Non-binary people are now protected from discrimination under the UK Equality Act

[stumbledin]

he Equality Act, which came into legislation in 2010, legally protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society on the basis of age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender reassignment, race, religion, pregnancy and maternity and marriage and civil partnership.

Following years of uncertainty, a UK employment tribunal have now confirmed that non-binary and gender-fluid people are protected under the gender reassignment category.

This is from Gay Times gaytimes.co.uk/life/non-binary-people-are-now-protected-from-discrimination-under-the-uk-equality-act/

I think (99% sure) that this is the case referred to www.oldsquare.co.uk/news-and-media/news/et-finds-that-gender-reassignment-s.7-eqa-includes-gender-fluid-and-non-bin

This thread makes my head hurt

many would say it's not choice , it's just who you are , although there is clearly an element of choice in any identity, of aspects of yourselves that you promote or otherwise

But if you are Male, no one will question whether you chose that identity or just accepted your innate identity

It's much harder if you are female it seems when other people will let you know if you are allowed to be none binary.

Ms Taylor also suffered difficulties using toilet facilities and getting managerial support, the lawyer added.

Wonder which toilet facilities they was using. Also whether management gave them short shrift because they was causing a great deal of trouble with all their other employees... not accepting a retraction of resignation seems perfectly reasonable to me.

So, if gender is officially a spectrum now, are we allowed to be a bit creative in defining our gender identities?

I pick "robot valkyrie 🚀"
And no set of pronouns can possibly encapsulate my sheer awesomeness.
Just keep repeating my name in all references to my person:
Kaiserin, Kaiserin, Kaiserin's

... seriously all that gender stuff is narcissistic bollocks, innit? It's funny for 5 seconds, like designing an avatar for a video game, but for it to be enshrined in law... What next, fursona and otherkin as protected characteristics? (Then again, religious beliefs...)

Wonder which toilet facilities they was using.

If the claimant was biologically male and using the men's and got harrassed for using the men's and management didn't support them against the harassers, that's outrageous. I suspect that that's not what happened here though.

But that's exactly what happened at my work. They were kicked out of the gents, and the guys were gobsmacked that the ladies wasn't welcoming

So the menz policed who could use their toilet and the laydeez was expected to mop up all their rejects?

Nice...

Like Kaiserin says, we can all pick a wild place on the spectrum and shout for proper recognition. It's contagious, all this thinking about gender.

I may be married to a man and have had three live children out of seven pregnancies, but I've always spoken my mind boldly and had a great career. Leadership rôles have always found me. The statutory staffroom groper in my second job found other targets after I offered to show him how my husband broke his arm.

Gender-wise I'm no teetering, tittering timid violet, so maybe I've been non-binary all along?!

But that's exactly what happened at my work. They were kicked out of the gents

Behold, actual transphobia, from men, harming trans people. This is the kind of thing that management should be supporting trans people with to resolve.

and the guys were gobsmacked that the ladies wasn't welcoming

Female-only has a meaning and the women have the right to say no to a male in their space. It is for men to humanely accommodate their gender non-conforming brethren.

What you've said is evidence that all this TWAW is a men's privilege movement designed to shift the burden of accommodating gender non-conforming males onto women. No wonder the bearded woke blokes are so keen on it.

Come back Norman Tebbit, all is forgiven.

Repeal the GRA. This whole Japanese knotweed of a shitshow needs cutting off at the roots.

Genuine question.
If you are non-binary, do you also reject the sexual categories for relationships? (Homo/heterosexual). If so, what do you use instead?

I think that depends on the person

Some understand the concept of sex and gender as distinct , this should mean they recognise sexuality , but some may feel that standard sexuality is of little relevenace to them. I have seen ( not met IRL) people claiming they are attracted to specific genders not tied to sex

As long as people are honest with potential mates , and accepting that different people are attracted to different characteristics it should not cause a problem

The claimant started to come to work in 'female' clothing. But women can wear a wide range of clothing, modern women would appear to be dressed in very masculine clothing to Victorian eyes. Women can wear floaty dresses, they can also wear jeans and T shirts and hoodies just like men. So if a man could wear a dress without being ridiculed, would this even be an issue?

How is non binary defined?

Antibles - the hopeless confusion of sex and gender in the GRA renders it unfit for purpose in my opinion. Maya brought out a good paper recently arguing for a short form birth certificate that does not give your sex. This to be suitable for all purposes apart from those where sex is important eg as covered by the sex exemptions now. Unisex facilities to run alongside male/female. Protection from harrassment/unlawful discrimination for those presenting differently from the expected for their sex. Would a GRC even be necessary in these circumstances? Arguably its not for the state to certify your gender, but it does have an important role in ensuring your sex is correctly recorded.

The boundaries of masculinity are tightly drawn. A man presenting as female is kicked out of the mens because any man transgressing male boundaries of dress must really be a woman? It seems obvious to women that this is nonsense, but it tells us that this is an issue for males and their rigid views of masculinity.

Funny, when I read the solicitor's brief summary of the case, I assumed the "non-binary" employee was female. Are they male? Interesting.

I still maintain that this is good news for women though. I think we want as wide a spectrum of "genders" to be covered under the Gender Reassignment PC so that it effectively becomes meaningless and denotes no special privileges like access to the opposite sex's facilities.