Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

EHRC single sex guidance out

471 replies

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 04/04/2022 11:19

Here: www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/separate-and-single-sex-service-providers-guide-equality-act-sex-and-gender

I'm off to read it...

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
Truthlikeness · 04/04/2022 13:25

@Lovelyricepudding

While I welcome any clarification of how to apply the law in practice, I am not sure that this goes far enough in protecting single sex spaces - as it states that it might be unlawful to exclude a TW who is presenting in the gender opposite to their sex from that opposite sex space/service

I agree

Me too - as female spaces exist so women don't have to share spaces with men and the guidance is clear than males cannot become the female sex, why is the onus not on orgs to carry out an impact assessment if they want to include transwomen. It seems backwards to me.
Datun · 04/04/2022 13:24

Yes, I agree there is still some confusion.

All it takes is people well versed in how the loopholes get exploited (like we are) to see how these things are unworkable.

Also, again, how can you exclude a transwoman, if they have a female birth certificate?

How do you actually do it?

Also (my bold)

"Because the operation of the Equality Act gender reassignment exceptions does not rely on possession, or not, of a Gender Recognition Certificate, any reform of the Gender Recognition Act will not erode the special status of services provided separately for men and women, or for men or women only, as defined by the Equality Act 2010, such as domestic abuse refuges, health services and clubs."

I haven't read it all, are they planning on reforming the gender recognition act?

OvaHere · 04/04/2022 13:03

@Lovelyricepudding

Ladies hairdresser.

Ha, most hairdressers around here seem to cut men's hair too. It is the men''s barbers that exclude women.

Yes I tend to find that is the case too. Except for maybe mobile hairdressing. Women that work from clients homes have good reason to offer services to only one sex.

If we look to Canada though it's often these women that are targeted for discrimination cases.

LangClegsInSpace · 04/04/2022 13:03

It does not call for individual "case-by-case" assessment.

This is the biggie!

More than anything else, 'case by case' in the stat code has made the exceptions unworkable.

JoodyBlue · 04/04/2022 13:01

@OvaHere I agree with you.

StellaAndCrow · 04/04/2022 13:00

@Lovelyricepudding

Jamie Wallis MP may be trans but is presenting as male gender so...???
Yes, that's what I was thinking. Seems to allow for the bearded men who like to say that they're lesbians now.
Lovelyricepudding · 04/04/2022 12:59

Ladies hairdresser.

Ha, most hairdressers around here seem to cut men's hair too. It is the men''s barbers that exclude women.

OvaHere · 04/04/2022 12:55

@JoodyBlue

Has any one found a clear description of what a "legitimate aim" is. Or is this a generalised term that is arguable in court, if not specifically described in the examples given in the guideance? With regard to the idea of enforcement. Up until very recently everyone assumed single sex spaces were without controversy. Society ran fine without any enforcement. I don't think the idea of enforcement has any relevance. It is guideance on how we agree to all live together well. A social contract.
It's a difficult one because even female spaces that don't involve nudity, trauma or physical contact are still useful due to how many men behave (whether deliberately or otherwise).

So if someone wants to set up a women's book group at the library they are probably doing so because a number of women feel more comfortable with that and men have a known tendency to dominate speaking time, even if they don't mean to.

So I think that example is a legitimate aim for that group to be single sex but I suspect the EHRC might not agree if a male whose identity was as a TW wanted to join.

Unless perhaps the library could prove that many women would leave the group or not join in the first place. As with other situations it's almost impossible to prove how many women self exclude from things.

tabbycatstripy · 04/04/2022 12:54

It might be, yes.

sashh · 04/04/2022 12:52

@Lovelyricepudding

When might it be proportionate to exclude men but not transwomen? Surely if it is fine to let transwomen in then there is no reason to exclude other men?
Ladies hairdresser.
JoodyBlue · 04/04/2022 12:51

@tabbycatstripy

Allison Bailey is concerned that there is a reliance on surveys and asking women for their objections before providing single sex services.

I agree with others that we need to go further than this guidance and there needs to be an obligation to consider whether the needs of specific groups have been met by provision, but it is definitely a step in the right direction.

I agree - a step in the right direction. Perhaps it goes as far as it can for now, clarifying the law, rather than changing it which requires more stamina.
Lovelyricepudding · 04/04/2022 12:50

I agree with others that we need to go further than this guidance and there needs to be an obligation to consider whether the needs of specific groups have been met by provision, but it is definitely a step in the right direction.

For public sector organisations sureky this is covered by their Public Sector Equality Duty?

Lovelyricepudding · 04/04/2022 12:48

I suppose the main legitimate aim would be to enable women to access a service, or to have the same access as men.

tabbycatstripy · 04/04/2022 12:46

Allison Bailey is concerned that there is a reliance on surveys and asking women for their objections before providing single sex services.

I agree with others that we need to go further than this guidance and there needs to be an obligation to consider whether the needs of specific groups have been met by provision, but it is definitely a step in the right direction.

Leafstamp · 04/04/2022 12:46

It seems to me like this all just illustrates the nonsense that is 'trans'.

Men can't be women and vice versa, gender reassignment should not be a protected characteristic in the EA2010 and there should be no such thing as Gender Recognition certificates.

By all means people can believe in gendered souls, wear whatever clothes they like and call themselves by whatever name, and there should be something in EA to protect people from discrimination based on the way they present, but to use the word gender in relation to this just causes problems.

JoodyBlue · 04/04/2022 12:45

Has any one found a clear description of what a "legitimate aim" is. Or is this a generalised term that is arguable in court, if not specifically described in the examples given in the guideance? With regard to the idea of enforcement. Up until very recently everyone assumed single sex spaces were without controversy. Society ran fine without any enforcement. I don't think the idea of enforcement has any relevance. It is guideance on how we agree to all live together well. A social contract.

MrsJorahMormont · 04/04/2022 12:41

I still think men will be using women's toilets etc. It needed to be clearer on the bar set.

Lovelyricepudding · 04/04/2022 12:40

They seem to have drawn a distinction between being trans (don't assume, nothing to do with presentation) and being trans and presenting as a gender? So the decision to exclude is not based on if they are trans but rather how a trans person presents?

rogdmum · 04/04/2022 12:38

@tabbycatstripy

‘However, the EHRC hasn’t said who would be included within their use of that term.’

Not sure it matters. Service providers can use the single sex exceptions and, if needed, also use the gender reassignment exceptions, so people of the sex you are excluding cannot access the service by invoking that protected characteristic.

I’m worried about definition creep. If the EHRC start using “trans” as the term to determine whether or not a person is protected via gender reassignment, that is going beyond TW/TM and potentially includes other gender identities, eg NB which are also often loosely held under the trans umbrella. The EHRC have previously said (for NB) that this needs clarification through legislation or the courts, so I’m concerned that they are themselves, potentially expanding who comes under gender reassignment. I think it would have been better for them to be more precise.
littlbrowndog · 04/04/2022 12:32

@bellinisurge

Good examples. Hope those evil sods at Edinburgh Rape Crisis read it.
Yep
OldCrone · 04/04/2022 12:32

@Lovelyricepudding

Jamie Wallis MP may be trans but is presenting as male gender so...???
Is he presenting as male gender? Do they define what the difference is between 'presenting as male gender' and 'presenting as female gender'? Is there a list of appropriate clothing and hairstyles for each category?
Whatsnewpussyhat · 04/04/2022 12:30

@Signalbox

The issue that still remains is that service providers will still be too shit scared to actually make use of the exceptions because of the narcissistic rage they will experience if they dare!
Yep, all those workplaces that have actively fucked over their female staff by making their toilets 'gender neutral' aren't going to simply change them back.
Lovelyricepudding · 04/04/2022 12:29

Jamie Wallis MP may be trans but is presenting as male gender so...???

OvaHere · 04/04/2022 12:28

Doesn't that contradict this part?

It appears to, yes.

stargirl1701 · 04/04/2022 12:25

What about Girlguiding?