Thread by @MForstater

This is an absolute failure of the equality industry...

Does section 7 of the Equality Act 2010 give some males the right to access spaces where women and girls expect bodily privacy without their consent?

Or does it not?

Professor Alex Sharpe, writing in Modern Law Review thinks it does

Sharpe relies on the case of Croft v Royal Mail [2003]

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…

This is what the judgment in Croft says

a-question-of-consent.net/2020/08/16/cro…

But Sharpe is right, the judges did suggest that women at work could give implicit consent through social acceptance, and that a male colleague could earn this through changing their appearance and demeanour.

They didn't hear from any of the claimant's female colleagues in court.

Its probably safe to say that the judges, 20 years before #metoo hadn't thought much about the power relations of a women at work faced with a male colleague who doesn't want to hear "no", and the pressure on women not to make a fuss if their boundaries are overstepped

Now we understand consent better, but the pressure on women to comply is even stronger.

Can you say no to sharing an intimate space with a male if this means social ostracisation and risk to your job?

If both your boss and your union rep will call you a bigot?

The words by which we might talk about this, even in general terms are deemed offensive

And this pressure is being imposed not just at work but on girls in school, women in hospital, and in prisons and mental health wards.

You shouldnt have to read legal judgments to try to work out if some males (which ones?) have a right to access spaces where women & girls are undressing

The equality orgs should have told us clearly

And the doctors advising the men wanting access should have told them clearly

....."Consent" obtained under duress is not consent.

Instead the equality organisations coerce, shame and bully women and girls who try to say no.