Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Islington Council slams 'botched' single sex spaces guidance

394 replies

IwantToRetire · 03/07/2025 20:14

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/

'Botched' single sex spaces rules 'risks harassment and discrimination'

Islington Council has strongly opposed new EHRC guidance on single-sex spaces, calling it unworkable and a risk to privacy, safety, and trans rights.

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
Abhannmor · 04/07/2025 09:44

Stealth. Always think of bombers incinerating children in their own homes. Not a brilliant choice of words there.

Igneococcus · 04/07/2025 09:45

STEALTH

Igneococcus · 04/07/2025 09:46

WOOHOO

DialSquare · 04/07/2025 09:46

Helleofabore · 04/07/2025 09:40

it is all very stealthy isn't it?

smug top gear GIF

.

DialSquare · 04/07/2025 09:47
All By Myself glee GIF

.

Boiledbeetle · 04/07/2025 09:48

Stealth mode and lifting skirts just brings to mind images of flashers in trenchcoats that used to frequent the parks of my childhood.

Islington Council slams 'botched' single sex spaces guidance
Islington Council slams 'botched' single sex spaces guidance
Boiledbeetle · 04/07/2025 09:50

DialSquare · 04/07/2025 09:47

.

Monsters Inc Hug GIF

❤️

GallantKumquat · 04/07/2025 09:51

Igneococcus · 04/07/2025 09:42

That's just showing off now.

Bigly-letter poverty and classism. 😞 On MN of all places.

Igneococcus · 04/07/2025 09:52

GallantKumquat · 04/07/2025 09:51

Bigly-letter poverty and classism. 😞 On MN of all places.

I know, totally shocking

DialSquare · 04/07/2025 09:56

It’s strange how all our male trans visitors have that same condescending word vomit posting style isn’t it. It’s also surprising that only one of them is posting on this thread.

Helleofabore · 04/07/2025 10:00

DialSquare · 04/07/2025 09:56

It’s strange how all our male trans visitors have that same condescending word vomit posting style isn’t it. It’s also surprising that only one of them is posting on this thread.

Indeed. Who'd've thunk?

FieldMarshallZukovsCoat · 04/07/2025 10:03

TheOtherRaven · 04/07/2025 09:06

I also wonder logically, what is the long term outcome in law likely to be when it's proven to the electorate beyond all doubt that antisocial behaviour gets what it wants and law abiding people suffer?

Do we think Reform are going to fuck about over this and wibble about it being complicated? Because unless Labour gets its act together fast on this, and on other issues, we are going to all find out.

Edited

The blueprint is already in place. If Reform gets in (and I truly hope they do not BTW) they will do something similar to Trump - they will state loud and clear that you cannot pretend to be the opposite sex, you cannot change sex, and that you are NOT entitled to anything that women have fought long and hard for. End of. They won't pussy foot around and ask women not to celebrate that sense has finally prevailed - like the judges of the SC ruling did, like we have to be grateful for crumbs from the male table. They will shout it from the rooftops, because guess what? It's true! Like it has been true since the dawn of time.

I work for a US company (UK subsidiary) and I can tell you, when that EO was signed, the 'about turn' that this company made was beyond belief. Training pulled immediately and re written to be in line with the EO. The beyond parody 'head of inclusion' who tried to tell me that there are three sexes not two when I refused to answer the company's demand for my 'gender identity' and asked her why she didn't want to record sex, has disappeared. The TiF that seemed to be wheeled out any time DEI was mentioned - also disappeared. Why the sudden change? Easy! The company won't get any federal business if they continue with this nonsense.

That's how stable this whole ideology is - the ideology that has infected government, education, NHS, and even the Armed Forces. It can be switched off in a heartbeat because business depends on it.

The end is near - money is at stake.

As always, I am in awe of the continued intelligent responses to the utter madness that appears on this forum.

Women are amazing.

DialSquare · 04/07/2025 10:03

Incidentally, I was born in Islington. Shame they don’t give a shit about the vulnerable working class women that still live there.

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 04/07/2025 10:06

Tatemoderndrawyourown · 04/07/2025 06:28

I agree with everything apart from the ‘it’s a statement of his selfishness’. To me it’s a statement of him being male that he can’t understand why (some) women don’t want him in the toilets and have a right to demand so. If he was a woman he’d get it.

I wouldn't let him off with the excuse that he's a mere man, so can't be expected to understand (or even try to understand). Men are perfectly capable of finding their empathy, and of obeying the law just because that's what decent people do.

DialSquare · 04/07/2025 10:12

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 04/07/2025 10:06

I wouldn't let him off with the excuse that he's a mere man, so can't be expected to understand (or even try to understand). Men are perfectly capable of finding their empathy, and of obeying the law just because that's what decent people do.

Agreed. That’s why most men wouldn’t dream of invading female single sex spaces.

Greyskybluesky · 04/07/2025 10:14

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 04/07/2025 10:06

I wouldn't let him off with the excuse that he's a mere man, so can't be expected to understand (or even try to understand). Men are perfectly capable of finding their empathy, and of obeying the law just because that's what decent people do.

I agree. Thankfully I know lots that do.

And I disagree with the statement "If he was a woman he’d get it". Plenty of women are prepared to sell out other women when it comes to women's spaces etc. To appease the men with 'feelings'. We see it on here regularly.

Fordian · 04/07/2025 10:17

GCAcademic · 03/07/2025 20:34

All those fake documents need to be revoked. They should never have been issued in the first place.

100%.

GRCs are the most egregious piece of legal fiction ever to be allowed. Revoke the GRA, rescind GRCs.

WithSilverBells · 04/07/2025 10:18

Except Article 8 of Convention of Human Rights explicitly protects my trans status, this was affirmed again in T.H. vs Czechia few weeks ago (and outright stated in GRA 2004) that transgender people have to right to keep their transition status private.

That was about repeatedly having to produce documentation that 'outed' the fact that a person was transsexual, presumably in all sorts of situations where sex was not relevant.
Being asked, where necessary, to produce documentation proving your sex in situations where sex is relevant is very unlikely to be an article 8 violation. Digital ID will do this, if the sex marker is linked to birth registered sex.

FeedbackProvider · 04/07/2025 10:22

Before Aida, this thread was about an Islington councillor’s misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the interim guidance. What’s the general view here of the interim guidance section “Asking about birth sex” from which the Islington complaints seem to stem? Do you think there could be improvements to the guidance and examples to head off these kinds of complaint?

FeedbackProvider · 04/07/2025 10:37

The primary source for the Islington news is here:
https://www.islington.media/news/impractical-and-poorly-developed-equalities-guidance-risks-discrimination-council-warns

which is linked from https://www.islington.gov.uk/ under Latest News.

This page states that they have published their EHRC feedback, but there’s no link. Anyone know where I can find the document containing their complete response to the EHRC interim guidance? I couldn’t find it with their site search or Google.

‘Impractical and poorly developed’ equalities guidance risks discrimination, council warns | Islington Council News

Proposed new rules on how organisations should implement equality laws risk discrimination against the people they are designed to protect, the council has warned.  

https://www.islington.media/news/impractical-and-poorly-developed-equalities-guidance-risks-discrimination-council-warns

GallantKumquat · 04/07/2025 10:37

FeedbackProvider · 04/07/2025 10:22

Before Aida, this thread was about an Islington councillor’s misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the interim guidance. What’s the general view here of the interim guidance section “Asking about birth sex” from which the Islington complaints seem to stem? Do you think there could be improvements to the guidance and examples to head off these kinds of complaint?

Michael Foran had a detailed post giving his response to the EHRC's request for consultation. I agree with practically everything he wrote. This was his reponse to the Asking about sex at birth guidance:

"This part of the guidance is running together two separate issues: whether obtaining information about a person’s birth sex is necessary and whether the means used to obtain that information is proportionate.

"It should be made clear that if a policy is operating based on the single-sex exceptions in Schedule 3, then the rules about natal or biological sex can be clearly communicated to service users without the need to collect or process information about a person’s birth sex. Collecting and processing information about a person’s birth sex will only be necessary if the service provider has decided that this service is one which requires heightened screening before access to the service is granted (for example a rape crisis centre) or where a dispute arises in the context of a service which does not have heightened screening before access.

"For example, in the context of a single-sex communal changing room, information about birth sex will not ordinarily be collected. Rather, the single-sex nature of the service will be communicated to service user’s and the expectation will be that this will be complied with. In that context, a dispute may arise if a biological man uses the women’s changing room. Here, too however, service can be refused without any need to request information about birth sex, if that information is already readily observable. In this context, it is only where the service provider is unsure about the biological sex of a service user that information about birth sex may be requested.

"Similarly, in the context of a rape crisis centre where there may be more heightened screening processes, a service provider may need to ask about an individuals biological sex and should do that in a proportionate manner. A good example of this, would be the requirement of service user’s to fill out a form upon entry to the service which includes a declaration to the effect that the user understands that this is a female-only service that is only offered to those who were born female. Again, if there is a dispute over the biological sex of a servicer user, further information may be requested.

"It is unclear why a birth certificate would be requested. Under our current law, birth certificates are not a reliable record of biological sex. They cannot be used to verify biological sex. Requesting to see a service user’s birth certificate will be obviously disproportionate because there is no rational connection between the means chosen to verify biological sex and the aim of verifying biological sex. Birth certificates can’t verify biological sex.

This Code should state that, where biological sex is disputed, a service provider should make the best assessment they can, with the information available. Service providers should also be warned that providing a single-sex service which is in practice a mixed-sex service because the rules are never enforced, can lead to liability for any discrimination or harassment experiences by service users expecting a single-sex service."

alimac12 · 04/07/2025 10:40

AidaP · 03/07/2025 20:29

Can you explain how? Because as trans woman my documents state F. Do I need to lift my skirt? Or is this based on the "we can always tell" that gets tons of cis women misgendered on the regular?

If you lift your skirt there is not going to be a vagina. Your documents can say F, if you die and someone studies your body there is no sign of female whatsoever. Your chromosome are xy. Why you want to use female spaces so bad? Is creepy.

Helleofabore · 04/07/2025 10:40

GallantKumquat · 04/07/2025 10:37

Michael Foran had a detailed post giving his response to the EHRC's request for consultation. I agree with practically everything he wrote. This was his reponse to the Asking about sex at birth guidance:

"This part of the guidance is running together two separate issues: whether obtaining information about a person’s birth sex is necessary and whether the means used to obtain that information is proportionate.

"It should be made clear that if a policy is operating based on the single-sex exceptions in Schedule 3, then the rules about natal or biological sex can be clearly communicated to service users without the need to collect or process information about a person’s birth sex. Collecting and processing information about a person’s birth sex will only be necessary if the service provider has decided that this service is one which requires heightened screening before access to the service is granted (for example a rape crisis centre) or where a dispute arises in the context of a service which does not have heightened screening before access.

"For example, in the context of a single-sex communal changing room, information about birth sex will not ordinarily be collected. Rather, the single-sex nature of the service will be communicated to service user’s and the expectation will be that this will be complied with. In that context, a dispute may arise if a biological man uses the women’s changing room. Here, too however, service can be refused without any need to request information about birth sex, if that information is already readily observable. In this context, it is only where the service provider is unsure about the biological sex of a service user that information about birth sex may be requested.

"Similarly, in the context of a rape crisis centre where there may be more heightened screening processes, a service provider may need to ask about an individuals biological sex and should do that in a proportionate manner. A good example of this, would be the requirement of service user’s to fill out a form upon entry to the service which includes a declaration to the effect that the user understands that this is a female-only service that is only offered to those who were born female. Again, if there is a dispute over the biological sex of a servicer user, further information may be requested.

"It is unclear why a birth certificate would be requested. Under our current law, birth certificates are not a reliable record of biological sex. They cannot be used to verify biological sex. Requesting to see a service user’s birth certificate will be obviously disproportionate because there is no rational connection between the means chosen to verify biological sex and the aim of verifying biological sex. Birth certificates can’t verify biological sex.

This Code should state that, where biological sex is disputed, a service provider should make the best assessment they can, with the information available. Service providers should also be warned that providing a single-sex service which is in practice a mixed-sex service because the rules are never enforced, can lead to liability for any discrimination or harassment experiences by service users expecting a single-sex service."

Edited

Thank you.

This is rather clear, isn’t it.

GallantKumquat · 04/07/2025 10:47

Here's a link to his full response. For some reason I couldn't add it to my comment:

https://archive.ph/P7jmV

Merrymouse · 04/07/2025 10:48

This seems similar to age restrictions - supermarket staff make assumptions about age many times a day, and it is up to the customer to prove their age if there is a dispute.

The only difference is that there is no way to legally obtain ID that doesn’t give your correct age.