Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

EHRC Code of Practice on Services, Public Functions and Associations has been laid - here is the Code itself

322 replies

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 16:37

Written Statement made by: Secretary of State for Education and Minister for
Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson) on 21 May 2026:

https://commonsbusiness.parliament.uk/Document/105423/Pdf?subType=Standard

I have approved the draft Code submitted on 4 September 2025 and as updated by the EHRC in April 2026 following engagement with government and their consideration of consultation responses and further legal analysis.
The current Code was produced in 2011 and there have been significant developments since then, including the Supreme Court ruling in For Women Scotland, resulting in the EHRC wanting to update the Code.
Following last year’s Supreme Court ruling, the draft Code’s content on sex and gender reassignment has changed substantially from the 2011 version. The ruling made it clear that sex means biological sex for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 and that trans people are still protected by the Act under the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’.

The Code of Practice on Services, Public Functions and Associations itself:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/equality-act-2010-draft-code-of-practice-for-services-public-functions-and-associations-2026

Equality Act 2010: Draft Code of Practice for services, public functions and associations, 2026

The Equality and Human Rights Commission's draft updated Code of Practice for services, public functions and associations.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/equality-act-2010-draft-code-of-practice-for-services-public-functions-and-associations-2026

OP posts:
Thread gallery
26
GCScot · 21/05/2026 19:22

Nonnim · 21/05/2026 19:13

This is a bit of a mess. How can it possibly be lawful to exclude trans men from men’s services and from women’s services? Why on earth has that been included?

Excluding transmen from both women's spaces and men's spaces if they 'pass' was mentioned in the 2025 Supreme Court judgement wasn't it?

Smacks a bit of a less-able student another student's work without really understanding what they are doing

borntobequiet · 21/05/2026 19:28

Excluding transmen from both women's spaces and men's spaces if they 'pass' was mentioned in the 2025 Supreme Court judgement wasn't it?

The SC judges seem to have realised, as others might not, that a bearded, balding, heavily-muscled individual entering a women’s toilet or changing room might induce anxiety and discomfort. The effects of testosterone are very distinctive, and women will react immediately to what appears at first glance to a male intruder.

Nonnim · 21/05/2026 19:35

Well I am gender critical. I do not think you can change sex and I do not think your physical appearance means that you can claim to be the opposite sex. The bearded individuals you speak of are women. This guidance is saying that there are women who cannot use women’s toilets and I am not happy about that. Someone doesn’t need to have long hair and a skirt and no muscles to be a woman that has been the whole point.

IwantToRetire · 21/05/2026 19:38

Have just read Sex Matters analysis in full and they are saying the bit about "special category data" is wrong in law! Quote:

Article 9(1) of UK GDPR defines special category data as “personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union membership, and the processing of genetic data, biometric data for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health or data concerning a natural person’s sex life or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.” It does not include sex.

Does this mean another court case is on the horizon?

WallaceinAnderland · 21/05/2026 19:39

parietal · 21/05/2026 18:54

Saying “sex” is sensitive under GDPR will be an absolute pain for millions of organisations. Think how many membership forms ask name & sex (or gender) and now they will have to have detailed data protection policies on everything. Crazy.

And where does this leave the register of births, marriages and death? No sex on a birth certificate?

SirChenjins · 21/05/2026 19:41

WallaceinAnderland · 21/05/2026 19:39

And where does this leave the register of births, marriages and death? No sex on a birth certificate?

Good point.

Has the recording of sex on health records been covered?

OP posts:
OP posts:
MyAmpleSheep · 21/05/2026 19:53

Nonnim · 21/05/2026 19:35

Well I am gender critical. I do not think you can change sex and I do not think your physical appearance means that you can claim to be the opposite sex. The bearded individuals you speak of are women. This guidance is saying that there are women who cannot use women’s toilets and I am not happy about that. Someone doesn’t need to have long hair and a skirt and no muscles to be a woman that has been the whole point.

It's not intended to refer to public toilets in general. It's intended to refer to places where a very masculine presenting woman would genuinely affect the service provision, for example in a women's rape counselling session (or the toilets provided at a venue where that service is provided) where some people might be triggered by the presence of someone visually very male. Even if they are female.

It might also be proportional to exclude a violent woman, or a drunk woman, because their presence would make the service less effective.

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 20:02

FernandoSor · 21/05/2026 18:41

Reform say they will repeal the Equality Act on the first day of a Reform government (Suella Braverman speech on the 17th Feb). This means that the EHRC, and all its guidance, will also be abolished.

not to rehash previous discussions but.... that's, charitably, a misrepresentation.

But - the odds of a Reform or Reform Tory coalition government within the next 12 months is pretty high and they will shoot this guidance in the back of the head.

OP posts:
BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth · 21/05/2026 20:03

AncientAtiny · 21/05/2026 19:21

Iwanttoretire kindly posted a link (at 18:25) to the Sex Matters response - their response says that the idea that sex is likely to constitute special category data for the purposes of the DPA is ‘wrong in law’
which is interesting!

Thank you! I haven't had a chance to look at that yet,

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 20:04

MyAmpleSheep · 21/05/2026 18:45

And it (correctly) points out that there are no documents that any one can produce to prove their sex. That being so is not a defect of the guidance; it's a fault of the government, and it's not wrong to point that out.

This is why I think the GRA should be repealed, not replaced and official documents never be faked ever again. It's utter madness, literal 1984 vibes.

OP posts:
SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 20:06

CarobBean72 · 21/05/2026 18:59

Yep.

That’s the Equality Act 2010 which rolled up the Race Relations Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Sex Discrimination Act & much else… leaving us with no protection against discrimination on grounds of age, belief, disability, maternity & pregnancy, sex & sexual orientation etc.

That’s the Equality Act which allowed Maya Forstater, Sandie Peggie, the Darlington Nurses, the woman currently suing Manchester City Council & others to bring and win their cases.

The Greens want to remove the protection of sex, Reform wants to remove the lot.

Be careful what you wish for.

Again to be very, very clear - the words repeal and replace are used interchangeably within political circles and there is no way on earth Reform is going to repeal and not replace. their entire schtick is protecting women's rights now (what mental word do we live on now.....) so thats not the trajectory at all.

Will the replacement be better? Dunno. But to say they are going to make it legal to sack the black / Jewish / pregnant worker etc is real hyperbole.

OP posts:
BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth · 21/05/2026 20:06

IwantToRetire · 21/05/2026 19:38

Have just read Sex Matters analysis in full and they are saying the bit about "special category data" is wrong in law! Quote:

Article 9(1) of UK GDPR defines special category data as “personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union membership, and the processing of genetic data, biometric data for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health or data concerning a natural person’s sex life or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.” It does not include sex.

Does this mean another court case is on the horizon?

Thank you for that. Yes, undoubtedly lots more legal action. Again.

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 20:07

Nonnim · 21/05/2026 19:13

This is a bit of a mess. How can it possibly be lawful to exclude trans men from men’s services and from women’s services? Why on earth has that been included?

I think the example given was quite clear, sexual assault support group, and someone who looks very much like a man may be triggering for women?

OP posts:
SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 20:09

This is so telling - this is the story people will read, this will be the narrative - "Toilets and changing rooms must be used on basis of biological sex, guidance confirms"

Not the dogs dinner underneath

OP posts:
SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 20:12

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 19:51

Responses, as usual, paint an interesting picture https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1tjtzcj/toilets_and_changing_rooms_must_be_used_on_basis/

OP posts:
BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth · 21/05/2026 20:19

Nonnim · 21/05/2026 19:13

This is a bit of a mess. How can it possibly be lawful to exclude trans men from men’s services and from women’s services? Why on earth has that been included?

I do agree that on the face of it, it seems very unfair. The SC judgment I believe mentioned situations such as rape crisis counselling, and other such situations, as other posters have said.

However, I do feel that if you as a female are determined to be viewed , and believed, as a male, and have gone through as many administrative and even medical processes as you can to outwardly appear male, there will undoubtedly be social consequences. And, because we normally do not allow anyone under 18 to have these processes, women who choose to do this are adults, and must accept certain consequences as an adult.

My family member is one such woman, who now presents as male, and aside from the obvious " delusion " (my word for it) that she is now a man, also realizes that she probably will not be welcomed in female spaces, although she does not feel safe in male spaces. So she uses mixed-sex spaces or nothing at all.

It's very limiting, and she knows it, but she's an adult and made her choices. I worry for her, but it wasn't my decision to make.

OP posts:
OP posts:
Iamnotalemming · 21/05/2026 20:55

The GLP take is predictably galling.
Third spaces won't ever be acceptable to the TRAs. Forced affirmation is what they want.

OP posts:
FernandoSor · 21/05/2026 21:34

SingleSexSpacesInSchools · 21/05/2026 20:06

Again to be very, very clear - the words repeal and replace are used interchangeably within political circles and there is no way on earth Reform is going to repeal and not replace. their entire schtick is protecting women's rights now (what mental word do we live on now.....) so thats not the trajectory at all.

Will the replacement be better? Dunno. But to say they are going to make it legal to sack the black / Jewish / pregnant worker etc is real hyperbole.

I’m just going by what Braverman said. Her exsct words were “We will repeal the Equality Act on day one of a Reform government”. As it takes substantially longer to enact legislation than to repeal it the logical conclusion is that there would be an extended window between repeal and replacement, during which UK citizens have very few protections.

Additionally, if Reform are only concerned about specific aspects of the act, why not propose to amend it rather than repeal the whole thing? They could simply remove gender reassignment from section 4 for example.

Swipe left for the next trending thread