Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

EHRC guidance might be delayed for over a year

302 replies

OhBuggerandArse · 30/10/2025 22:12

Ministers really can't cope with acknowledging the law, can they?

https://www.thetimes.com/article/d7cd9e2f-2635-409d-a624-a833611a09fc?shareToken=f3f89ea86fb5c264c18866395c93194d

I hope this is just a flag they're sending up to evaluate how much pushback there might be - let's make sure that the pushback is noisy, articulate and effective.

Rules forcing trans people to use birth-sex facilities delayed

The Equality and Human Rights Commission set out statutory guidance on how gyms, clubs and hospitals must judge single-sex spaces based on biology

https://www.thetimes.com/article/d7cd9e2f-2635-409d-a624-a833611a09fc?shareToken=f3f89ea86fb5c264c18866395c93194d

OP posts:
Thread gallery
21
NoWordForFluffy · 03/11/2025 19:11

Coatsoff42 · 03/11/2025 19:07

I wonder what JD mobile hairdressing (No 670) are worried about? What would be the concerns of someone who drives around cutting hair in someone else’s house?

Especially as the TRA gotcha is the unisex loo in your house! Absolutely nothing to worry about there. 🤷‍♀️

NotAtMyAge · 03/11/2025 19:21

Coatsoff42 · 03/11/2025 19:07

I wonder what JD mobile hairdressing (No 670) are worried about? What would be the concerns of someone who drives around cutting hair in someone else’s house?

My guess is being seen to be on the right side of history. Gotta be good for business, don'cha know?

ArabellaSaurus · 03/11/2025 19:30

163 Borderline Personality Disorder Collective?!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 03/11/2025 19:32

I imagine that’s a general description for many of these organisations.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 03/11/2025 20:00

Coatsoff42 · 03/11/2025 19:07

I wonder what JD mobile hairdressing (No 670) are worried about? What would be the concerns of someone who drives around cutting hair in someone else’s house?

Yeah, surely if they need to go they use the facilities in their clients houses. 😂 If this is typical of the businesses who have signed it, they're really running out of ally's.

ArabellaSaurus · 03/11/2025 20:04

Someone described as a 'polyamory educator and queer sex therapist in training'

For those who imagine someone has infiltrated and been taking the piss; I can assure you this is completely verbatim from the person's website.

ItsCoolForCats · 03/11/2025 20:46

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 03/11/2025 20:00

Yeah, surely if they need to go they use the facilities in their clients houses. 😂 If this is typical of the businesses who have signed it, they're really running out of ally's.

Yes, and as they love pointing out, people have gender neutral bathrooms in their homes 🙄

ItsCoolForCats · 03/11/2025 21:43

theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw · 03/11/2025 21:13

Equality commission’s guidance after sex ruling is fundamentally unworkable | Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) | The Guardian https://share.google/2xYUZizwOvby6VhGs

WEC member on the Guardian letters page. The usual obfuscation and elisions.

Appalling, hyperbolic nonsense. I can't believe this has been written by an MP. It really highlights why the WEC is such a mess when this is the calibre of some of the members.

ItsCoolForCats · 03/11/2025 21:45

And she said the quiet part out loud at the end. They really are waiting for Mary Any Stephenson to take over in the hope that she will be more willing to misrepresent the law than Baroness Faulkner is.

Everything I have seen of MAS suggests she is sensible, so I really hope she won't be bullied by them.

EdithStourton · 03/11/2025 21:50

Maybe we should volunteer to write the guidance for them...

GaIadrieI · 03/11/2025 21:53

So, obeying the law is optional it seems?

OhBuggerandArse · 03/11/2025 21:58

GaIadrieI · 03/11/2025 21:53

So, obeying the law is optional it seems?

The trouble is they still don't really believe that it is the law, because surely the law would agree with Naice People Like Them.

OP posts:
Talkinpeace · 03/11/2025 22:03

tick tock tick tock

ArabellaSaurus · 03/11/2025 22:03

theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw · 03/11/2025 21:13

Equality commission’s guidance after sex ruling is fundamentally unworkable | Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) | The Guardian https://share.google/2xYUZizwOvby6VhGs

WEC member on the Guardian letters page. The usual obfuscation and elisions.

'I have already heard appalling stories of women being aggressively challenged while waiting in a queue for the bathroom.'

No! Wait til you hear my story about being sexually assaulted in a 'bathroom', Rachel! Or is that not the kind of story you care about?

ArabellaSaurus · 03/11/2025 22:04

In fact, I will write to Rachel Taylor tomorrow. I assume as a member of the WESC, she's supposed to be my representative in some form?

Greyskybluesky · 03/11/2025 22:09

Yeah, quite a few of us have our own stories about men in women's toilets, Rachel.

They are women's spaces. Not for men. Any men. However they might perceive themselves.

GreenUp · 04/11/2025 00:50

Rachel Taylor was the trans activist MP who asked Mary-Ann Stephenson ridiculous questions when MAS was being interviewed for the EHRC job. I'd imagine Mary-Ann already has the measure of these MPs.

From the transcript of the committee meeting......

Rachel Taylor: Until it was raised by colleagues of mine, I noted that
you had not mentioned the LGBT community in any of your answers.
Given the discussions and debates around the recent judgment of the
Supreme Court and the correspondence that my colleague Dr Swallow
mentioned, can you describe the specific steps and actions that you will
take to gain the trust of the trans community, if you were to be
successful in this role?

Rachel Taylor: Obviously, how those intersectionality issues impact on
lesbians and trans women is important. I want to move on. The Supreme
Court noted that the EHRC’s interim guidance or statement went beyond
what the law required.1 How will you ensure that future guidance
accurately reflects legal obligations rather than policy preferences? Is
there a danger that the EHRC makes the same mistake again, or even in
the other direction? How would you mitigate that risk?

Rachel Taylor: I have one final question. You have spoken passionately
about your desire to uphold freedom of speech. Is it appropriate for
people on social media to suggest that women or trans women entering
toilets should be photographed or videoed, or is that something you
would publicly distance yourself from?

https://committees.parliament.uk/event/24530/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/

IwantToRetire · 04/11/2025 01:00

theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw · 03/11/2025 21:13

Equality commission’s guidance after sex ruling is fundamentally unworkable | Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) | The Guardian https://share.google/2xYUZizwOvby6VhGs

WEC member on the Guardian letters page. The usual obfuscation and elisions.

I think this makes it clear that it isn't about the cost of building works or whatever, it is totally about TRAs saying trans people will not respect the ruling / guidance and employers are going to have check toilets users. And then there will be legal costs.

So yet again, trans are the ones causing problems, but they arent the problem it is everybody else.

IwantToRetire · 04/11/2025 01:07

Has this been posted. Getting a bit confused with the different threads, that are basically about the same thing.

Key Findings

  • Gatekeeping is widespread: incidents typically follow a pattern of misgendering/mistaken identity → challenge or refusal → avoidance, reported by trans people and some cis gender, gender-non-conforming women.
  • Incidents of being openly challenged in public spaces increased markedly following the non-statutory interim update: frequency of incidents and the perception that they are identity-based rose after April 2025, with toilets in pubs/leisure venues featuring strongly.
  • Avoidance has become routine: many respondents now avoid gendered facilities following incidents, reporting significant consequences on health, work and social participation.
  • Some people are more likely to have experienced difficulties: disability/long-term condition status and more visibly gender-non- conforming presentation are linked to higher challenge rates; cis gender non-conforming/ masculine women have been misidentified and targeted regularly.
  • Public messaging matters: inconsistent interpretations have been understood by many members of the public as permission to challenge people in gendered spaces if they think they shouldn’t be there. These challenges are inappropriate and risk unlawful harassment; there is no factual evidence that excluding trans people from spaces that align with their gender improves public safety.
  • Attempts to sabotage research: the hundreds of hostile responses to this survey and attempts to sabotage the research act to corroborate trans, intersex and gender- nonconforming respondents’ fears of harassment from those opposed to their inclusion in society.

https://transactual.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Gendered-Spaces-Review-Final.pdf

https://transactual.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Gendered-Spaces-Review-Final.pdf

IwantToRetire · 04/11/2025 01:09

Attempts to sabotage research: the hundreds of hostile responses to this survey and attempts to sabotage the research act to corroborate trans, intersex and gender- nonconforming respondents’ fears of harassment from those opposed to their inclusion in society.

I do hope that nobody on FWR made a response that was hostile.

Talking about sex based rights isn't hostile.

IDareSay · 04/11/2025 05:33

https://archive.is/MU71P

Tactics used to thwart the Supreme Court’s trans ruling must end

The Times View

ArabellaSaurus · 04/11/2025 06:55

IDareSay · 04/11/2025 05:33

https://archive.is/MU71P

Tactics used to thwart the Supreme Court’s trans ruling must end

The Times View

Edited

Excellent, thank you.

'The risk is that Ms Phillipson will take the out­lying position of a vocal minority for something more significant. The reality is that there is widespread support for the Supreme Court’s ruling: a YouGov survey in May showed that 63 per cent of the public thought the ruling was the right decision, and 52 per cent believed it clarified the law on women’s rights.

But it is not only activists who wish to challenge the ruling. Nearly 50 Labour MPs are reported to have written to Peter Kyle, the business secretary, complaining of a “minefield” of competing rights. It has also been suggested that these MPs raised concerns with Mr Kyle about the costs of implementing the guidance, such as the need to build gender-neutral toilets. The government should heed the advice of Claire Coutinho, the shadow equalities minister, who states: “The guidance adds no new regulatory burden, nor does it change the law for any business or public body. It simply helps organisations comply with the law as it already stands.”

Government insiders claim it is “total nonsense” to suggest any delay is deliberate, and that any hold-up is due simply to a complex document requiring careful consideration. However, it is hard to escape the impression that this is a fight the government would rather not face. It would be a grave mistake if ministers were to acquiesce in the watering down, or subversion, of a ruling that is as right as it is clear. The Supreme Court did the country a service in providing the clarity necessary to lay the trans debate to rest. The law is the law. Sir Keir Starmer of all people should beware of the consequences of bringing it into disrepute.'

Lay the trans debate to rest, and we can all move on. For Pete's sake.

NoWordForFluffy · 04/11/2025 07:13

Maybe she's going to slide it through on the day of the Budget? Try to hide it somewhat.