Latest news with #SexMatters
Telegraph
4 days ago
- Health
- Telegraph
Periods aren't only for women, says Britain's biggest toiletries supplier
Periods are ' not inherently feminine ', according to Britain's biggest toiletry supplier. Bunzl, the major distribution company, said 'not all people who menstruate are women' in a campaign designed to stop the stigma of talking about periods. As a result, it has now been accused of denying biological reality and 'pandering to trans activists'. Bunzl's inclusive language guide was released to promote eco-friendly sanitary products by provider Grace and Green. It suggests common terms such as 'sanitary', 'hygiene' and 'feminine products' should be replaced with the term 'period products' to avoid offence. It also advises against only referring women or girls, because 'non-binary people, transgender men and intersex people may also menstruate', and suggests providing period products and disposal bins in gender-neutral locations and all public lavatories. 'Most of all, be respectful of everyone's different experiences of their period,' it adds. 'We can all empathise with the struggles that come with bleeding, even if they are different for each of us.' Helen Joyce, the director of advocacy at the Sex Matters charity, called the language 'offensive' and accused the guide authors of 'erasing women and girls from the female-only experience of menstruation'. 'The only way that Grace and Green's products could truly be 'gender-neutral' is if its product designers had considered male anatomy when designing sanitary pads and tampons, which is clearly not the case,' she said. 'Coy phrases like 'feminine products' or 'feminine hygiene' may be a bit old-fashioned, but suppliers like Grace & Green and retailers like Boots and Aldi openly admit that their motivation to replace them with 'period products' isn't a desire to be more frank about women's biological reality – it's about denying that biological reality altogether. 'This type of nonsense is blatant pandering to trans activists, who demand that everyone else plays along with the farcical idea that men who imagine themselves to be female can have periods, and that women who imagine themselves to be male are 'men who menstruate'.' Supermarkets have changed policy A number of high street giants have changed their policy on the products in recent years. In 2022, Aldi followed Asda by replacing its 'feminine hygiene' signage with 'period products'. Richard Shuttleworth, Aldi's then diversity and inclusion director, said at the time: 'We are pleased to have renamed the category both in-store and online to better reflect how shoppers feel about period products.' Earlier the same year, Boots carried out the same rebrand. A spokesman for Grace and Green told The Telegraph they stand by the statement 'Not all women menstruate, and not all people who menstruate are women'. They continued: 'This is a simple recognition of biological and lived realities. Some women don't menstruate – for example due to menopause, contraception, pregnancy or medical conditions – and some people who are not women, including trans men, non-binary, and intersex individuals, do. 'Denying this erases entire communities and contributes to the marginalisation of people who already face significant barriers to healthcare, dignity, and access to essential products. 'Acknowledging this diversity is not about erasing women – it's about expanding understanding.'
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Quakers accused of ‘destroying' reputation with trans-inclusive lavatories
Quakers have been accused of 'destroying' their reputation as pioneers on women's rights by refusing to provide separate toilets for females. Quakers in Britain said its toilets would remain 'trans inclusive' despite the ruling by the Supreme Court that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act refers to biological sex and not gender identity. It said it was not desirable to monitor who uses its facilities, adding: 'We cannot guarantee any shared space as exclusive for one group of people.' Quakers have gained a reputation for their progressive attitude towards women, having allowed them to preach as early as the 17th century. But Helen Joyce, the director of advocacy at Sex Matters, a women's rights group, said they appeared to have abandoned that legacy by adopting 'textbook trans activism'. 'Early Quakers were famously supportive of women's rights – they would surely be shocked and ashamed if they could see the destruction of that proud legacy,' she said. Last month's Supreme Court ruled that transgender women are not legally women, and clarified that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act means biological sex and not gender identity. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) then put out interim guidance to organisations, underlining that in places such as hospitals, shops and restaurants, 'trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities'. A growing number of public bodies have changed their guidance in light of the judgment. The Football Association has said trans women could be banned from women's sport. But other organisations, including the Houses of Parliament, are awaiting final guidance from the EHRC. The statement from Quakers in Britain dismissed the EHRC's interim guidance, which it said 'goes beyond the scope and actual statements' in the Supreme Court ruling. Paul Parker, the recording clerk, said: 'This is already contested and subject to legal challenge.' He said the faith group would 'welcome and affirm trans and non-binary people in Quaker spaces', adding: 'We must respect the dignity of each person to live with integrity, informed by the truth of their lived experience'. Like Stonewall, Mr Parker said the Supreme Court judgement did not have 'the force of law'. 'Whilst the EHRC has recently issued guidance, this is currently only interim guidance. It is non-statutory and therefore does not have the force of law,' the document states. 'We see the Equality Act itself as our primary legal guide when making decisions. 'It is not possible or desirable to monitor who uses our facilities and therefore cannot guarantee any shared space as exclusive for one group of people. We will not label something as a single-sex space if we cannot truthfully guarantee that it will be single-sex.' The minutes of the meeting read: 'The rights and inclusion of people belonging to our communities and using our buildings are not, and should not be, just about toilets. We will continue to work to make our corner of the commonwealth of heaven on Earth a more welcoming and accessible place. This is what love requires of us.' Quakers in Britain also pointed out that at its main building, French House in London, all public facilities were 'trans inclusive'. A spokesman said: 'Toilets labelled with a 'female' sign are intended for cis women, trans women, and non-binary and intersex people for whom this toilet is best aligned with their lived experience. 'Toilets labelled with a 'male' sign are intended for cis men, trans men, and non-binary and intersex people for whom this toilet is best aligned with their lived experience.' Ms Joyce said: 'British Quakers' announcement that it will continue to allow trans-identifying men to use female facilities is textbook trans activism. It is also in breach of the law. The organisation would be wise to consult legal expertise without delay. 'It is not 'inclusive' to seek a way around labelling toilets and changing rooms as male and female in order to avoid having to monitor whether people comply with common-sense rules that are there to protect everyone. It places the desires of those who seek to transgress boundaries over the needs of the most vulnerable. 'This is an upside-down vision of equality, integrity and truth. By defying the UK's highest court and removing protections for women and girls, Quakers are courting legal risk and demonstrating a lack of care and responsibility, in the pursuit of a fashionable dogma.' A spokesman for Quakers in Britain said: 'Our facilities are legally compliant. Quakers in Britain welcome and affirm trans and non-binary people in all Quaker spaces. Our values of equality and integrity guide every decision we make. 'No trans, non-binary, or intersex Quaker, staff member, or service user will be asked to disclose or prove aspects of their identity in ways that are not asked of cisgender people. We do not seek to monitor who uses our facilities, nor do we believe it is possible or desirable to do so. 'We have self-contained facilities, which function as single sex spaces, available for all our building users. We are committed to taking robust and proactive steps to ensure that all our spaces remain safe, inclusive, and free from harassment or inappropriate behaviour.'
Telegraph
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Quakers accused of ‘destroying' reputation with trans-inclusive lavatories
Quakers have been accused of 'destroying' their reputation as pioneers on women's rights by refusing to provide separate toilets for females. Quakers in Britain said its toilets would remain 'trans inclusive' despite the ruling by the Supreme Court that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act refers to biological sex and not gender identity. It said it was not desirable to monitor who uses its facilities, adding: 'We cannot guarantee any shared space as exclusive for one group of people.' Quakers have gained a reputation for their progressive attitude towards women, having allowed them to preach as early as the 17th century. But Helen Joyce, the director of advocacy at Sex Matters, a women's rights group, said they appeared to have abandoned that legacy by adopting 'textbook trans activism'. 'Early Quakers were famously supportive of women's rights – they would surely be shocked and ashamed if they could see the destruction of that proud legacy,' she said. 'Contested and subject to legal challenge' Last month's Supreme Court ruled that transgender women are not legally women, and clarified that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act means biological sex and not gender identity. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) then put out interim guidance to organisations, underlining that in places such as hospitals, shops and restaurants, 'trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities'. A growing number of public bodies have changed their guidance in light of the judgment. The Football Association has said trans women could be banned from women's sport. But other organisations, including the Houses of Parliament, are awaiting final guidance from the EHRC. The statement from Quakers in Britain dismissed the EHRC's interim guidance, which it said 'goes beyond the scope and actual statements' in the Supreme Court ruling. Paul Parker, the recording clerk, said: 'This is already contested and subject to legal challenge.' He said the faith group would 'welcome and affirm trans and non-binary people in Quaker spaces', adding: 'We must respect the dignity of each person to live with integrity, informed by the truth of their lived experience'. 'This is what love requires of us' Like Stonewall, Mr Parker said the Supreme Court judgement did not have 'the force of law'. 'Whilst the EHRC has recently issued guidance, this is currently only interim guidance. It is non-statutory and therefore does not have the force of law,' the document states. 'We see the Equality Act itself as our primary legal guide when making decisions. 'It is not possible or desirable to monitor who uses our facilities and therefore cannot guarantee any shared space as exclusive for one group of people. We will not label something as a single-sex space if we cannot truthfully guarantee that it will be single-sex.' The minutes of the meeting read: 'The rights and inclusion of people belonging to our communities and using our buildings are not, and should not be, just about toilets. We will continue to work to make our corner of the commonwealth of heaven on Earth a more welcoming and accessible place. This is what love requires of us.' Quakers in Britain also pointed out that at its main building, French House in London, all public facilities were 'trans inclusive'. A spokesman said: 'Toilets labelled with a 'female' sign are intended for cis women, trans women, and non-binary and intersex people for whom this toilet is best aligned with their lived experience. 'Toilets labelled with a 'male' sign are intended for cis men, trans men, and non-binary and intersex people for whom this toilet is best aligned with their lived experience.' 'Upside-down vision of equality' Ms Joyce said: 'British Quakers' announcement that it will continue to allow trans-identifying men to use female facilities is textbook trans activism. It is also in breach of the law. The organisation would be wise to consult legal expertise without delay. 'It is not 'inclusive' to seek a way around labelling toilets and changing rooms as male and female in order to avoid having to monitor whether people comply with common-sense rules that are there to protect everyone. It places the desires of those who seek to transgress boundaries over the needs of the most vulnerable. 'This is an upside-down vision of equality, integrity and truth. By defying the UK's highest court and removing protections for women and girls, Quakers are courting legal risk and demonstrating a lack of care and responsibility, in the pursuit of a fashionable dogma.' A spokesman for Quakers in Britain said: 'Our facilities are legally compliant. Quakers in Britain welcome and affirm trans and non-binary people in all Quaker spaces. Our values of equality and integrity guide every decision we make. 'No trans, non-binary, or intersex Quaker, staff member, or service user will be asked to disclose or prove aspects of their identity in ways that are not asked of cisgender people. We do not seek to monitor who uses our facilities, nor do we believe it is possible or desirable to do so. 'We have self-contained facilities, which function as single sex spaces, available for all our building users. We are committed to taking robust and proactive steps to ensure that all our spaces remain safe, inclusive, and free from harassment or inappropriate behaviour.'
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Survey suggests most people think Supreme Court gender ruling was right
A majority of people think the Supreme Court made the right decision in its recent ruling on biological sex and that the law on women's rights is now clear, according to a survey commissioned by gender-critical campaigners. Polling for the Sex Matters charity also suggested that almost three quarters of those asked felt the right decision had been made by some sporting bodies in banning transgender women from its female competitions. The organisation commissioned YouGov to survey 2,106 adults online in Great Britain earlier this month, following the April ruling. The Supreme Court said the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, following a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland (FWS). Almost two thirds (63%) of those surveyed said they believed the Supreme Court had made the right decision, while just over half (52%) said the ruling has made the law around women's rights and how they apply to transgender people clear. While 13% said the ruling would have a positive impact on them and 6% said it would be negative, more than three quarters of people (77%) said the ruling would make no real difference to them. Following the ruling, English and Scottish governing bodies banned transgender women from the competitive female football game, while they were also banned from competitive women's and girl's cricket in England and Wales. The survey suggested 74% of those surveyed felt these were the right decisions, while 12% disagreed and 14% said they did not know. On the question of toilets, around a fifth of people felt transgender men and women should use whichever facilities they prefer, while around two fifths said unisex toilets should be used. Asked about which toilets transgender people should use, a fifth of those surveyed felt transgender women should use the men's toilets, while 14% said they should use the women's toilets. Some 17% said transgender men should use the men's toilets and the same proportion said they should use the women's toilets. In the wake of the Supreme Court ruling Cabinet Office minister Pat McFadden said the 'logical consequence of the judgment' and new equalities watchdog guidance was that people will have to use toilets, changing rooms and other facilities of their biological sex. But he added that there would not be 'toilet police'. The equalities watchdog, Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), issued interim guidance, saying trans women 'should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in workplaces or public-facing services like shops and hospitals, with the same applying for trans men using men's toilets. A more detailed code of practice is expected from the EHRC to be put forward for ministerial approval by June. Campaign group the Good Law Project (GLP) last week announced it has taken the first step of a legal challenge against the watchdog, claiming the guidance is 'wrong in law'. Some trans rights groups have raised concerns about the practical implications of the Supreme Court ruling. But Susan Smith, from FWS, said the Sex Matters survey results showed that 'the more governments push gender identity ideology, the more failings are revealed which strengthens public opposition'. She said: 'For all the noise created by activists in recent weeks, this polling indicates that most people believe that women's human rights matter and that the court acted correctly in determining that robust, clear definitions were critical to ensuring that lesbians, and gay men were not sacrificed or redefined in law. 'We are pleased that there is evidence of heightened awareness of the case in Scotland in particular, which bears out our belief that the more governments push gender identity ideology, the more failings are revealed which strengthens public opposition.' Maya Forstater, chief executive of Sex Matters said the fact a majority in the survey said they believe the ruling had made the law around women's rights and how they apply to transgender people clear means 'there is no justification for leaders to kick the can down the road by claiming 'confusion' and the need to wait for further guidance before the law can be implemented'. :: Figures in the survey were weighted to be representative of GB adults.
Telegraph
20-05-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
Houses of Parliament refuses to ban trans women from female lavatories
The Houses of Parliament have refused to ban trans women from female lavatories despite the Supreme Court's gender ruling. A spokesman told The Telegraph that the House of Commons would be waiting for guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission before changing its rules. He said they wanted to ensure that all are treated in an 'inclusive manner'. The House of Lords said it would be adopting a similar approach. But the women's rights group Sex Matters said the statement was a 'humiliating blow for women who visit or work in Parliament' and risked allowing biological men to enter women's facilities to 'intimidate' them. And former Labour MP Rosie Duffield warned the Commons that it was not 'above the law'. The Supreme Court ruled in April that legally a trans woman does not count as a woman, and that the word 'sex' in the Equality Act refers to biological sex and not gender identity. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) then put out interim guidance to organisations to underline that in places such as hospitals, shops and restaurants, 'trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women's facilities'. A growing number of public bodies are changing their guidance in light of the judgment. The Football Association, for example, has said trans women would be banned from women's sport. But other organisations, including the NHS, have said they are awaiting guidance from the EHRC. Now the Telegraph can reveal that the House of Commons has also refused to change its guidance. A spokesman said: 'Like many organisations, we are awaiting full guidance from the EHRC on this issue. 'However, in advance of that we are reviewing the facilities that are available on the estate and providing support to colleagues where needed. We are committed to treating all those who work in or visit Parliament with respect, and in an inclusive manner.' 'Humiliating blow for women' Asked why the Commons had decided not to follow the EHRC's interim guidance, the spokesman said there was no comment. A spokesman for the House of Lords said the Upper House was 'taking a similar approach to the House of Commons'. Maya Forstater, chief executive of Sex Matters, said: 'These statements from the UK's Parliament amount to a humiliating blow for women who visit or work in the building. 'If one institution in the country should show leadership in following the rule of law, it's the one where the law is made. 'By refusing to set rules that make clear that all men, however they identify, are excluded from women's toilets, the House of Commons is all but guaranteeing that men who identify as women will continue to enter female-only facilities and intimidate any woman who dares to complain. 'The House of Commons is a workplace for thousands of people, many of them women, not to mention the visitors who come and go in large numbers. The Supreme Court's judgment was perfectly clear, as are the Workplace Health and Safety regulations which require separate-sex toilets for employees. 'There is no excuse for waiting, as the EHRC itself made clear. Each day the House of Commons delays putting its house in order is one more day at risk of being on the wrong side of legal action.' Ms Duffield, who says she was driven out of Labour for her gender-critical views, said: 'The House of Commons, like every other UK institution, workplace, sports facility, place of learning and commercial company, has to comply with the law. 'The EHRC will assist people to understand whether they need to make adjustments according to the ruling, but no organisation is above the law.' Several organisations have threatened to disregard the guidance, and the controversial LGBT charity Stonewall has claimed the law is still not settled. Last week the Good Law Project announced plans to challenge equalities minister Bridget Phillipson over her call for toilets to be restricted by biological sex. Public support overwhelming The row came as a major poll found the British public overwhelmingly supports the banning of trans women from female lavatories and sports. Nearly three quarters (74 per cent) back the Football Association's decision to bar trans women from the female game, according to the YouGov poll of more than 2,000 adults. Almost two thirds (61 per cent) believe trans women – biological men who identify as female – should not be able to use women's lavatories. And more than half believe passports and driving licences should show the person's biological sex rather than their gender identity. The survey, commissioned by Sex Matters, found that 63 per cent believe the court made the right decision while18 per cent believe it was wrong. The rest did not know. Susan Smith of For Women Scotland, which brought the original case which came before the Supreme Court, said: 'For all the noise created by activists in recent weeks, this polling indicates that most people believe that women's human rights matter and that the court acted correctly in determining that robust, clear definitions were critical to ensuring that lesbians and gay men were not sacrificed or redefined in law. 'We are pleased that there is evidence of heightened awareness of the case in Scotland in particular, which bears out our belief that the more governments push gender identity ideology, the more failings are revealed which strengthens public opposition.' In April Sex Matters wrote to the NHS Confederation, which represents trusts, to demand it withdraw guidance which says trans people can use whichever lavatories and changing rooms they wish. They said female NHS staff were being forced to work in a 'degrading and humiliating' environment because hospitals were still using outdated trans guidance.
