DH -v- The WI, Thread 2

[Another2Cats]

@RareGoalsVerge rightly pointed out (thank you) on my previous thread that it was getting near the limit and that I should start a second thread, so this is it.

This is a link to the first thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5333650-an-update-to-the-wi-announcement-thread-my-dh-just-got-a-reply-to-his-application-to-join-them

So, a recap.

DH has long had an interest in a couple of activities that were only offered locally by the WI. Obviously, it never crossed his mind to try and join as the WI is a woman only organisation - or so he thought.

But then, following the FWS case, the WI made an announcement that they would continue accepting trans identifying men (TIM) as members.

I suggested to DH that he could now join the WI and jokingly said (although it wasn't really funny, I'm not good at jokes) that he wouldn't have to bother with a wig and lippy any more.

So DH applied to join the local federation and was rejected.

Various things then happened and DH is now bringing a sex discrimination claim against the WI.

The WI instructed a big Tier 1 London law firm, one of the partners of which then called DH and explained that they would be relying on section 158, Equality Act and invited him to withdraw his claim.

After that they sent a letter to DH stating that in addition to the section 158 defence it was also the case that the WI "does not purport to establish single sex membership within the meaning of the EqA"

They went on to say:

"As such, it is free to define “women who have reached the Age of Majority” within its Membership Rules as it pleases, as long as its definition is not discriminatory. As we explain below, the definition “women who live as women, including transgender women” is not discriminatory."

They also said that their membership policy does not discriminate on the grounds of sex or render reassignment and that:

"The Membership Policy does not exclude anyone on these grounds. It allows for the admission of “biological” men as members, as long as they are living as women. It also allows for the admission of people who are not trans, as long as they are living as women."
.

So that is where we are as of today. The next step in the process will be in early August so there probably won't be any substantive update to the thread until then.

But, as I said earlier, even though I don't always reply to every post I do read every single comment (often more than once) and having people take an interest really does make a difference. Thank you.
.

PS In their letter, they put quotation marks around the word biological - "biological" (see above). Both DH and I were rather confused by this and thought that they were perhaps quoting him in the Particulars of Claim, but DH hadn't used that term.

On looking at the letter in more detail, the answer was found in one of the footnotes. They said:

2 Where references are made to “biological” sex in in this letter, quotation marks are used to make it clear that we refer to the term as used by the Supreme Court in FWS, to mean sex as recorded at birth. This is not a term that NFWI would otherwise use itself, because sex (including the sex of trans and intersex people) is not binary in this way.

[emphasis added]

Well, it's going to be interesting to hear that point argued in court. DH did make a point in the Particulars of Claim to keep referring to "men with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment", perhaps this annoyed them a bit?

Amusing comment buried in article here…

https://www.thetimes.com/article/49049545-260a-428b-af74-f947b572bed9?shareToken=106bd0682888694943b5ed7fe91903b1

Prince William visited the WI…”When asked if he could become a member, Hilary Fraser told the prince: “No, not unless you can put on a skirt.” The prince replied: “Well, for a chocolate brownie, Hilary, you never know what I’ll do.”

Ah, so you don’t have to ‘live as a woman’ but just put on a skirt? So the Scots get a free pass with their kilts.

so are they still ignoring the law of the land

She summed up their entry criteria quite succinctly I guess.

I just came on to post this - it made me think of this thread too 😄

Meant to attach the image

Yes I saw that, too. Saying it out loud.

I think that comment is very telling. It shows to me that prince William understands the issues and the ease at which people can claim to be trans.

It was surely just a lighthearted comment/joke on both sides, though? A bit of chitchat at a formal event. I don’t think you can really read anything into it!

Don’t get me wrong, I think gender is a load of nonsense and that the WI are being appalling, and am completely behind OP and her DH, but I don’t think you can read too much into that exchange.

YY!

I agree, it was a lighthearted comment. But kinda ironic in light if the WI trans policy.

It's more useful than not though that William has had a little interaction with the WI. Any journalist could make hay out of that bit of sunshine.

I agree. It's a typical royal visit joke, and I doubt he's given the matter a second's thought

How's it going @Another2Cats , any update you can divulge?

I've just seen this on another thread "men in women's groups" (apologies if C&Ping someone else's comment isn't the done thing here)

Helleofabore · 19/09/2025 11:25

Luckily for us, Akua Reindorf KC has clarified a point that has been repeatedly doubled down on within this thread.
Starts between 34-35 minutes in, but the entire session is good with Naomi Cunningham, Akua Reindorf, Ben Cooper and Sarah Vine.
Either way this is the transcript that I tidied up, although there could be typos.
This is the bit about associations and whether there can be an association with women and males who identify as female.
"But everybody has to have ALL the protected characteristics in question."
And then
"What you can’t have is a group for people with two separate [protected characteristics] …where some people have one protected characteristic and others have a different one".
"Because then let's say you have a group for lesbians or women and men who identify as women, trans women, it's not a… it doesn't satisfy the condition of being a single sex association. A single protected characteristic association for women because not everybody is a woman. It doesn't satisfy the condition for being um a single characteristic association for people who have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment because not everybody has that protected characteristic ."
"So you can't have that kind of an association. So you can't have a so-called trans-inclusive association. I mean as Maya says, you can always have two associations that join up and do things together. There are ways around it. But fundamentally, what we have started to call sumptions law is wrong both for services and for associations. um "
"Of course, if it was possible to have a self ID service or association, For Women Scotland simply would not have won the case. Because this is what the Scottish government wanted to do. They wanted to have transidentified males in a quota for women."Hope that might be helpful if you need it OP.

Is there any update, @Another2Cats?

@Another2Cats How are you? What’s the latest situation?

I'm fine, thank you. The case is progressing as slowly as legal cases do. DH has filed and served his Directions Questionnaire and also his Reply to Defence.

However, there are a number of things going on in the background that I am not at liberty to talk about.

As and when these things are resolved I will (or may be) in a position to update this thread more freely.

Thank you.

Thanks for the update. Sending supportive vibes cx

Looking forward to a lot of WI members being expelled for:
Not being ladylike enough
Not wearing enough make-up
Not having a good enough handbag
Basically not womaning well enough

(Actually I've been to a local WI meeting and the only person not meeting the womanly criteria listed above was me 😂😂😂😂 they were all lovely and welcoming though )

Thank you for the update.

You guys have got a slam dunk here, thanks for breaking down more of the bullshit.

Thanks for updating, and thanks to your husband for pursuing this.

@Another2Cats thank you.

Looking forward to hearing from you, @Another2Cats . Hope all is going well for you and your DH