Is the Equality Act deliberately ambiguous?

[scotsheather]

The government have fallen over themselves to say everything is fine and still will be whatever happens with gender recognition laws because the EA is there and will not be changed. They make it sound so simple and as if we are arguing about heehaw. Looking more closely, it requires a 'proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim'.

Exactly who is to be the judge of 'proportionate' and 'legitimate'? And this confusion is playing right into the TRAs hands, as we have seen from service providers afraid to challenge men or women being in opposite sex facilities. Whether its single sex swim, hostel dorms, fitting rooms, even prisoners increasingly becoming 'trans' to get moved to a womens prison.

While few would argue that protecting women and girls is a legitimate aim, the proportionality of for instance telling a trans person they can't access spaces for the opposite birth sex has caused so much confusion, and it appears the goverment and the TRAs are quietly letting this play out. tbh I see it from both sides. I've been challenged in toilets and changing rooms as I look quite masculine and proudly so. Thats fine, I don't need any 'validation' of my sex. Then the more serious transwomen with years of medical assessment, hormones and surgery might more legitimately argue their right in more (but not all) protected spaces.

I'm not aware of any Chris Hanbrooke style cases in the UK, but who knows. Thats the extremes we could be heading down at this rate.

The EA is designed to be flexible. You should not discriminate, but the EA recognises there might be situations where it is unavoidable. The wording applies to other protected characteristics - not just gender reassignment.

The judge of 'proportionate' and 'legitimate' are judges - doh. It happens though that there have not been any cases in the higher courts that have been reported. This either indicates that services providers are complying with the law or else trans people do not have the means and support to challenge discrimination. As the EA has been law for 8 years and the equivalent provisions in the Sex Discrimination Act, for 2 years prior to that, I am not seeing any issue for service providers or women more broadly.

"Chris Hanbrooke" was a convicted psychopath at the time of his offence. It was very sad that he was given the opportunity to assault a woman in what should have been a safe space. I do wonder if the refuge had done a more robust risk assessment before allowing him access to the communal accommodation (e.g. a criminal record check) they could have stopped him. Having said that a convicted sex offender and diagnosed psychopath, who has been released from jail, and is determined to sexual assault a woman is sadly going to succeed - regardless of laws that protect trans rights.

BTW there is a lot of guidance on the interpretation of the EA on the EHRC website www.equalityhumanrights.com/en. The "statutory guidance" needs to be followed by the courts unless they have a very good reason.

The EqA was rushed through by a New Labour government that knew it was highly likely to lose the next (and looming) general election and wanted to get something on the statute before it did. The result is a rushed piece of weak and toothless legislation with more holes than a sieve. Some of those holes are being exposed by extremist transactivism but there are many more.

It's not deliberately ambiguous - it's just not up to scratch and never really was.

It makes the bottle thrown at Lesbians at the Pride march a double hate crime but the perp got a talking to from the police so not to worry.

Its intelligible, if you have the will to use it. But as we see, abusers walk away from being prosecuted all the time, and women's services are disappearing and desperately underfunded.

Exactly who is to be the judge of 'proportionate' and 'legitimate'?

Of all the places to be strictly single sex, prisons and mental health wards should be non-negotiable. We've seen that even in those situations males and females share space. Therefore, either those providing the services haven't the inclination to use the EA,or the EA is useless.

As far as I can see, the only people who think it works are the people who want to abuse it.