For which services is separate by "gender" appropriate?

[MyAmpleSheep]

Assuming it to be compliant with all relevant legislation (which is another discussion), which public services make more (or enough) sense to separate by self-defined gender rather than by sex?

We are often told that segregating by sex is permissible but not the only way to split "men" and "women" and that it's proportionate and appropriate to split men-identifiers from women-identifiers in some services in "appropriate circumstances" or some other phrase.

What are those services, and what are the appropriate circumstances?

This is a question about services, so I'm explicitly not referring to what the EA2010 covers under associations. Social groups are not services, and they can already be split or made exclusive in a much wider range of ways; I'm not asking about them. Only about public services. For clarity it's probably best to avoid terminology like "single sex spaces" because it's easy to misunderstand whether a "space" is a service - or an association.

So - which services can appropriately be segregated as women+trans-identifying men (women+ "trans women") and men+trans-identifying women (men + "trans men")?

As I've answered - any that wish to.

And I do. That horrific example you used potentially happened to a man rather than to a woman. It is different.

And given you used murder, no one is available to speak to the vulnerability.

It was a ludicrous thing to say.

According to wikipedia Stonewall is the largest LGBT rights organisation in Europe, so I would assume that their opinion stands for something and is more likely to hold sway over public policy than any individual posting on this site.

There are quite a few organisations that have been forced to stop being single-gender when they would prefer to continue.

Can you give examples? Can you give examples of the kind of person they might turn away for being the wrong gender?

No less of a victim than any other raped and murdered man. Or do you think otherwise?

Woman = Adult human female = biology, not a construct, observable long after death
Man = Adult human male = biology, not a construct, observable long after death

Masculine = a societal construct that varies between cultures and over time
Patriarchy = a series of societal constructs that preserve the rights of men over women

Feminine = a societal construct of how women should dress and behave that varies between cultures and over time
Matriarchy = a rare social system that puts women in the position of power

A book group is an association, which is treated differently to a service in the Equality Act. For a start, the exceptions are far wider ranging: an association can legally discriminate on all protected characteristics except race.

Go on then, how many men who claim to be women have been raped or murdered in the UK this year? And while you’re at it, which sex did the raping and murdering?

You don't understand my answer then.

Here's one example for you. Modern version of a pub with a "No Irish" rule. https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/irish-traveller-settles-race-discrimination-claim-support-equality-watchdog

Because I'm extra nice to you, it also illustrates my point about the EA. Hopefully this helps you understand.

No, I think they have shared the same horrifying experience. As was the point of my post. Surely you didn't miss the point quite so spectacularly?

So one example from 2024 shows 'quite a lot of call'? Interesting.

Why?

You point was men and women have the same experiences and the same feelings of vulnerability?

Sorry - so you think there isn't problem with racism in the UK?

Why would anyone wish to host a 'single gender' service or facility rather than just an 'mixed sex' one? What sort of service do you mean?

What if it were a book group offered by a Council-run library? Would that make it a service?

So what is the difference between a male with a trans identity and one without that makes one welcome according to you in female spaces and one not?

So does that mean the an association that was set up for, say, Black African asylum seekers would also have to include Iranian asylum seekers?

My (very clear) point was that women and trans women can share the same experiences and feelings of vulnerability and it is nonsense to suggest they cannot.

Because they wish to welcome trans women or trans men into their service alongside biological women or men.

As can any man. So?

So men and women can share the same experiences and feelings of vulnerability and it is nonsense to suggest they cannot?
Got it!

Yep, you really don't understand my point about the EA at all. Or are pretending not to.

I've done enough to prove my point to anyone here in good faith who might be mislead by your lightweight jibes.

If I thought you were a person of integrity asking a genuine question I'd have put a bit more effort in and posted the other links I pulled up with a five second search, but that takes a bit of my own time to validate the information and I'm afraid given your posting history I simply do not consider you worth the effort.

Have a nice evening.

I think that would be a service, but surely the last thing they would want to do is set up a 'single gender service' and then start having to decide whether people had the right gender.

Identify just one single incidence of a transwoman becoming pregnant against their will? Just one. The experience of a transwoman is not the same as a woman.

Then it would be a service, not an association. Additionally it would have further duties under the public service provision in part 1 (these don’t apply to private sector service providers)