Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

Wonder what Graham Linehan makes of all this!

I agree with you if they say they changed their minds, what if they attempt to hide their previous assertions and now go with the flow? should they get credit for that?

Meanwhile, back on the topic of this thread, apparently in 3 US states the top female high school high jumper is actually a boy. Again, what are the odds? At least one of these was no where near the top when competing against males just 2 years ago. Never happens though...

the Supreme Court ruling means the @LadiesFootball own rules imposed without consultation with its own membership is in direct conflict with equality law

Didn’t follow this closely before tbh.

The way I understand it is that the Scottish government said people with a gender recognition cert are entitled to sex-based protections. For Women Scotland said those protections only apply to people born female and the UK SC agreed. Presumably the sex protections for men only apply to male born also.

I know this ruling is in the UK but it will obviously apply to NI so very curious as to what it will mean in reality for trans people and for any organisation or business going forward.

Using a simple example of a gym, ie. a facility for everyone. Say they currently have male, female, and a disabled changing area (reasonable accommodation for people with a disability).

Will they now be obliged to provide eight changing areas, ie M, F, TM, TF, M disabled, F disabled, TM disabled, TF disabled? If they don’t, are they leaving themselves open to a case for discrimination?

Will they now be obliged to provide eight changing areas, ie M, F, TM, TF, M disabled, F disabled, TM disabled, TF disabled? If they don’t, are they leaving themselves open to a case for discrimination?

As I understand it, they are not obliged at all.

I can see this ruling just accelerating businesses and organisations using one mixed space changing area with cubicles, and provision for disability.

We will all go the way of the likes of Germany and the Scandinavian countries who are not burdened by the religious shame of their bodies.

Because they know they have lost, their argument was exposed to be as flimsy as a house of cards, and it had no scientific support.

So now they are left to just insult and pretend they have the higher moral ground.

Weeeeell, except that:

So no. It would not be a good idea to remove single-sex changing rooms.

I have no idea what the rates of sex assault are like in Sweden or Germany, but even if there is a cultural difference that means that women and girls do not risk assault the way they do in the UK or Ireland, I would need evidence that removing single-sex areas is the solution, rather than a consequence.

IOW, fix the problem of sexual assault by men first, then remove the single-sex areas.

Did you not go to a swimming pool when you lived there?

Not from my experience. I remember my first time in Stuttgart which was quite an eye opener for a repressed catholic.

Never stared at a point on a wall so hard for so long as I wriggled out of my clothes in a constricted towel.

Religion and Catholic repression seem to figure quite prominently in your last few posts on this.

Well no they didn't.

And any time I did were both pertinent and relevant to my opinion.

So where are they at in the UK now, it is correct to use whatever pronouns people choose for themselves, but calling a transwoman a woman is misgendering?

Why would Muslim women be "de facto excluded" from swimming pools?

There is elements of the religion that preclude them from swimming with men full stop.

Alternatively not all Muslim men or women adhere to Islam or at least strictly do.

But to answer your question IMO, no one should be excluded from anywhere.