Ann Sinnott of Authentic Equity Alliance vs EHRC Judicial Review of incorrect Equality Act guidance

[R0wantrees]

The presiding judge decided that this should go straight to a 1-day oral Permissions Hearing.

This hearing will decide whether or not AEA can proceed to Judicial Review of EHRC and will also rule on request for a costs cap (to protect AEA) should the case go forward.

AEA about the case,
"Official sources provide unlawful guidance on the 2010 Equality Act!
Yes, you read that right! It's shocking, isn't it?

For nearly 10 years, unlawful guidance on the 2010 Equality Act (EA2010) has been displayed on the website of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and on the Government Equalities Office (GEO) website for 5 years.

Over these ten years, the guidance has been widely accessed and further disseminated by countless organisations of all types. As a result, the unlawful guidance is reflected in the equality policies of organisations and institutions throughout the UK.

EHRC and GEO guidance is in breach of EA2010, Schedule 3, Sections 26, 27 and 28

This is a legal case to ensure that EA2010 guidance accurately reflects the Act.

The Complainant is Authentic Equity Alliance (AEA), a Community Interest Company established to promote and further the interests of women and girls."
Website: aealliance.co.uk/

Ann Sinnott (founder/director) twitter.com/AnnMSinnott

Twitter live tweeting of case via #AEAvEHRC and #IStandWithAnnSinnott

Is it a male thing to believe that TS males who are "post op" are indistinguishable from women?

Well, Hayley Cropper on Coronation Street was quite convincing. I suspect a lot of people don't actually know any transsexuals and have that in mind.

Is it a male thing to believe that TS males who are "post op" are indistinguishable from women?

I've yet to see a male treat a TS male as if they are women, though.

BelleHathor Many thanks

If this is refused then it would seem proven that LGBT+ and women's briefs can no longer be held by the same organisation or post. Women's rights and interests will require a separate, impartial body for equality of representation, since any brief holding both becomes wholly bogged down in all this and compromised beyond hope.

Well, Hayley Cropper on Coronation Street was quite convincing. I suspect a lot of people don't actually know any transsexuals and have that in mind.

That was the intention by the Press For Change lobbyists. Both Whittle and Burns have talked about how significant a role this played.

Is it a male thing to believe that TS males who are "post op" are indistinguishable from women?

I think the response I got from a male companion, after seeing a transwoman and wife is typical: "I didn't fancy either of them"

I've yet to see a male treat a TS male as if they are women, though

Quite. If TW were treated like women they would've been told to fuck off and shut up years ago.

Comment from sexmatters regarding TW being indistinguishable:
This is a truly astonishing submission, if you think for a moment about what it really means. Surgeons are only surgeons - they don't do actual magic. #Comment

The barefaced cheek of that 'indistinguishable' statement! FFS

Males who have had their penis inverted to create a neovagina are not "indistinguishable from women"

Denial of service to a trans person should only be in exceptional circumstances. That is the Commission's view.
They can't use the women's changing facility, or the men's, so there would need to be pretty exceptional circumstances to reach that conclusion.

Why can't transgender males use the male changing facility? This is often asserted as self-evident but without explanation. Surely the issue of discrimination should be focussed on why some males might be/feel excluded from male sex spaces/services?

@fishareboring

If this is refused then it would seem proven that LGBT+ and women's briefs can no longer be held by the same organisation or post. Women's rights and interests will require a separate, impartial body for equality of representation, since any brief holding both becomes wholly bogged down in all this and compromised beyond hope.

Given their arguments today, I’d say they have already well and truly proven that!

EHRC are saying that TW with a GRC are indistinguishable from TW without a GRC, so a GRC is unnecessary

Exactly. So the only solution is to enforce the law already in place to keep all males out of single sex facilities, services and sports.

Denial of service to a trans person should only be in exceptional circumstances. That is the Commission's view.
They can't use the women's changing facility, or the men's, so there would need to be pretty exceptional circumstances to reach that conclusion.

Also this is a bizarre statement. "Trans people" are both sexes, no?

@fishareboring

If this is refused then it would seem proven that LGBT+ and women's briefs can no longer be held by the same organisation or post. Women's rights and interests will require a separate, impartial body for equality of representation, since any brief holding both becomes wholly bogged down in all this and compromised beyond hope.

T+. Nobody involved in LGBT cares about lesbians.

1m: Judge returns. All rise.

judge returns

Judge is back...

I nearly stood up then

Urgh. Refused.

The only logical solution is to get rid of the GRC completely and repeal the GRA

refused

Thanks to everyone who has been updating from the twitter feed

I'm staggered.

Refused