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

It's all horrifically sexist.

It is a woeful misinterpretation of the legislation to the expense of vulnerable women who don't, on an individual basis, have the means to fight it.

I agree.

what 'other attributes of sex' are there that aren't phyisiological

Asking to get into a female-only space.

I'm serious.

For a lot of these people there is no circumstance in which they would say a male asking to get into a female-only space wasn't permitted. The act of asking means you should be there.

@FindTheTruth

40s: No grounds to show that the guidance has placed women and girls at a disadvantage.

a) I didn't see the judge ask if women and girls have been placed at a disadvantage (might be wrong)

b) So ... is this about providing proof that where women and girls have been placed at a disadvantage, the service provider acted on guidance from the EHRC?

c) so does it require FOIAs to find out if each service provider used the guidance of the EHRC?

How the hell are we going to show all the women and girls who just don’t use mixed sex changing facilities, or single sex after hearing a rumour that there might be blokes in there? Or all the schoolgirls holding it in all day, because their toilets are now mixed sex?

It's all horrifically sexist.

I do find it endlessly amusing that all of this is an expression of the idea of sex not being a thing/binary, but actually being based entirely on binary sex based thinking. And as always in sex based anything, wholly advantaging the male sex at the expense of the female sex.

Despair not. It is very useful to have this muddled confusion and quite jawdropping sexist bias front and centre in the public eye.

I'm horrified by what I've just read, was following earlier and it seemed to be going well. Just come back from a work meeting to see this shitshow. So what happens next, do we have to wait for the written ruling and then appeal? And who decides? Is it worth more digging now or do we wait?

Devastated. But thank you Ann for what you have done.

Also... .what's the definition of 'disadvantage' for this judge? Its a form of abuse to expect women and girls to explain and justify why single sex spaces are needed.

I’m just...

Ann I will happily contribute to an appeal if you decide to do so. Thank you for all you have done

How the hell are we going to show all the women and girls who just don’t use mixed sex changing facilities, or single sex after hearing a rumour that there might be blokes in there?

exactly. this is abuse

It's trending and I'm assuming the press will pick it up

Going back to thepuredrops post on p15

I actually think the EA needs to be revised, GRC was of no consequence as per EHRC argument. It’s the pc of GR that is the issue.

Is this what we should do now? How do we best go about that?

This will not prevail. It just won't.

Women are half the population of this country, and almost none of them realise what's going on.

This sort of outrageous result wakes up more women. Women who can vote. And will.

It's just another hurdle. That's all.

Am devastated too. This is awful.

Ann I will happily contribute to an appeal if you decide to do so. Thank you for all you have done flowers

100%

The fuck does this even mean though? Aside from the fact that you cant change 'physiological attributes of sex' what 'other attributes of sex' are there that aren't phyisiological? What can that possibly even mean that isn't horrifically sexist?

Its making other people use opposite sex pronouns isn't it?

Jess Bradley explained this in the book, 'To My Trans Sisters'
edited by Charlie Craggs (publ Oct 2017)

"The first time I changed the world was when I told my mates to call me she rather than he. I literally constructed a new world where its possible to understand myself as a genderqueer woman, despite being asigned male at birth simply by changing the language to describe myself. This is why language and pronouns are so important. Its about creating a world in which trans people are allowed to exist"

"And I can honestly say that the work that trans people do for each other means that, for me at least, the trans community is a beautiful place to be. Despite our differences, we have each others' backs"

Anyone done a FOI yet to ask who the stakeholders EHRC consulted with were?

I've just come out of a meeting and struggling to take the implications of this in. So am I right in now understanding that literally there is no legal option for a woman to be in, or request, a single sexed environment or service? Surely it's not that bad, right? Have I got this wrong?

Although part of me is despairing, I'm glad that this has been brought into bright daylight. There will be enough in the text to be able to point to utter absurdities, more to peak people with.

The press may pick this up, yes, but their track record of reporting on this in the MSM is woeful and usually biased. It will probably be told as a story of an uppity woman being told to get back in her box and accept that TWAW.

This is me clutching at straws but....... if the Tories win lots of seats, will they feel they can sort this mess out or will they still feel the need to try and please both sides?

It seems to me like a fairly technical case with a weird conclusion and very odd statements about who's indistinguishable from whom (with/without GRCs, TW who have had some sort of unnamed medical operation and other types of women), so I'll be interested to see how the press summarise it (but not actually confident it'll be accurate!)

One or two on Twitter saying that it might give pointers as to how the next case needs to be positioned. I don’t know enough to comment on that, but I really hope so.

Came here to see what was going on because I saw lots of TRA's (men) crowing on twitter.

They love having their feet on women's necks, don't they.

@R0wantrees

The fuck does this even mean though? Aside from the fact that you cant change 'physiological attributes of sex' what 'other attributes of sex' are there that aren't phyisiological? What can that possibly even mean that isn't horrifically sexist?

Its making other people use opposite sex pronouns isn't it?

Jess Bradley explained this in the book, 'To My Trans Sisters'
edited by Charlie Craggs (publ Oct 2017)

"The first time I changed the world was when I told my mates to call me she rather than he. I literally constructed a new world where its possible to understand myself as a genderqueer woman, despite being asigned male at birth simply by changing the language to describe myself. This is why language and pronouns are so important. Its about creating a world in which trans people are allowed to exist"

"And I can honestly say that the work that trans people do for each other means that, for me at least, the trans community is a beautiful place to be. Despite our differences, we have each others' backs"

Jess Bradley, who lost his job after exposing himself?