effectiveness of the GLP will reach a tipping point. His fox killing backlash will be very tame in comparison to what they'll throw at him.

Then I’m not sure why pp’s are asking for them 🤷🏼‍♀️

Pausing for a moment, can remind ourselves of the base regulations:

From the Workplace health, safety and welfare. Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992.

Sanitary conveniences

20.—(1) Suitable and sufficient sanitary conveniences shall be provided at readily accessible places.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), sanitary conveniences shall not be suitable unless—

(a)the rooms containing them are adequately ventilated and lit;

(b)they and the rooms containing them are kept in a clean and orderly condition; and

(c)separate rooms containing conveniences are provided for men and women except where and so far as each convenience is in a separate room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside.

(3) It shall be sufficient compliance with the requirement in paragraph (1) to provide sufficient sanitary conveniences in a workplace which is not a new workplace, a modification, an extension or a conversion and which, immediately before this regulation came into force in respect of it, was subject to the provisions of the Factories Act 1961, if sanitary conveniences are provided in accordance with the provisions of Part II of Schedule

In what way is the EHRC interim guidance disagreeing with this statutory guidance?

Separately, @Tandora, I am highly entertained by your idea that the net result of the SC ruling will result in a diminution of single sex facilities in favour of universal facilities. Universal facilities are very inefficient In terms of space and as both lessors and lessees want to minimise costs, landlords will provide the legal minimum sex based toilet facilities.

But you are free to create a different legal and financial framework.

I said "feel free... it would be useful [to correct the previous assumption]", having asked several times for clarifications about what they meant by "trans" ... and in Tandora logic that means "please don't, I'm not interested"

Basically so you can show any lurkers what a load of bullshit it all is.

Feel free didn’t sound to me like you were interested.

I offered to share something that would be outing to post as I thought that you were interested in an actual exchange of ideas. It was clear from your response that you were not . Now it’s even more clear since you have admitted your questions are rhetorical and have started with the personal attacks.

I did not sneer at rape victims.

You and I had a perfectly human exchange. It’s ok to disagree with people.

oh.

righty ho

I have no idea if I disagree with you, because you are fundamentally unable to articulate your view.

There's no point in asking for an example of a point you think that we disagree on because you'll just make it up again, so I'm none the wiser.

What about outing disabled people by giving them separate loos? I’m outed as female when I go to the ladies loos. When we can identify that people are trans by looking, then what’s the problem with them being out and proud. I’d like to know what’s so bad about being trans it needs to be hidden? Being more open might result in better quality of life and mental health. Skulking and hiding isn’t good for the spirit

As an ideologue? I think that ship has sailed.

"I have a truly marvelous demonstration of this proposition that this margin is too narrow to contain"

Really important that you understand this: female at birth = female entire life until death.
Sex remains stable. Gender does not