Islington Council slams 'botched' single sex spaces guidance

[IwantToRetire]

The council argues that the new guidance, which suggests that staff should check a person’s sex at birth before granting access to single-sex services or spaces, is unworkable and risks breaching individuals’ privacy and exposing them to harassment.

"Expecting reception staff in a busy leisure centre or a domestic violence service to determine whether someone is trans, without subjecting them to harassment or breaching their right to privacy, is not practical.

"It risks legal confusion and a culture of suspicion.

"That’s why we have called for the EHRC to pause this botched process – properly listening to trans communities – rather than simply causing further confusion."

Full article at https://www.times-series.co.uk/news/25283099.islington-council-slams-botched-single-sex-spaces-guidance/

The logical comparison for 'asking about sex' would probably be asking age for age-restricted services.

This is a very common thing for businesses and service providers to ask for, for example selling alcohol, or films with restrictions, etc. Also applies to many events and competitions etc, with age categories.

oh, cross post, Merrymouse!

This ‘genital inspection’ line is actually really revealing but not in the way those that use it want it to be.

I have said it before, but it needs to be said over and over. It doesn’t matter whether that male person has a penis or not. It truly doesn’t. They are male.

A female single sex space is not for someone doesn’t have a penis. Women are not male people without penises. Ever.

Just because a male person doesn’t have a penis, that doesn’t mean that he is a female person. It never did. But those very first misogynist male clinicians who have told these male people that they had ‘become’ female because of hormones and surgery should be held accountable for the negligence they started.

No. There is no need for genital inspections. Only a person with a lack of critical thinking ability and little grasp of logic would think this was anything but a weak gotcha. But it keeps being rolled out. By people who were obviously convinced by it. And if someone is convinced by that, what more do we need to know about them.

I have been told by a Rolls Royce employee that as America is their largest market, they have withdrawn all their Equalities initiatives to comply with Trump's order.

One of the first things to go has been initiatives to get girls and women into Engineering and STEM.

The backlash is here and it will come for anyone who is not a white, straight, able-bodied, Christian man (so many transwomen will be fine).

Reform will continue the work if elected.

@AidaP

In your opinion about stealth and privacy, do you believe that a person who has a transgender identity should or shouldn’t disclose their sex before sex with someone who doesn’t know?

Article 8 protects a limited right to privacy.

In Y v. Poland the ECHR ruled that there is no right to have a sex marker changed on a full birth certificate.

"One of the first things to go has been initiatives to get girls and women into Engineering and STEM."

These programs were notoriously abused by TIMs, the absolute worst male cheaters. Really you should have picked a better example for pernicious effect of of Trump's EO.

America is a different country, and both Republicans and Democrats value individual freedom over collective responsibility. That informs their approach to everything from gun law to health care.

In the U.K. all progress on this issue has been made within the framework of equality law, which recognises that many different groups have rights and they must be balanced.

How can you 'botch' guidance that males should use facilities designated for men, females should use facilities designated for women, and the definitions of 'male' and 'female' are the biological ones?
Not exactly rocket science, is it?

There's a quibble about provision of single-sex toilets being required, advised, mandated, preferred, regulated, or suggested by the Equality Act, Building Regulations, Workplace regulations, Health and Safety legislation, or whatever, but Islington Council manages a lot of buildings which will already have the standard women's/men's/disabled configuration, and which have for decades operated successfully on trusting the users, plus some recent unisex toilets, so where does the 'botching' come in?

A sign saying 'Women's/Men's/Disabled facilities are restricted for use by people belonging to the designated group. Islington Council asks you to respect this'
puts the onus on the individual, and the SC ruling provides a definition of the 'Women's/Men's' designation, in case anyone isn't clear about it.

The good men will stay out. AidaP won't.

I hear you - I didn't say that the EO was good though. It has far reaching negative implications that are affecting females in the US. It sickens me.

I used it as an example of how I think Reform may go if (god forbid) they get in. I agree with your point, they will go the same way as the US for certain. That's why this constant questioning of the SC ruling, as if it's the most complex problem in the world, has to cease. The current government should be all over this - making it clear in robust terms that the law is the law.

’Women's/Men's/Disabled facilities are restricted for use by people belonging to the designated group. Islington Council asks you to respect this'

It is really very clear what is happening when male people will ignore a sign such as this and use a female space. It is not stealthy at all. It is blatant. It is patently obvious who is and isn’t respectful in this situation.

@FranticSemantics it is beyond time that TRAs sucked up their wants and put womens needs first. If they can't do that we will end up with a reform government and noone wants that.

"How can you 'botch' guidance that males should use facilities designated for men, females should use facilities designated for women, and the definitions of 'male' and 'female' are the biological ones?
Not exactly rocket science, is it?"

Nailed it, @MarieDeGournay

Judging by the first post, it likely involves kleenex.

There was a time when repealing and nullifying the GRA and existing GRCs seemed harsh. In the light of the endlessly performed behaviour of men in this women's space alone, no, it really doesn't. It seems entirely sensible and necessary.

Love the way that despite claiming to be a "women" you still use the misogynistic put downs. Leopards, spots....

It is good to remember that the Matterhorn still exists in Summer. It is not just for winter sport.

Agree that we are different countries, with different approaches and legal frameworks. It does not detract from the fact that over the past decade, males have been able to access women's spaces despite a law 'recognising that many different groups have rights and must be balanced' being in place.

The current government needs to robustly reinforce this recent clarification of existing law. If the people charged with overseeing the laws of the land can't understand something as simple as this, then it will add to the overall perception that they can't get anything right. If they appear to not be able to get anything right - then people will start to look for an alternative. They already are.

I’m in with the in crowd!

It does not detract from the fact that over the past decade, males have been able to access women's spaces despite a law 'recognising that many different groups have rights and must be balanced' being in place.

I think it's relevant that we have had a Conservative government for 9 out of the last 10 years, and Conservatives don't prioritise human rights issues. It took a very long time to convince them that it was necessary to listen to a bunch of feminists, and (with some honourable exceptions), many only paid attention when they realised they could use the issue to attack other parties.

Sadly many people who identify as progressive and left wing (Islington Council) also have a rather sketchy understanding of the human rights framework, but it is at least imbedded in our laws.

Right who did this!!! Own up!
😁

My lips are sealed!

😁

The legend of the 'ever so nice transwoman who is my friend' will get something of a test won't it?

I wonder if it will dawn on the women around those that refuse to stop using the women's when there is mixed sex facilities around, that their nice friend isn't quite so nice.

Just to clarify, I’ve not had a Phalloplasty!

oh my!

I just looked at the grin emoji that MN converted it to and it is so low resolution it does looked like a shocked face or a grimace. I had not thought in that direction, but seeing that emoji that I posted in reaction to your words, I am now cringing inside out and laughing all at the same time. x