If you want to understand where I'm coming from on proposed changes to sex discrimination laws, this is well written and easy to follow:
"The law is very shortly, and most likely, going to change, in such a way as to entirely replace the protected category of sex with the category of self-defined gender identity. Provisions for exceptions which currently exist (the right to female only services such as rape crisis centres etc) will likely be abolished completely.
This effectively abolishes the rights of the entire female sex to be recognised as such, replacing those rights with an ill-defined and circular concept that allows self-definition to be the only measure of what woman means.
Woman effectively has no definition and no protection either; it becomes a label devoid of content.
Equality Law appears to be about to overstep its remit remarkably - from its origin as a tool designed to recognise clearly defined categories of oppressed people and provide them with protections from discrimination - into a tool that legally dismantles and refuses to recognise an existing clearly defined category, biological sex.
Sex and gender are decidedly not the same thing. However references to gender, an intangible belief system, will soon supercede sex entirely, and women will be compelled by law to declare that it is their "deeply held belief regarding their identity" that is discriminated against if they are to claim protections.
A woman who isn't hired for a role because she is recognised to be a female of childbearing age will have no recourse if that employer can demonstrate that he hires other 'women' (who could be biologically male but not recognised as distinguishable from females any longer, since sex is no longer a protected measure).
Female quotas designed to address the disproportionate under-representation of the female sex will be filled by those who are of the male sex, but have declared the requisite gender identity.
The axis of oppression is always sex, but no "gender" discrimination has occurred.
To be a member of a sex class which makes up half the population and yet to find oneself represented by more of the male sex under a banner that "this is what women are" allows a grotesque masking of an entirely visible inequality.
Further, it will not be permissible for biological females to demand same sex accommodations, ever, in any circumstance.
I do not agree that it is the human right of an individual to reassign their gender. I do believe it is their right to live and express themselves as they choose, enter into any consenting adult relationship they see fit, and not face discrimination for this.
But if asserting the right to claim membership of a sex to which one categorically does not belong comes at the expense of the original members of that sex being forced to cede their own rights to definition, then, no, it is not a human right. It should never be a human right to force people to falsely identify themselves for the benefit of another."