Government response to the petition...

[LazyTuesdayAfternoon]

I don't know if there's a thread about this already, sorry if I've missed it.

What do people make of the response?

It seems quite proportionate to me but, as always, I guess the devil will be in the detail...

Providers may exclude trans people from facilities of the sex they identify with, provided it is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.

At least it's clear in the way it describes trans people as identifying with a sex, not somehow becoming that sex or fudging with gender.

I am not in a position to do this, I would help, is someone be up for leading a crowdfund to take Marks & Spencer and Topshop along with those that offered the training, to court for the EA2010 sex segregation, putting the dignity, privacy and safeguarding of women and girls at risk?

*fudging with gender - fudging by using the word gender instead of sex.

I am not in a position to do this, I would help, is someone be up for leading a crowdfund to take Marks & Spencer and Topshop along with those that offered the training, to court for the EA2010 sex segregation, putting the dignity, privacy and safeguarding of women and girls at risk?

I wouldn't have the legal skills / knowledge to take the initiative, but I would help in whatever way I can with some sort of campaign addressing this.

"At least it's clear in the way it describes trans people as identifying with a sex, not somehow becoming that sex or fudging with gender."

Unless they have a GRC. And the organisation cannot ask if people have a GRC. It's unworkable - nor are the exceptions anywhere near as sound as the Government is suggesting. I know lawyers representing trans people often bring cases under the protected characteristic of disability and there are no exemptions so exclusion would be unlawful.

The Equality Act was rushed through at the end of a Parliamentary session. It has a lot of oddities.

But even if not, the least discriminatory response, and therefore the one probably required by law, would be to make the space unisex. If that happens I, and may Y other women like me, are going to be very cross with any feminists whose campaigning brings that about.

Hmmm. I don't want unisex space either.

M&S lose either way if it goes to court, the public will be aware of M&S breaking the law, men will not be happy as per the Hampstead pond invasion, women will not be happy so they will potentially lose a proportion of customer from 99% of the population over this issue. Win or lose, M&S lose if they don't change back the policy to sex segregation.

Government have confirmed no change to single sex exemptions. Sounds positive for women but its not.

Even though single sex exemptions will exist on paper self ID of sex would make them UNUSABLE. Getting a GRC gives you a new birth certificate AND really strong privacy protections. It will be impossible for a service provider to prove someone IS trans. On paper ALL their official documentation will match that of a natal female. We cant exclude on the basis of trans if we can’t confirm someone IS TRANS.

This is a hugely important issue we must all talk about. If the sex on a birth certificate can be changed on demand then legal sex is no longer linked to biology so the protected characteristic of sex in Equality law becomes meaningless.

Think about it, when legal sex is not based on someone’s actual sex then the legal concept of sex based rights (that underpin the whole of women’s rights) becomes a nonsense. If we allow a birth certificate to become legal fiction, sex based rights and sexism becomes undefinable.

Women must not accept this. Laws on paper are worth if they can’t be USED in real life.

If that happens I, and may Y other women like me, are going to be very cross with any feminists whose campaigning brings that about

This sounds rather threatening. Have I misunderstood?

If that happens I, and may Y other women like me, are going to be very cross with any feminists whose campaigning brings that about

What are you going to do? #punchaterf?

And you wonder why women want sex-segregated private spaces - when all the activism is a QED repeated ad nauseam.

If we allow a birth certificate to become legal fiction, sex based rights and sexism becomes undefinable. Doesn't the current GRC does this? I don't think we can do anything about that.

Is the next campaign to stop further legal fiction appearing on a birth certificate?

If that happens I, and may Y other women like me, are going to be very cross with any feminists whose campaigning brings that about

This appears rather threatening to me, I think we need clarity here.

This is a hugely important issue we must all talk about. If the sex on a birth certificate can be changed on demand then legal sex is no longer linked to biology so the protected characteristic of sex in Equality law becomes meaningless.

This seems like the issue in USA where legal action on behalf of schoolchildren to challenge policies in schools failed as they were not alble to define 'sex' or 'opposite sex' in federal court. It may now go to The Supreme Court to define:
www.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/boyertown-transgender-bathroom-lgbtq-gender-identiy-philadelphia-suburbs-20180524.html

discussed in recent thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3266198-No-True-Transwoman-transadvocates-question-whether-TW-is-genuine-after-said-TW-sexually-harasses-women-in-homeless-shelter

It includes the need to provide a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and a second medical report of any treatment, proof of having lived for at least two years in their acquired gender, the approval of their spouse if married, as well as the fee to apply, and any associated costs with obtaining supporting evidence. Furthermore, trans people are already able to more easily change their name and gender in their passport and driving license. Streamlining the process of changing their legal gender on their birth certificate, so that they are recognised legally in their acquired gender, would help trans people to have all their identity documents match.

This is the bit that makes the sex protections in the EA meaningless.

If transgender identified males change their sex designation on their DL and passport how can any one legally deny them access to sex segregated spaces? They cannot.
That is the provision that has caused businesses to go unisex. They are afraid of discrimination lawsuits from males with ID that states they are female.

The bit about it being onerous to have to get a diagnosis of a medical condition to get treatment for a "medical condition" is absurd.

Unless they have a GRC. And the organisation cannot ask if people have a GRC. It's unworkable - nor are the exceptions anywhere near as sound as the Government is suggesting. I know lawyers representing trans people often bring cases under the protected characteristic of disability and there are no exemptions so exclusion would be unlawful.

Seems like the GRA was a pretty terrible act all round then.

Yes they fear lawsuits from males who identify as the opposite sex.

What about law suits from men and women who are their sex, how many of us could bring a class action against these businesses and public services?

But even if not, the least discriminatory response, and therefore the one probably required by law, would be to make the space unisex. If that happens I, and may Y other women like me, are going to be very cross with any feminists whose campaigning brings that about.

Too late. It is already happening.
How bizarre for you to blame Feminists retroactively for writing law that makes it possible for transgender identified males to change the sex designation on their DL and birth certificate.

We are going to have to fight everything. Some test cases eg M&S would be good.
The response could have been worse though.
I, too, would love to know what 'cross' means in this context.

A class action from Girl guides families and maybe pick families in a girls school to test the law?

The Equality Act is UK wide legislation from Westminster so the Scottish Government can’t play with it.

Unless they have a GRC. And the organisation cannot ask if people have a GRC. It's unworkable - nor are the exceptions anywhere near as sound as the Government is suggesting.

I guess, in that case, they'll remain single sex and you'll have to campaign for your own 3rd trans space.

Lots to be really positive about in this response. Miles away from the Miller report and a long long way from where the government was last Autumn. The response gets that there are two sides and women's rights matter and is focusing on a way to find a solution. They are clearly listening. Well done and thank you to all the brilliant women working on this. Everyone should be giving themselves a huge pat on the back here, this is a major shift politically.

Having said all that, I totally agree strengthening how the EA exemptions are used in practice are utterly key. One of WPUK's demands focus on this, and manfriday are doing a great job of highlighting how it's already encroaching on women's rights in practice.

This last paragraph of the response made me feel really positive. If this is how the terms of the debate are framed, we can get somewhere really positive with it, I'm sure:
The Government is committed to improving the position of women and girls, and supports their rights, safety, privacy and dignity. We are also committed to improving the position of trans people and supporting their rights. We are confident that advancing the rights of trans people does not have to compromise women’s rights, and will work with all groups to ensure this.

Disability law works on the premise of "reasonable adjustment". There are no "exclusions" but people can be excluded because if it is not considered "reasonable" to force women to share female only facilities and services with biological males you will lose the case. HTH.

Plus many trans people don't have a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

We need a cultural shift to respecting the importance of women only space. That is clear. But it's not unachievable, particularly with safeguarding being an issue and the media and public having their say and putting pressure on institutions.

I guess, in that case, they'll remain single sex and you'll have to campaign for your own 3rd trans space.

Trans activists can fight for themselves, fight the service providers rather than women and girls, using models women and people with disabilities successfully campaigned for trans specialist services.

I guess, in that case, they'll remain single sex and you'll have to campaign for your own 3rd trans space.

One thing is for sure, once upon a time I would have stood with Trans people to fight for their own spaces - no more!