Important - The Equality Act guidance has just changed

[WatchThePotatoesBoil]

I've just this minute been told by the EHRC that the Equality Act guidance has been changed, and the new version was published on Friday as promised to Fair Play for Woman.

It no longer states:

Where someone has a gender recognition certificate they should be treated in their acquired gender for all purposes and therefore should not be excluded from single sex services.

It now states:

Transsexual people should not be routinely asked to produce their Gender Recognition Certificate (if they have one) as evidence of their legal sex. If a business requires proof of a person’s legal sex, then their birth certificate should be sufficient confirmation.

There will of course, now be a new Twitter war on what this actually means.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/what-equality-law-means-for-your-business-2018.pdf

(page 46)

Pencils I think you are right, this is the end game.

I am not a lawyer, but I would think this may have implications for the case where a pub landlord in Halifax was prosecuted for doing exactly that:

www.lawcentres.org.uk/policy/news/news/kirklees-law-centre-wins-landmark-transgender-discrimination-case

So: The phrase "refusing them access to the toilets appropriate to the sex in which they present." has now been deleted.

That is indeed interesting. Any GC legal analysis of these changes yet?

That is what basically happened in the Kirklees case, no?

That is interesting.

It's not just daft student ideas. Here is a research project run by the Dickson Poon School of Law at Kings College London. They've been given half a million to research the feasibility of doing away with sex as a legal category. One of the expected outcomes is a draft bill. The icing on the cake is that their advisory board is EHRC, Stonewall and Equality & Diversity Forum (don't know much about EDF).

Remove the entire legal existent and ability to articulate a group with a characteristic protected under the EA and discriminated against, harmed, raped and murdered solely due to that characteristic.

Fuck off.

Not on my watch.

So: The phrase "refusing them access to the toilets appropriate to the sex in which they present." has now been deleted.

Oooh-Mr Howl will be interested in that. Will brief him when he gets home for legal opinion.

Excuse me for being a little bit muddle-headed. Does this mean we have already lost the fight?

Far from clear, littlemouse...

Does this mean we have already lost the fight?

No it means that unlike in 2004 when they pushed the GRA through 'quietly' without anybody noticing, this time round we have our eyes open and can see clearly what is happening.

Fuck off.

Not on my watch

This.

I suppose with things like pub toilets they are expecting everything will move to gender neutral mixed sex anyway.

That is confusing, deliberately I suspect.
Does anyone else think it's some sort of preparation for changes to the EA?

I think it's becoming more and more obvious that the gender recognition act needs to be completely repealed as it is no longer fit for purpose.

It never was. A GRC is one thing. A changed birth certificate should never happen except in a case of genuine error.

You've got no legal way of saying they are trans though, even if it's extremely obvious they are not female. If they say they are a woman and don't say they are trans and have a birth cert that says female, there's no legal way to ask.

It's saying "If you need to ascertain someone's sex e.g. for employment in a women's shelter, their birth certificate is enough. However much you might think they are a biological male, you are not to ask."

This is bad news.

*as opposed to the physical sex they were born with

• as opposed to the sex recorded at birth*

At first this looks like a really minor change but I don't think it is. 'Sex' isn't described as physical any more, it's just admin - something that's 'recorded' not a property of your body

Yes Pencils. This is a very concerning change.
So you can't ask to see a GRC but just the new faked birth certificate. It should never have been possible to backdate documents. I was horrified in 2004 but never thought things could get this bad.

This is bad news.

I think how bad news depends on what happens with the GRA. If self ID goes through its very bad. However when we campaign at least we can counter the TRA nonsense that changes to the GRA won't affect us.

However when we campaign at least we can counter the TRA nonsense that changes to the GRA won't affect us.

Yep. At least the gaslighting "it's just admin," is clearly shown to be a flagrant lie now. Which women knew.

Wander

You were never allowed to see a GRC (erm... so what was it for? dunno...). In fact, the guidance seems to have gone the other way, now saying "not routinely" asked to see a GRC.

Someone replied to me on twitter saying that they thought only one of the two types of birth certificate (long-form/short-form) got changed.

No idea if that is correct...

It's saying "If you need to ascertain someone's sex e.g. for employment in a women's shelter, their birth certificate is enough. However much you might think they are a biological male, you are not to ask."

This is bad news.

It's not really news. It's been that way since the GRA came in and it was predicted in the debates at the time as a problem.

twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1049337934820904961

The difference is that up 'til now this has only been an issue when encountering one of

The amended birth certificates I've seen look like the replacement short form ones you get if have lost the original.

One old transsexual friend wasn't born in Britain so used his GRC prob more often than most.

The problem is how amibiguous the wording is, it needs to be much more clear. An awful lot of businesses will err on the side of caution with all this anyway, it's too confusing for people and no one wants to get on the wrong side of trans people. No business wants the TRA effectively destroying their business on social media and god knows what else they'd do.

Both birth certificates get changed. You get a short one free but have to pay the standard fee if you want a new long certificate (literal violence! ).

It's well worth reading the current guidance for applying for a GRC before responding to the consultation.

Definition Changes; these seem important.

OLD DEFINITIONS

gender reassignment - The process of changing or transitioning from one gender to another. See also transsexual person.

gender recognition certificate - A certificate issued under the Gender Recognition Act to a transsexual person who seeks such a certificate and has, or has had, gender dysphoria, has lived in the acquired gender throughout the preceding two years, and intends to continue to live in the acquired gender until death.

transsexual person - A person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. This may be a woman who has transitioned or is transitioning to be a man, or a man who has transitioned or is transitioning to be a woman. The law does not require a person to undergo a medical procedure to be recognised as a transsexual person. Once a transsexual person has acquired a gender recognition certificate, it is probably the case that they should be treated entirely as in their acquired gender.

NEW DEFINITIONS

gender reassignment - The process of changing or transitioning from one sex to another. See also transsexual person.

gender recognition certificate - A certificate issued under the Gender Recognition Act to a transsexual person who seeks such a certificate

transsexual person - The term used in the Equality Act 2010 to describe someone who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. Protection extends to those treated less favourably because they are perceived to be transsexual.

The above changes seem important because to me they look like they have been prepared in anticipation of changes to the Gender Recognition Act - but I am not a lawyer.

Very useful thread. I’m still in the process of working on my answers to the consultation and I will be working some of this information in somewhere. Thank you all.