84
Hackney mayor says trans women can continue using women’s toilets despite EHRC 'guidance' (www.scenemag.co.uk)
submitted 3 days ago by to c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hackney’s Green Party mayor Zoë Garbett has said trans women will continue to be able to use women’s toilets and other council facilities in the borough, despite new Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) 'guidance' stating that single-sex spaces should be organised according to biological sex.

all 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 27 points 3 days ago

I fully expect J. K. Rowling to donate 2 million to suing the borough for this.

Btw, if you pay for any Harry Potter merch or media, you are complicit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 17 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    Yet another green W.

    See how easy it is?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    Although I like this, it is currently against the law and they're going to get drowned in litigation from the TERF lobby.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 3 days ago* (2 children)

    It’s a guidance not a law. As such if taken to court a judge must take it into account, but it does not automatically mean it is a clear case of breaking the law. Actual ruling and case law are going to be what defines how much teeth it has.

    I’m glad to see it being challenged like this because it could very well set the precedence that undoes it all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago

    Exactly. Its been one of the most depressing things of the past year or so to see some very specific legal guidance (essentially that it is allowable to have strict single sex spaces excluding trans people if it is essential to achieve certain aims (like women's refuges)) being used to enact sweeping bans by governments and companies out of reflexive ass covering.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    What I find really fascinating about the response to this comment is the fear of "what if..." with respect to being challenged on it.

    I'm not downplaying what a pain that will be. The alternative is making discriminatory rules based on something that isn't even technically required, and that feels so... wrong? It's so much easier to say "nah" to a "should" rather than a "shall". It just takes a tiny bit of chutzpah.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    What is chutzpah?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago

    Too early to tell if it's easy, because they are likely to get sued to hell and back.

    Presumably the EHRC guidance that led to this situation, based on the Supreme Court ruling, is itself legally challengeable, which might be the result... If so, the Supreme Court really fucked up by issuing such an ambiguous ruling.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 8 points 3 days ago

    Need more people standing up against transphobic nonsense

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 3 days ago

    Hooray for the Greens and hooray for Hackney!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •