Men in women’s groups.

[gingangirly]

Really unsure if I’m being unreasonable, but what do others think?

I belong to a FB group for women over 65 in my town. They have lots of get togethers, at least a couple a week. A few months ago there was a vote after a man requested to join. The overwhelming majority said no. If they want a similar group, start their own. Fair enough.

However there is a trans woman that has been welcomed with open arms. He would NOT pass as a woman, not quite a bloke in a wig but certainly you would know he was trans.

What do people think about this? Acceptable or not? I’m am totally the ‘live and let live’ but seems a bit disingenuous to ban men but not trans women?

I wouldn't take him seriously after 20 years.

But that is the thing that that poster and the other on this thread don’t want to acknowledge. That the law says no. And somehow they don’t understand the word no.

I don't care if it is, doesn't change my feelings on the matter.

What feelings? That you'd be happy to include a trans identifying man in prosecco night with the girls? Fine, knock yourself out, the law doesn't concern itself with policing who you socialise with.

And that's your choice. We are two different people who are allowed to think differently on the same subject.

Exactly. De minimus non curat lex.

But. It is impossible to quantify an illegal enterprise (I think Sutton v Mischon de Reya off the top of my head but I’ll double check) so therefore regardless of “feelings” if it’s illegal it’s illegal. And you can’t opt out of the law.

Thank you! At last someone is saying they don't have a problem with the fact I don't have an issue with it!

So when would you take him seriously? I don't understand what your criteria are?

Why would we? It's not really relevant to the discussion though.

Because there is legally a difference between a social night organised in a household friendship context on the hoof with a bunch of people going out and the sex make up of a group or other non-household organisation that seeks to be for one or other of the two sexes.

I don’t care what anyone does on nights out with their friends. That’s entirely up to them. But it’s not the same as a group that purports to be solely for women or solely for men.

There has been pages and pages of people not understanding that my feelings on the matter might be different to theirs and arguing the toss with me endlessly.

Look, as long as you're not running some sort of club or association and applying non legally compliant membership criteria, it doesn't matter, does it?

I never said from when I very first posted on the matter that I was running a club, just that if I was a member of a club I wouldn't have an issue with them allowing trans women. Yet people have not accepted that.

You wouldn't think there was anything wrong with them breaking the law?

No, there have been pages and pages of people pointing out that acting in line with your "feelings" on this matter has significant issues for many women and of you refusing to recognise that.

You are angry that no one is saying "oh fair enough, I disagree but your feelings are as valid as anyone else's" but at the same time you refuse to acknowledge the valid reasons other people think your position is a bad one.

Can't have it both ways I'm afraid.

Because the law doesn’t care what your view on it is. The law says that if it is a group or club that states it is single sex then your view is irrelevant. The law is that if the club or group purports to be single sex then that means it has to be single sex - either all men or all women and those terms mean the biological sex. So a trans woman is a man and a trans man is a woman for the purposes of the legislation.

Not under those circumstances I wouldn't no.

I don't need to have it both ways. I know the various reasons why some are against it. All I'm doing is endlessly defending my views.

I think you can let a man into a women’s group, that’s up to you, much like paying someone you know is dodging tax/child support in cash.
Is it personal morality? Is it societal responsibility? Is it the law?

Oh that is good. Because earlier today you said you didn't understand why people disagreed with you. And frankly I felt that was a bit off since I'd explained my position to you directly and you'd even replied, so I knew you did understand even if you disgree.

So, we know what your views are and we disagree with you. So what exactly are you complaining about again?

Oh yes: people "not understanding that my feelings on the matter might be different to theirs and arguing the toss with me endlessly."

I think you have to accept that, like you, they do understand, they just disagree.

I'm not complaining about anything just replying to the endless responses from people who either don't understand why I feel the way I do or won't accept it, or simply answering the questions they have put to me.

Ah! Yet another thread where @Howseitgoinshows us that he is a very feminine, agreeable, sensitive, empathic, nurturing, compassionate, emotionally expressive, understanding and cooperative individual who enjoys feminine aesthetics & interests more common to women.

A bit like, if you were a chain smoker you wouldn't mind your favourite pub ignoring the smoking ban, even if it was unpleasant for other customers?

For me it’s the law. Every day. And always. And I might - depending on how invested I was in the group - take action for an EA breach if they purported to be women only and allowed a man to join.

If you won’t obey the single sex law, as clarified by the Supreme Court, what other laws are you willing to break? Wheat is it about this one that means you consider it ok to break?