Does your Local Authority Equality Policy exclude sex as a protected characteristic?

[bananaistheanswer]

Inspired by Jean Hatchet's posts on twitter, I checked mine and colour me shocked, it's been excluded.

Attached below is the list from the EA2010 with my LA's interpretation alongside - note the wording We believe our responsibility for equality is wider than those areas covered by the Equality Act 2010

So removing sex from the list of protected characteristics widens the scope of the EA2010?

So what's your LA equality policy like?

I hope you are copying in your MP, counsellor, chair of council and chief exec

Do please. They are legally correct. They can spread the word.

Do please. They are legally correct. They can spread the word.

What has However it is usually not possible to determine sex until after puberty and sexual maturity got to do with legal correctness.

It is batshitness.

Is that someone from Falkirk council, who thinks sex isn’t determined until after puberty?

I can’t actually bear that level of stupidity. It’s too much.

Tempting to send them a GCSE biology book isn't it?

Me either lemonjelllo
Its the consequences of it that worry me though.

Was it Falkirk? I really want to write to them and suggest some training is needed for that staff member. But I don’t think you get training that basic outside of primary school.

That is your personal definition
No its a scientific fact.

@bowlofbabelfish have you seen this woke nonsense from Falkirk council?

Lemon
Iv pmd you.

@Floeer

Have you heard back from Essex County Council?

I have noticed today that they have 'updated' their website removing the protected characteristics page totally. It was missing sex, marriage & civil partnership and pregnancy & maternity lumping them together in a group called gender equality with a link to EHRC page about sex discrimination.

The Equality & Diversity page is still listing the protected characteristics as age, gender, religion, sexual orientation, disability & race.

Off to email again.

Yes absolutely if the EHRC has got it wrong then the EHRC must also correct itself.

I reckon all this bullshit is targeted transactivism like Sarah Brown's. Why would local councils have done this otherwise?

Crayfishparty

No I haven't yet! And I emailed chasing again a day ago! Even linking them to that page!

Did get a letter from MP though so maybe I'll ask him to put pressure on ECC?

Local Cllrs have all responded tbf, saying they are looking into it and will let me know the outcome...

Still waiting for replies from local Primary Schools and Ofsted too.

I reckon all this bullshit is targeted transactivism like Sarah Brown's.

I think Pickled Balls has had a hand in far more than Cambridge's policies.

There has been intense specific activism at strategic targets, pulling on those activists influence and resources as males and deliberately making use of misogynist and antifeminist tropes and bias. This has been done quietly with no public or stakeholder consultations.

Once those few strategic targets have been won, it's probably been pretty easy to nudge other LAs and organisations to follow along like sheep just by pointing at the TA's self serving and illegal or ultra vires policies by calling them 'progressive' and 'up to date' while crying suicide dbad publicity through the other side of their mouths.

In my experience at different types of organisation, policies are usually written by nameless people who don't have to implement them and don't have real understanding of the practicality of how their policies will be implemented. It's just junk on paper, literally disparagingly referred to as "paperwork", that few understand and most never bother to read through. Organisations routinely copy someone else's policies rather than have to spend resources creating their own, then if something goes wrong they can lay the blame at the door of whoever they copied from!

Liverpool CC have just agreed to 'the suggested text change'. I'll be checking across the website, as from the response i'm not sure they quite get it.

Theinconstantgardener
However it is usually not possible to determine sex until after puberty and sexual maturity
I think they're refering to intersex children, obviously had a talk from Gires or someone and got it completely wrapped round their necks. I'd be tempted to tell them you intend to share with local paper.

Someone in a professional capacity actually resppnded that sex is determined at puberty? Jesus.....

To my interpretation, 'sex' includes those whose sex is difficult to determine. It is not a binary. If you are intersex and experience health complications due to that physicality, you should have protection- based on your sex as intersex. Why would anyone fight the inclusion of sex? Everyone has it. A trans man has a sex and may still need protection based on that, and also on his gender in a separate way. To include sex as a separate characteristic isn't a blow against trans people . It's protecting everyone.

Intersex people don't not have a sex. They have a sex, it's male or female. It's not in between. Secondary characteristics make that difficult to determine but it's not like they are not any sex, or are a third sex I learned this from links on mumsnet

Intersex people are the only group who have a "sex assigned at birth" (by a professional expert). Everyone else has a sex observed at birth.

KreigersClone
Someone in a professional capacity actually responded that sex is determined at puberty? Jesus
I know. The level of ignorance is astounding and frightening. Im supposed to be away on a relaxing weekend just now but as soon as im home im going to compose a reply to them. Too angry atm.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3281917-RadFemLawyer-thread-on-sex-and-gender-and-why-public-authorities-are-legally-misguided-to-use-gender-instead-of-sex-and-or-to-conflate-the-two-terms?

What do you think of that interpretation of sex/gender in law?

I emailed back my LA after their reply as posted on previous page. This what I wrote with some helpful hints from posters on here
Thank you for your reply dated to my letter of 11th June. There are a number of points in this response made which I find concerning.
Firstly I have no issue with the report itself – just the list of protected characteristics. I note in fact that on page 10 section 6.15, sex is listed on its own as a protected characteristic. This makes the list on page 2 even more incongruous.

In your reply, as you correctly state, sex is biological and gender is a social construct. However Sex is determined at conception, not after puberty as is claimed in your reply. (‘However it is usually not possible to determine sex until after puberty and sexual maturity’) It is the sperm that either carries an X or Y chromosome that then creates a female or male zygote. It is not possible for humans to change their sex or only have an X or Y chromosome develop after puberty. Sex is created at conception and observed at birth. It is a biological fact. Therefore I’m not sure what you mean by people ‘whose sex is difficult to determine’ (Apart from a very tiny proportion of people born intersex of course) I am also concerned that the terms sex and gender have been confused in your reply. This is particularly disconcerting, coming as it does, from the council’s policy office.

To reiterate- sex and gender are not the same and I am fully in agreement with you that ‘all people must feel safe and be welcome and able to participate in community life.’ However by putting sex and gender together in the list of protected characteristics, the council is not adhering to the Equality Act which recognizes that sex (not gender) is the protected characteristic. The EHRC also makes it clear that the two should not be conflated. This is particularly pertinent to safety and participation. If sex is not protected then women and girls are not protected
Furthermore, you also state that the terms boy and girl describe gender- this is incorrect. The term girl means a female child. Female describes someone’s biological sex. Saying that girl and boy is gender, is destructive and limiting to opportunities to either sex because genders are regressive and oppressive stereotypes.

I appreciate your reassurance that any further reports will be clearer but this cannot be achieved if a list of protected characteristics on one page is correct (lists sex) and incorrect on another page (sex (gender)) Nor can it be achieved if policy makers and report writers conflate the two terms

You may like to know that council had also listed sex (gender) but amended this to sex after correspondence from concerned women
They replied within minutes as follows
he document that I think you are referring to is a report on progress to the EHRC. The Council have received no criticism from the EHRC on this. I also refer you to the following guidance on the EHRC website.
www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/sex-discrimination
The Equality Act 2010 says you must not be discriminated against because:
•you are (or are not) a particular sex (gender)
•someone thinks you are the opposite sex (this is known as discrimination by perception)
•you are connected to someone of a particular sex (this is known as discrimination by association)
In the Equality Act, sex can mean either male or female, or a group of people like men or boys, or women or girls.’
We have copied the terminology used by the EHRC above i.e. sex(gender)
I hope this helps you understand our position.

So in other words go away you are a mad woman. There's a few hours of my life I will never get back again. < sigh> Im just so cross that she has completely dismissed my points

Theinconstantgardener

It may be worth ensuring that this response is shared with either WPUK and/or Fairplay for Women. I think they may have had similar responses from a council which may have been successfully challenged.