Baroness Falkner: Labour Party has abandoned women and feminism

[Signalbox]

“… She has unfinished business, however. Three months ago she submitted, with the support of the board, what she views as her legacy — statutory guidance on how public bodies, businesses and employers should interpret a seismic ruling by the Supreme Court. The ruling, on April 16, clarified that under the Equality Act 2010 the terms “women” and “sex” referred to “biological” sex, not acquired gender.

Since then, however, the guidance has gone nowhere. It is now somewhere in the bowels of the Department for Education, and there is no indication of when it will be published. The EHRC, Falkner says, has been told by the government that it is “all very complex and we need to take our time over it”.

She doesn’t buy it. “We’ve had external counsel, internal counsel, everybody’s looked at it. I mean, I’m so certain of the lawfulness of our code that I don’t think I’ve ever been so certain about anything before,” she says. “The other explanation simply is that they’re terrified of their MPs who would wish for trans self-identification or trans inclusion to prevail across all areas of society, including Section 3 of the Equality Act, and would wish for the exemptions not to exist.” …

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/baroness-falkner-labour-was-the-party-of-feminism-not-any-more-fzgjxswgn

Archive…

https://archive.ph/b9CcE

Quite, the Unions were vehemently opposed to equal pay for women back in the day.

I don't think I have seen any Labour MPs, or anyone else for that matter, campaign for a new Equality Act that gives trans people the rights they want. Which is surely the correct reaction to a law you don't like: campaign to repeal it and write a new one, not just ignore it and/or gripe about how the judges are evil for interpreting it in a way you don't like.

It's such an Americanised attitude to politics. Win points by pointing out constantly how you disagree with the law as it stands. But don't blame the legislature that made the law, blame the evil unelected judges. And don't, by any means, take any action to actually change anything.

It's pathetic.

I don't think I have seen any Labour MPs, or anyone else for that matter, campaign for a new Equality Act that gives trans people the rights they want. Which is surely the correct reaction to a law you don't like: campaign to repeal it and write a new one, not just ignore it and/or gripe about how the judges are evil for interpreting it in a way you don't like.

Pre-GE (so before the SC decision), my now Labour MP was very clear that the EA required no amendment to it (I was asking for amendment to clarify that sex meant biological sex) and they were proud of it. I imagine this was the party line when the lack of clarity suited them.

It would be a bit of a u turn to suggest that it now does need amending. However, this is the current Labour government. Nothing a good pivot won't sort! 🙄

What an inspiring woman. Thank you Baroness Falkner.

It is odd that the reaction from TRA is that the interpretation of the law is wrong, rather than the law not fit for what they want.

I dont think MP who are sympathetic to TRA really understand any of it or cannot argue for the laws TRA want.

She’s brilliant.

They may be afraid to change the law. Trying to change it might bring more focus on it, and most would see a change for what it is - a blatant roll back of women’s rights and protections

Full of admiration. The word legend gets thrown about... but for some people it's maybe not even enough

Does anyone have a Share token for the Times article? I'd like to send it to my 'Be Kind' friend but she probably won't read an archive link.

Good morning to you, Howse! Nice to see you’re busy on the anti-women case, bright and early on a Saturday. Can’t have women celebrating a true heroine, can we?

A formidable woman

I have found one

www.thetimes.com/article/2e926aef-4003-4a6b-bfb1-4c45e0e49b25?shareToken=1669c4377a2f078e8df8e618e866095f

The only one of the main big three parties to have never had a female leader, says it all.

She’s been such a breath of fresh air. Brave and principled after years of the EHRC selling out women.

She's been fantastic, not cowering in the face of extreme hate from the men wanting to decriminalise voyeurism and indecent exposure.
Very pleased she's in the HoL where there are a large number of wise peers supporting women's rights and the need to safeguard children.

I am not convinced either that the Labour Party is the party of feminism. No party is.

Good for her, however. Her successor will not be as brave because if her leadership was supported now she would not be leaving or giving this interview. There will be a move to get someone who is trans or trans friendly.

What an admirable and impressive woman she is.

The new chair is dr Mary Ann Stephenson. The usual suspects protested loudly about her appt because she'd been seen supporting gender critical opinions and the women and equalities committee wrote a sad faced letter saying they couldn't support her appt www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jul/31/mary-ann-stephenson-confirmed-as-ehrc-chair-despite-mps-objections

so I think she'll be fine

Well that’s good about the new appointment but I hope Dr Stephenson is actually supported to lead. Seems like bad omens for her already

This should age well:

The Beaumont Society, the longest-established transgender support group in the UK, said of the decision of the NFWI and Girlguiding: “This is a backward step in both the law and in society and will, in time be found to be as unsupportable as similar pseudosciences such as vaccines causing autism, or phrenology, or polygenism or injecting bleach to cure Covid.”

Exactly. They would need to make the law clear that if men say they are women they would be entitled to access to every service designed for women and be recognised as women when providing a service to others. They wouldn’t get away with fudging the law this time around. It would need to be explicitly anti-woman. Not a good look for Labour and they know it.

Oh, the irony.

Why do you think they're so keen on girls being compelled to share everything with boys? That girls must be taught that they have no right to boundaries / single sex spaces? That men from the Beaumont society must be given access to every single sex space for girl and women?

Can't wait to hear more from them weighing in on just who should be allowed to watch teenage girls changing.

We need to start highlighting just what they're demanding and who it is they're expecting to give up their rights to privacy and safety. And get clear explanations from Labour about why they're supporting this.
Make them talk.

@DecorMadness has it. The TRA know full well that any campaign for new laws to erode women's rights via some Amendment will be unpopular. Putting it diplomatically. So whining and smears will be the tactics.
Until that blessed day that Zack has his photo taken outside no 10....

It’s not her that is clueless.