Really only posting this as it shows that even those hoping to be on the right side of woke history acknowledge that the EA does not relate to gender identity. Quote:
"Chapter 1 of the Equality Act 2010 provides for nine “protected characteristics” and it is unlawful to discriminate against someone because of a protected characteristic. As stated above, non-binary is not one of those characteristics. So could a non-binary individual have a claim under any of the nine protected characteristics?
It is important to clarify why the protected characteristics of sexual orientation and sex (both of which are protected under the Equality Act) are not at all relevant to this discussion. Firstly, sexual orientation relates to attraction (i.e. heterosexual or homosexual) which has no bearing on someone’s gender identity. Secondly, whilst sex and gender are often conflated, put simply, sex is biological (male, female, and intersex) whereas gender is a social construct which is better understood as a spectrum relating to traditional roles.
One of the other protected characteristics which often leads to misinterpretation by employers is gender reassignment. Gender reassignment is defined as the following under S7 Equality Act:
A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
A reference to a transsexual person is a reference to a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
In relation to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment—
a. a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a transsexual person;
b. a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to transsexual persons."
www.bpe.co.uk/discover-bpe/why-bpe/insights/2020/02/are-non-binary-people-protected-under-the-equality-act/
This was originally publised on Lexology which is a web site rounding up latest legal advice, but articles are behind a paywall.
(So if this group of legal people can accept the reality that sex is a biological reality but gender is a social construct how come so many seem willing to distort this reality so as to be seen as supporting the reality denying rainbos coalition?)