Sexist Unions boycott Labour women's conference

[fromorbit]

Unison, Aslef, Usdaw and the Musicians Union are planning to not attend Labour Women's Conference on 26 September 2026 in Liverpool because men are not allowed.

This is breaking Labour party rules against sex discrimination against women and that the Supreme Court judgement is correct:
https://labour.org.uk/resources/supreme-court-judgment-faqs/

This could be a huge issue for Burnham and Labour. Especially as Unison, & Unite are already facing court cases over their refusal to admit women exist.

Like the recent Amnesty trainwreck this could be a self inflicted car crash for TAs in the unions. It will force Labour to choose between reality and catering to a bunch of sexists who don't like it when women get have political meetings without male supervision.

No, I saw the circumstances bit. Leave that to one side - if a woman (or girl) says no to a male Dr examining her, he should absolutely respect that, surely? So, what should he do that doesn't mean he leaves her unattended and blame her if anything goes wrong (as you said)?

All the decent men I know would certainly respect the needs of women to privacy, safety and dignity.

You have already been told that this board was specifically created to allow the discussion of the difference between sex and the stereotypes of behaviour and presentation which are known as gender. This means that we are free to debate as much as we wish the way in which the behaviour and demands of (in particular) trans-identifying men negatively affect the hard-won, sex-based rights of women. It isn't in the slightest bit obsessive for women to avail ourselves of the opportunity for debate on these issues which Mumsnet has created for us. If you don't like what we discuss, feel free not to visit this board.

Because it’s the pesky women who somehow coerced the Labour Party into banning the poor men from taking sears ment for women. The funny thing is, transmen could have had those seats, what with being female and all…. TRA never seem to think of that

I’d be hitting specsavers before the lotto to be fair.

The circumstances matter. Provide them and I'll be happy to answer. Without it - you can answer.

💯

Yes, I imagine you would.

I'll ask again.

What pejorative terms?

That's the beauty of discussions. You seem to have a problem with me not being aware of everything in the history of Mumsnet. I'm afraid I have a full-life and this is a passing distraction. If you wish to make this your entire personality, then go ahead. The rest of society will think you quite odd and avoid you.

Do you really believe a male Dr could move on and leave a woman or girl unattended because she said no? Or can you think of an alternative?

Its unclear how many may have boycotted or attended. Richards has made claims, but as noted by others, he's an unreliable narrator.

I don’t need to do the eye test (my eyes are fine, they can tell the sexes from each other just fine), it was half a wee helpful suggestion for you but yes,
come on the lotto!

That appears to be what you're suggesting. Unless of course you've decided to provide the essential context - or the answer?

Great, so you weren't aware of the context and now its been helpfully explained.

Mostly, people would probably say a quick thanks at this point.

So given a male Dr can't leave a woman or girl at risk and needing treatment, what should come between her saying no and him moving onto another patient?

But you are the one being rude and snippy to people. You seem very angry. If you want to discuss medical misogyny there is an active thread that you might find interesting.

You have been told at least 3 times on this thread alone the reason why the sex and gender board was created. People choosing to use this board to discuss matters which really gravely impact women's rights is neither obsessive nor making such discussion anyone's whole personality. You really are not showing the best side of your own personality with your snide asides and constant use of derogatory language about other users.

Why don't you share?

So, to recap. You went off on one about a board set up to discuss gender identity in relation to feminism doing what it was set up to do because you didn’t know that was why it was set up. Now that has been clarified you’re continuing to lash out at everyone who explained that to you. AND you don’t contribute to the other feminism board despite apparently being so concerned about all the other ‘more important’ issues facing women.

Did I miss anything?

*Men. Being in places they shouldn’t be.

Do you? Hanging about boards you have no interest in. Quite sad really. I’m about to wander over the to the dogs board to say how much I don’t like dogs.

I'm looking to you to explain your thinking behind your post. It should be easy for you to do.

I only appear 'very angry' because I see through you and you know I do.

No you're not. You're asking me to comment on something that you won't explain and you have an answer in mind. I've been quite clear that until you provide the appropriate context, I won't answer. You seem to have trouble with this. That's unfortunate for you.