Women’s Rights

Because it probably contains wording that biological women arent going to like, hence why they are holding it back until after the May by - elections.

I agree with Bridey. Bridget Phillipson is woefully inadequate but I will be interested to hear what she has to say and if it differs from the Supreme Court ruling on biological gender.

Because they have consistently shown they are useless on this subject. It is of no surprise.

In any other context the mantra is "the letter of the law must be obeyed" BP has been massively dragging her feet in this respect, wishing it would just go away no doubt. Bet if the ruling had gone the other way though ...........

Well they're not 'new rules' it's supposed to give clarification under the law as it has always been. I expect she's having trouble, like so many do, with making single sex spaces inclusive of some special men, while following 'the letter of the law'.

I heard this will be released in May after the elections. Something about not being allowed to publish while campaigning is going on

Isn’t it a little like purdah in GE, ie no political communications or legislation etc to be released for a certain period before the elections and not during campaigning, it’s quite normal.

They have had a year bless them.
I see the 2 misogynists in chief - Alistair Campbell and joloyn Maughan are demonstrating their unpleasantness on the subject. 'Progressive' men are so dangerous to women.

Apparently that’s not correct Grannybags but it’s a convenient excuse. The timing is so suspicious you have to wonder what it will say. Obviously they know it will upset some voters.,

This is not legislation though Cossy this is updated guidance about existing legislation.

I will wait to hear what the new rules say but Labour do seem to be rather uncertain on women's rights.
I hope that they will be clear on safety for all women with no ambiguity. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Phillipson would know perfectly well about the rules pertaining to Election campaigning periods. She has dissembled for nearly a year about releasing the guidance.

The Trans lobby wields enormous influence within the Labour Party out of all proportion to its numbers; generous donations have much to do with it, coupled with threats to take their grievances to the ECHR if thwarted in their desire to frequent ladies' lavatories.
Robin Moira White, a barrister who identifies as female ,said in an interview on Woman's Hour 12.05.2025 concerning this issue, that he did not think the Supreme Court ruling would survive a trip to the ECHR. A great deal about the dignity of transwomen being compromised by being forced to use places of additional privacy, (single lavatories) which will reveal to their colleagues that they are trans.

Once again these are not new rules, the legislation was confirmed by the Supreme Court one year ago that in the Equality Act sex refers to biological sex at birth. The EHRC guidance on implementing this legislation correctly is what has been updated (in theory at least), presumably to apply UK law and not 'Stonewall law' as so many organisations have so far.

I do worry what society has done to these people by playing pretend. It is unspeakably cruel. No one needs to reveal to anybody that Robin moira white for example is trans, we all know. Those who have pretended that these men are women have done harm not only to women but also to those who pretend to be another sex.

What is even more unspeakably cruel in my opinion Galaxy is telling children they can change their sex when anybody with more than one brain cell knows it's impossible. A little boy that likes to dress up in a tutu and fairy wand is still a little boy, just one who has imagination and enjoys pretend in a non stereotypical way.

Rosie51

This is not legislation though Cossy this is updated guidance about existing legislation.

The definition around purdah also mentions political communications of which this is one.

I know many on year simply love an excuse to diss the LP, who have made mistakes during their “reign” in power, but sometimes there are totally legitimate reasons.

AGAA4

I will wait to hear what the new rules say but Labour do seem to be rather uncertain on women's rights.
I hope that they will be clear on safety for all women with no ambiguity. No ifs, buts or maybes.

I agree, but trans people do also deserve safeguarding, just not at the expense of any biological women.

Cossy

Rosie51

This is not legislation though Cossy this is updated guidance about existing legislation.

The definition around purdah also mentions political communications of which this is one.

I know many on year simply love an excuse to diss the LP, who have made mistakes during their “reign” in power, but sometimes there are totally legitimate reasons.

I'm not 'dissing' the LP, I voted for them! It was pointed out they released something about pothole repair funding which presumably is political communication? Whether or not this is covered by purdah you can't deny that the timing is awfully suspicious. A whole year and she gets the updated guidance just on the very day she can't release it. We weren't born yesterday.
Labour do many things right but on women's rights and protections they fail miserably in my opinion.

I think BP is worried that there will be additional costs to businesses if they have to provide extra facilities. That would seem more important to her than privacy for women.

Pretty much everyone on this thread has been talking about this issue for years, it is a failing of most political parties, and to be fair large sections of society, it is a discussion on women's rights, it just happens that the labour party failed and are failing on this. The tories in particular Penny Mordaunt, were hopeless at the time too. Badenoch saw the light reasonably early on but then so did Wes Streeting.

Please don’t misunderstand me, I do support women’s rights and want to preserve them completely, I want those who feel uncomfortable in shared public spaces to have private spaces, and only have to share other spaces such as changing rooms and loos with other biological women.

Women had to fight hard and long for their rights and said rights shouldn’t be eroded.

Yes I know, cossy, don't worry, I'm just chatting

Also even if you disagreed completely with me it would be fine. Me and Trisher used to fight like crazy on this subject, I missed her when she went.

Ilovecheese

I think BP is worried that there will be additional costs to businesses if they have to provide extra facilities. That would seem more important to her than privacy for women.

They've already hammered businesses thus far, I can't imagine they'd lose sleep over adding additional costs on this issue. No! it just smacks of obfuscation.

Why is it that the onus is forever on women to share their facilities whilst men on the other hand have to make no such allowances, for men who wish to present as women. Surely part of their personal spaces could be designated for transwomen, after all under the dresses, anatomically they're the same. It's not as if the very quiet transmen demographic appear to have impacted on them in quite the same way as the more vociferous and overt transwomen almost in an aggressive male like fashion Something to ponder on