The state of transgender law training in practice

This article by @legalfeminist is shocking

https://legalfeminist.org.uk/2020/10/16/transgender-law-in-practice/

It looks at training at @TheInnerTemple by @JuliaArmfield, @AllanBriddock, @AlexSharpe64 , @Genderintell, @JoeHart and @moira_robin

The training seems based on motivated reasoning to justify this:

Some males want to use female only facilities.

Their wishes are all that matters

Women who want privacy & security are bigots

... The law says so!

Except as @legalfeminist carefully and patiently point out it doesn't

This is the big myth at the heart of the lawyers-against-womens-boundaries argument

The idea that the exceptions are rarely used

A moment's thought or a well placed Q could demolish this.

The exceptions are used *whenever* single sex facilities are provided

You can't bar people from boardrooms, pubs, libraries, professions etc on the basis of sex

You can bar them from toilets, showers, dorms etc

And you don't have to do this on a discretionary one-by-one basis asking each potential user 20 questions to work if the are male or female.

You do it by setting a policy (a rule or PCP as the lawyers say) and communicating it to all.

Like this:

https://a-question-of-consent.net/2020/05/05/they-are-rarely-used/