Another legal attack on the Equality Act

[christinarossetti19]

www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/news/articles/gender-fluid-non-binary-workers-protected-under-equality-act-landmark-ruling-shows?utm_source

Of course this employee shouldn't have been subjected to abusive jokes and insults, but equally the organisation should have dealt with this under harassment policies.

Instead, the Equality Act has been interpreted in Employment Law to include non-binary and gender fluid because even the govt agrees that 'gender is a spectrum'.

Barrister is Robin Moira White, a transgender person.

Still, hoping that the GRA reforms being thrown out will precede a thorough scrutiny of what was intended by the GRA and the points of conflict with the Equality Act.

And put sex-based rights firmly back on the legal agenda.

Given that the case is ongoing, I think it's quite unprofessional of a legal representative to be commenting on it in a public domain tbh./ It's almost as if you have to suppress any viewpoint that identifies the attack on women's legal rights which seems to be the primary purpose of this obsession with gender ideology.

Boasting gets the better of people. I agree it's unprofessional. Convincing a few people in a tribunal that cross dressers like Pip Bunce have a new label that is "reassignment" is nothing to boast about. The whole edifice that is identity is a confusing morass which can bamboozle anyone, and employment tribunals are famously easily fooled.

If men bully cross dressers then that's a problem, but forcing women to share facilities with cross dressing men is not affected by the label they slap on their behaviour.

This case is trivial and irrelevant to the work women are doing on exercising their rights to sex segregated facilities.

And the grandiose 'forgive me if I don't respond to questions' then answering a wide-eyed 'just checking?' question in a grubby attempt to uphold their gender ideology.

It's all a bit self aggrandising.

This for example.
" I see no reason why this ruling should not extend to other complex gender identities such as a-gender and gender queer.”"

What is "complex" about this? Fuck all. What a bunch of egocentric time wasters.

I'm not always in agreement with Robin's posts here but I read the above posts as informative.
I was genuinely interested in whether the opinion was that people who felt they had no gender would be protected against discrimination or harrassment under the 'gender reassignment' characteristic. As this has quite often not been the case from activists on social media, for one example.

Anti bullying workplace policies protect everyone. There is no need to claim special identity status to raise a grievance about bullying at work.

I think I'm with Escapeplanning inasmuch that I'm not interested in Robin's posts or pov to be honest.

If you look at the Equality Act and how it describes gender assignment, it clearly references the biological reality of there being two sexes, not some ideological belief system about whether you have a gender or not.