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">https://legalfeminist.org.uk/2020/10/1... 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& #39;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& #39;s thought or a well placed Q could demolish this.

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

You can& #39;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& #39;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/">https://a-question-of-consent.net/2020/05/0...