Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Equality policies no longer listing “sex” as a protected characteristic

88 replies

GoldHat · 12/11/2019 17:30

Evening all,

Today I noticed in one of the handouts given to me on my course, under the Equality and Diversity statement for the awarding body, the following statement, which listed on what grounds they oppose discrimination:

“The purpose of this policy is to set out our commitment to ensuring we adhere to legislation and regulation requirements. We fully support the principle of equal opportunities and oppose all unlawful or unfair discrimination on the grounds of ability, age, colour, culture, disability, domestic circumstances, employment status, gender, marital/civil partnership status, nationality, political orientation, racial origin, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, social background or any other grounds or status.”

I noticed there was no mention of “sex” so went to legislation.gov.uk ( www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/4) and found the following nine characteristics:

The protected characteristics
The following characteristics are protected characteristics—

  •   age; 

  •   disability; 

  •   gender reassignment; 

  •   marriage and civil partnership; 

  •   pregnancy and maternity; 

  •   race; 

  •   religion or belief; 

  •   sex; 

  •   sexual orientation.

As you can see sex is on there, but the policy of the awarding body does not list sex as a protected characteristic.

I then looked at the Equality and Diversity policy for the centre where I am completing my course and on there, they have the following statement:

“The Equality Act 2010 introduces the term “protected characteristic” to refer to aspects of a person’s identity explicitly protected from discrimination. Nine are identified and they are Race, Disability, Gender, Age, Sexual orientation, Religion and belief, Gender reassignment, Pregnancy / maternity, Marriage / civil partnership. The protected characteristic of marriage and civil partnership is not included in the education duties of the Act.”

Again, sex is not listed as a protected characteristic.

I have then looked at the school policy my child attends and their equality policy says the following:

“XXXXXX School seeks to ensure that no member of the school community or any person through their contact with the school are discriminated by any of the following characteristics:
Age
Disability
Gender Reassignment
Marriage and Civil Partnership
Pregnancy and maternity
Race
Religion or belief
Gender
Sexual orientation
(Taken from ‘Protected Characteristics’ (Equality Act 2010)”

Again they have listed the nine characteristics in the same sequence and word for word as the list on legislation.gov.uk; except when it comes to the 8th characteristic on their list, which is listed as “gender” whereas the Equality Act 2010 uses the word “sex.” So it would appear the change from sex to gender was a deliberate change.

So that’s 3 separate policies of that have replaced the word “sex” with the word “gender” which I have found within the space of 30mins.

I should think there are many other business and companies and schools with similar changes, where the protected characteristic “sex” has been deleted and replaced by the word “gender.”

I must admit seeing them delete the word “sex” and use gender instead is really annoying me, to the point I have contacted them to query their policy and I have been asked to email them my concerns.

Am I right to be annoyed by this? Or are companies and businesses and institutions allowed to do this and refer to sex as gender?

Thoughts please. Thanks.

OP posts:
Creepster · 12/11/2019 20:19

I am unsure if anyone has been able to determine who perpetrated the fraud.

CranberriesChoccy · 12/11/2019 20:16

Well now, just had a look at the company ai work for and lo and behold, sex doesn't get a mention in their policy, but gender does. Big surprise, they were given an award by Stonewall for their equality, diversity, and inclusivity policy.

I'm going to do some digging and send an email. I suspect so many of these cases are down to pressure from Stonewall conflating the 2 terms, probably telling them they mean the same thing and reducing it to gender makes it simpler.

HipTightOnions · 12/11/2019 20:03

This prompted me to look at my employer’s policy. Neither the policy nor the latest equality duty report makes any reference to the protected characteristics.

Original poster
GoldHat · 12/11/2019 19:54

@ScrimshawTheSecond
The trouble is, as has been pointed out, 'Gender' is such a vague term, and different people define it in different ways.

Hence why the legislation does not use the term gender; instead the two words used to provide clarity on this matter are “sex” and “gender reassignment”. Sex cannot be defined in different ways as it is a biological term and therefore is either male or female.

Any confusion of the terms sex and gender reassignment should be seen as deliberate to invoke rights that does not apply to an individual and remove the rights of those the characteristics are there to protect.

@LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD
Let us know what it says.

@WorkingItOutAsIGo
Exactly. By removing the the word sex, they are removing the rights of those who have or are undergoing gender reassignment to identify as the opposite sex, only to then find the sex they have changed to has now lost all meaning.

I forgot to add, the centre I am doing the course with is part of my local council, so it would appear the councils policies are these.

Can I ask all you lovely people on here to also check your children’s school policies as well as the policies of your place of employment and any other services you use as I think these changes are systematic and much more widespread than initially thought.

It is scary to think a persons biological sex is no longer being regarded as a protected characteristic; instead their “gender” is now the protected characteristic.

OP posts:
ScapaFlo · 12/11/2019 19:38

I think it's worth repeating that the Equality Act 2010 is an Act of Parliament and organisations are not allowed to rewrite Acts of Parliament to pick and choose which bits of the law they wish to adhere to. No, it hasn't been updated to reflect 'gender' or 'gender identity'. It's still the EA 2010 as written in 2010, not 2019!

Can you imagine an organisation getting away with changing the speed limit or the tax laws to suit themselves? It's a nonsense.

RedToothBrush · 12/11/2019 19:30

Every form I have with gender on not sex, I correct it.

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD · 12/11/2019 19:06

I must check what DSs school says...

CranberriesChoccy · 12/11/2019 19:05

Pleased to see my local council has correctly included sex in their categories that have protected status. Last amended July 2019, so fairly recent. I may have a look from time to time to make sure it doesn't change. Thanks for putting a spotlight on this, it's important.

Sunkisses · 12/11/2019 18:54

Yes, this has been a big campaign by Woman's Place UK (WPUK). They asked people to check their local authority's website (and other bodies) and get them to change it back to the correct LEGAL protected characteristic of SEX.

womansplaceuk.org/sex-is-a-protected-characteristic/

womansplaceuk.org/grassroots-womens-pressure-forces-local-authorities-to-comply-with-the-law-over-sex-and-gender/

Justhadathought · 12/11/2019 18:52

I think we need a big campaign about this called Sex not Gender

Agree.....

Creepster · 12/11/2019 18:49

Fraudulent copies of the EA2010 protected characteristics were distributed by parties unknown in the past few years.
Many councils and organizations have changed back to the correct list of protected characteristics when they were advised of their error.

Trying to cause councils, organizations, and businesses to discriminate against women based on incorrect information about the EA2010 has been widespread. It is a shameful thing to have done.

WorkingItOutAsIGo · 12/11/2019 18:37

The thing is just to challenge it each and every time you see it. Every time I have it has led to change.

It’s interesting because by doing it they are actually not just removing our rights, but also those who have the characteristic of gender reassignment. So hurting the people they are trying to help...

Original poster
GoldHat · 12/11/2019 18:30

Thank you everyone. Glad to see I’m not getting unnecessarily annoyed.

@CeridwenTheWitch
I didn’t know Stonewall we’re trying to get sex removed as a protected characteristic. It’s outrageous how far they are willing to go to achieve their selfish aims.

I would definitely back any such campaign for to make it clear that sex is not gender. Sex is either Male or female and is based on biological factors. Gender could anything a person wants it to be.

@TheShoesa
TBH, I think the term sex has been intentionally changed to gender so as to give those who self identify as something that differs to their biological sex, the same rights as those afforded to a person who has certain rights due to their biological sex.

@Coldwatershock
Thanks. I need a sort of template so I can get my point across well.

What I’m finding hard to accept is why these companies think it is perfectly acceptable to change the characteristics from those listed clearly within legislation. Gender shouldn’t even be listed as a protected characteristic in their policies, since gender is a social construct or self identity whereas sex is a biological factor.

Surely what they are doing is in breach of the law?

I mean, my child’s school policy lists the 9 characteristics where on their list gender has replaced sex, then says immediately after the list: “ Taken from ‘Protected Characteristics’ (Equality Act 2010)”
Are they being serious?? Seriously peed of at that.

OP posts:
ScrimshawTheSecond · 12/11/2019 18:30

we need a big campaign about this called Sex not Gender

Yes. The trouble is, as has been pointed out, 'Gender' is such a vague term, and different people define it in different ways. Is there a governmental definition?

Uncompromisingwoman · 12/11/2019 18:21

The EHRC are one of the government organisations that have been totally regulatory captured. Their guidelines for schools are truly awful in terms of safeguarding and the safety and welfare of girls. But they don't give a fuck.

hopelesssuitcase · 12/11/2019 18:18

Well I once had to ask the EHRC to change a document to say sex instead of gender (referring to equality act) so there isn't much hope really.
(they did change it - but imagine that they needed Joe Bloggs to tell them they'd made that mistake in the first place).

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD · 12/11/2019 18:16

Uhuh... corporate.marksandspencer.com/contact/headquarters

Uncompromisingwoman · 12/11/2019 18:12

M & S removing sex from the protected characteristics? Completely predictable.

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD · 12/11/2019 18:12

Interesting. I wonder if shareholders can request topics for the agm?

TimeLady · 12/11/2019 18:12

Ooops sorry, wrong thread

TimeLady · 12/11/2019 18:11

Ditto in this document too

corporate.marksandspencer.com/documents/plan-a-our-approach/mns-people-principles.pdf

Treating everyone equally regardless of age, gender, gender reassignment, colour, ethnic or national origin, disability, hours of work, nationality, religion or belief, marital or civil partner status, disfigurement, political opinions or sexual orientation. We treat all colleagues with dignity and respect and expect colleagues to treat each other and our customers in the same way.

Uncompromisingwoman · 12/11/2019 18:10

It's incorrect and we need to challenge it. Everywhere. If an organisation or individual can't get the basic law correct, especially when purporting to train others then it calls into question whether the rest of their work is incorrect, lies or discriminatory.
It ought to be really serious to deliberately mislead people about the law in this way. Although as it often comes from the very powerful (looking at the BBC and Stonewall as prime examples) it will be down to those without the £££ to challenge it.

FemaleAndLearning · 12/11/2019 18:08

Yes write to them and tell them to update their policies. I've done this several times. It started with s hook forms which led to school policy which led to local council. They all deleted sex. It is not acceptable, so yes you should be annoyed and you are right to complain. It is a slow chip, chip to get people to accept that gender identity should replace sex.

TimeLady · 12/11/2019 18:07

I pointed this out to my Borough and County Councils and I'm pleased to say the wording in their Equality policies was changed, so it's worth doing.

Swipe left for the next trending thread