Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Ann Sinnott update - time to join up some dots?

5 replies

highame · 15/05/2021 07:45

It's interesting to read Ann's update because I am gaining more positives than negatives. Today is a very good day with the new lead at the EHRC saying women have the right to discuss trans issues. That boulder going up the hill is getting a little nearer the top. Perhaps another push with the letter writing because things are looking a little clearer.

There are lots of threads where the latest information and clarification would require organisations and companies to review their policies. The workload just doesn't seem so heavy anymore. Hope this isn't duplicated

Update on Official sources provide unlawful guidance on the 2010 Equality Act!

Dear Supporters

Sorry it’s taken so long to update you but it’s been something of an emotional roller-coaster.

You will probably know by now that permission to proceed to judicial review of EHRC was refused. After much soul searching and advice from multiple quarters, the decision won’t be appealed.

I’ve seen a great deal of comment about the Hearing, the principal actors, the judge, as well as the outcome. It would serve no good purpose for me to add to that, suffice it to say I was bitterly disappointed.

But the process of litigation and the Hearing itself was not without gain.

The first gain in the process was getting EHRC to correct its popular guidance which contained unlawful statements relating to single-sex spaces and routinely used ‘gender’ instead of ‘sex’.

We then shifted our focus to the Code of Practice for service-providers which, in our opinion, contained a misinterpretation of the Equality Act and prescriptive language that went beyond the Act’s ‘a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim’. The judge rejected this. But it’s clear from his comment - our argument an “obvious absurdity” - that he hadn’t understood. As laid out in our skeleton, our argument was cogent and coherent and far from absurd. Whether or not the judge, had he understood, would have agreed is another matter. It’s important to note that this Hearing did not set a legal precedent.

But there were interesting elements in the Defendant’s skeleton that were also mentioned in the Hearing.

For the second time in little over a week, EHRC confirmed - in open court - that people with a Gender Recognition Certificate can be lawfully excluded from single-sex services and spaces – the first occasion was at Maya Forstater’s Appeal.

EHRC stated that it had informed some organisations that their policies were unlawful and that it would do the same with other organisations that came to its attention.
Some of you might like to think about letter-writing…
EHRC asserted that it could not be held responsible for unlawful policies adopted by service-providers and that complainants should take legal action against service providers.
Some of you might like to put your thinking caps on…
I want to thank each and every one of you for donating to this legal action and also for supporting me personally. I was deeply touched by your comments and shored-up when energies ran low. I’m sorry I didn’t deliver for you.
Thank you so much.
Ann

OP posts:
midgedude · 15/05/2021 07:48

Thanks

EmpressWitchDoesntBurn · 15/05/2021 07:52

I don’t think Ann has anything to apologise for.

LizzieSiddal · 15/05/2021 08:11

Thank you Ann for taking this action! It didn’t go the way we all wanted but it did make the EHRC clarify their position, which is so important for the future.

Thecatonthemat · 15/05/2021 08:15

Yes it was well worth taking this case . Thank you to Ann and supporters for bringing it.

Erikrie · 15/05/2021 09:27

I think it helped clarify the position, which is very helpful going forward.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page