Darlington nurses win their employment tribunal

[Lovelyview]

https://christianconcern.com/ccpressreleases/victory-for-darlington-nurses-as-judge-rules-policy-that-allows-men-into-womens-changing-rooms-is-unlawful-harassment-and-discrimination/

Brilliant news!

Because poor Rose is an ACTUAL woman!!! Did you not realise?

Seriously, that is what lots of them think.

Very very happy! Well done - you won on behalf of us all. Thank you xxx

Just saw this, amazing news! Congratulations to the Darlington Nurses!

It shouldn't have happened in the first place, but thank fuck they won!

Even if they got to appeal the Trust would run into the basic problem of proving that the legislation which provided for single sex changing areas was passed on the basis that the word woman was used to mean females and some male persons.

The SC has already ruled on word woman in the EA.

Changing rooms are health and safety obligations pulling health and safety legislation apart to change the meaning of the word woman is a poor use of public funds with imo a very low change of the SC ruling it included some males.

Eg the 1992 regs schedule 1 takes account of the biology in toilets with male (not man) provision and female provision (not woman)

I just watched C4 news on delay and thought Bethany was fantastic. She never called Rose "she" which I thought was fab. C4 news clearly pushing the poor Rose line for having such horrible abuse thrown at Rose.

I've been very under the weather today with a rotten virus. I've only just caught up with the news and it's perked me right up! Woohoo!

It's ridiculous. TRAs are going to have to accept that they can't steamroller over women's rights and boundaries and force people to accept that a man is a women. It's not going to work anymore.

Rose didn't want to change with other men so now Rose is using a third space. If the Trust had done that in the first place instead of discriminating against their female employees all this could have been avoided. It doesn't have to be hard.

I can't be doing with people who can't understand basic biology...

The judgement is such a relief, and its been amazing seeing it reported all over mainstream press.

Nothing you say will ever justify men bypassing the consent of women and girls. A man will never, ever be a woman. The sooner you get acquainted with material reality, the better. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

A day to celebrate.

However, also a day to be angry that 'Rose' Henderson did this to women, and that the Darlington trust did this to women.

And the saddest thing of all about this sorry business: that a woman felt she had no option other than to disclose her childhood sexual abuse to the court and inevitably every news outlet in the country. To try to explain her distress at a man in the women's changing room.

AFAIK he denied saying it at all.

Whilst I am delighted for the Darlington Nurses and consider my donation to their crowdfunder to have been well-spent, this is not a "landmark judgement". As a first-tier tribunal ruling, it does not set precedent.

I look forward to reading the judgement.

I hope that the NHS (and all employers) absolutely shit themselves if a TiM asks to use the female changing rooms/toilets, or actually just does so.

Complete turnaround from bending over backwards to facilitiate TiM and advocating re-education for those who didn't agree isn't it? Hopefully!

Great result today. We owe the Darlington nurses a huge debt of gratitude for all they have done for women.

A judgment can be a landmark judgment even if it doesn't strictly set precedent. Landmark means that it has significant impact across legal, social or political spheres or clarifies a complex area of law.

A judge saying that there is no legal scope to argue that people can access single sex spaces based on gender identity is a landmark judgment. Particularly the analysis of ECHR rights, and its application of the 1992 Regs and For Women Scotland.

This judgment will have huge practical implications for employers even though it is not binding on other tribunals.

1. A surgically-constructed phallus made of repurposed arm, back, or thigh flesh is not "male genitals".
2. Very few trans-identifying women have crotch surgery. Most of them stop after the double mastectomy.

Great news. Bethany was v good on C4 news.

You have more trust than I do, I expect meetings along the lines now of 'you dont' have a problem with the men undressing with you in your spaces DO YOU?' rather like Lord Farquard with his guards holding up the cards of what the audience must do at this point or else.

The line of 'if women don't mind/if the man is lovely/ if the wind is from the west and a pig is walking backwards playing the banjo' will probably go on a good while yet. While women fight case, after case, after case, and the tax payer funds it.

Well, considering you keep saying people can't change sex, why the hell do you insist on referring to me as 'He'? I was born a woman and still identify as a woman. It's getting boring now.

It is going to be very interesting to see how this all pans out. Because the judgement does allude to the fact that there may be discrimination against another ‘Rose’ if ‘Rose’ was required to undress with other men.

Employers were happy to implement Stonewall law because there was no cost to them, the cost was borne by female dignity and safety. And they got brownie points for doing it in terms of Stonewall ‘good place to work’ awards. Now workplaces will have a number of trans people and support groups vocal about their ‘rights’.
Employers would probably be happy to go back to ‘male’ and ‘female’ facilities because that again is no cost to them. But it is unlikely that trans rights groups will let them do that.

I think he was told he could use the changing rooms which 'aligned with his gender identity '. That was actually the Trust's policy. So he thought he could be there.

You think a woman can have a penis, the word is meaningless when you use it. Anyway, since you think man and woman is just a matter of belief, I believe you're a man. You say you're not, what's the difference?

Assume I got deleted for saying Kermit is lying, which I half expected. Everyone does know men aren't women, though, so 🤷

Jesus, how many times do I have to repeat myself. I was asking if transmen would have to use female changing areas, because I thought this would distress some woman. ( I was using the example of a woman with a 'penis' to explain what could be offensive) I personally do not have, and have never had a penis, or anything pretending to be a penis