Twitter thread: no impact assessments carried out for school guidance in Scotland

[SunsetBeetch]

Well this is concerning, although probably not surprising:

Government funded school guidance has been issued across Scotland, endorsed by Children's Commissioner, charities, LA's etc which discards the need for single sex spaces/sports t.co/ye3ekBGSEi

No Equality Impact Assessments were carried out, neither by the organisations who compiled the guidance nor the Local Authorities who have distributed it amongst their schools.

Surely gender and gender id are both protected characteristics so it would need to be done. I think nothing has been done here as sex is no longer a protected characteristic, so no requirement
where does this idea come from? I'm in scotland and afaik no changes have been made to the protected characteristics in the equality act.
If some could advise I'd be grateful, it's important I know!

SardineReturns The Equality Act 2010 is legislation that applies across the UK. Despite the separate legal system in Scotland, it cannot be changed by the Scottish Government.

From the text of the act:

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. 

None of the outstanding legislative changes are to this part of the act. Gender is not a protected characteristic.

But trans orgs are advising authorities using a skewed interpretation of the EA, effectively pre-empting a change to self-id by circumventing the protected characteristic of sex. So we have to counter this misinformation.

Charlie that is reassuring

Haven't been able to read this whole thread but just in relation to the OP and the last cpl posts:

Gender reassignment and sex are protected characteristics, not gender identity and gender. In fact nowhere in equality laws at UK or EU level is gender a protected characteristic.

Also just to reassure people here, a few of us have set up a campaign group and we are working on addressing all this and will be able to share more some time in the next few months and we will of course keep Mumsnet posted.

We will be addressing the schools guidance, the GRA etc, looking at where there have been failures in upholding the rights of women and girls, and making recommendations/demands. We are also carrying out our own research.

We obviously want what we do to have a strong a basis as possible, so it is a lot of work, but there's now four of us working on this and if anyone has anything they think might be useful please do DM.

TAs say that "gender reassignment" is one of the protected characteristics in the EA- where are they getting this from? Is that in the EA at all?

Btw - I believe they will try to change the EA so that gender identity trumps sex. Because that is what they want.

*and that gender reassignment can merely be the 'intention' to transition - so sex hormones and surgery not necessary to be protected by the act. Which is pretty much self ID already, isn't it?

where does this idea come from?

Possibly because of this.

Also because Stonewall are busy delivering equality & diversity training spreading lies.

ToeToToe, 'gender reassignment' is one of the protected characteristics. TRAs want that changed to 'gender identity'. They also want 'sex' changed to 'gender'.

They are busily telling people this is already the case.

Gender reassignment is the protected characteristic and it basically means anyone who identifies as trans, but if you have a GRC you can change your birth certificate to the opposite sex, so in the case of a transwoman if you have that then you are legally female, not male, except for in relation to the exemptions that apply to all transwomen, including those with a GRC. That's what the whole AWS thing has been about, i.e. that transwomen without a GRC are still legally male, and yet the Labour party are allowing them into to AWS. The legal challenge to AWS was never in relation to transwomen with a GRC.

Self ID as a principle is more and more how this is all functioning as we have seen with everything from Labour AWS to refuges. This is why we need to update the Equality Act in order to secure solid sex based protections. But also we need to challenge the language changes from sex to gender in regards to our protected characteristics, it's another way of trying to erase our rights...

leyat would police scotland confirming they document people/arrest (& i'm assuming crime) according to their self declared gender be up your street?

And many organisations are also now referring to a protected characteristic of gender (which does not exist as per Eq Act 2010) and make no mention of the protected characteristic of sex.

These organisation include The Equality and Human Rights Commission

would police scotland confirming they document people/arrest (& i'm assuming crime) according to their self declared gender be up your street

I'd be interested to know this. I did ask (tweet) but had no reply

Great observation LemonJello

And yet during the consultation for the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Bill -

The EHRC said that ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ are not synonymous terms, and that ‘gender’ is not a protected characteristic.

On the substantive differences between sexual harrassment of girls and boys:
twitter.com/Commonswomequ/status/1003667705415831552

the video is evidence given to Women's & Equalities committee by @ VeraJ (Twitter)
www.womenonporn.org

There are important recent findings on sexual assault & harrassment of girls in school & I think this is really relevent.

leyat
Thats good to hear. Thank you for doing this.

Lemonjello

I can't believe what I just read in your post wrt that info from the equalities commission!

Can I ask, d'you think it's deliberate or incompetence?

I've been asking myself that question about a lot of things recently and whatever the answer is it's

Lemonjello, where is that from specifically - surely we could write to them to point out their mistake? It could be as simple as a mistake, I'd like to hope...
Thanks to all for the reassuring info re the equality act.

It’s difficult to know Terry. I think that in general people are squeamish about the word sex and think that sex and gender are synonymous.

However, I don’t think that’s an adequate explanation when the organisation in question is tasked with providing guidance about the law- they should be using the correct legal terminology and the fact they are not is very odd.

Pencils that is very interesting. I will have a read through that link you posted.

R0wantrees I quite agree re the importance of sexual assault and harrasent, I don’t suppose in all your fabulous links database, you have anything about this but specifically related to Scotland?

uptheduffy it is from the document Assessing impact and the Public
Sector Equality Duty A guide for public authorities in Scotland. It’s on page 6.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/6.assessing_impact-_formatted_0.pdf

Yes definitely we should complain, particularly in light of pencils quote above, where they recognise the difference between sex and gender.

If there are not the same thing then they are misrepresenting the Equality Act 2010 in their guidance by removing sex as a protected characteristic and including something which is not a defined protected characteristic in law. They are misrepresenting the law basically. IANAL but that seems...negligent.

Here’s a handy online form to make your complaint.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/contact-us/general-enquiries-and-information

Thanks Lemonjello

Yes, it's not really good enough coming from those who should absolutely know the difference between sex and gender.

I deffo think I'll be writing to them regarding this mistake.

You're way ahead of me Lemonjello, thank you!

Done. Lets wait and see how they respond.

This is what I sent

Dear Madam/ Sir

I am writing to express concern at something I read in your document “Assessing impact and the Public Sector Equality Duty A guide for public authorities in Scotland”.

On page 6 of the guide, you have neglected to include he protected characteristic of sex. Instead you have included ‘gender’ which is not a protected characteristic.

I would like an explanation as to why an organisation tasked with the promotion and enforcement of the Equality Act 2010, has misrepresented it in such a way.

In your own words, from your consultation response to the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Bill, you say “...’sex’ and ‘gender’ are not synonymous terms” and that “...’gender’ is not a protected characteristic.”

Why then, would you misrepresent the law and state that it is, in your guide to the public sector equality duty?