Datun · Today 13:54
Ah. It was my understanding that Willoughby wanted sue over the equality act protected characteristic, not the GRA.
You may be right, but I think the Equality Act and GRA end up potentially clashing, with the GRC getting trumping power specially because of the lack of fool-proof clarity in the Equality Act that “sex” means biological sex. That seemed to be what Dr Michael Foran said in the oral evidence to the HoC.
That’s why it is nonsense to say easier GRCs would make no difference. (Even though no surgery or hormones are necessary for a GRC)
Gender Reassignment with no GRC does not have the same power ( except it did in that NHS judgement regarding the natal male with the protected characteristic of ‘Gender Reassignment’ as a woman, who mentioned taking off their underwear because they were ‘hot and sweaty’, was seen naked from the waist down by women in the changing room, but felt discriminated against and embarrassed when, following this, the manageress asked them if they always took off their underwear. They brought a law suit against the NHS trust and won. Legal people on this board thought the judgement was wrong.
A Catch 22 seems to be is that those who say they have the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment ( no diagnosis of dysphoria, no surgery, not even a stuffed bra, wig and lipstick necessary), may not be asked if they have a GRC. So they, and potentially any man who lies, end up being treated as though they do have one.