Good Law Project to report Sex Matters over 'deviant' remark

[IwantToRetire]

In its assessment of the EHRC guidance, Sex Matters took issue with the following phrase: "It is unlikely to be either practical or appropriate to approach any particular individual to make enquiries about their sex in relation to facilities, such as toilets, which are incidental to the primary service.”

The sex-based rights group responded in a publication entitled <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.is/o/lLjDq/sex-matters.org/posts/updates/sex-is-not-special-category-data/?ref=ed_latest" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">"Sex is not a 'special category' data", saying: "There is no legal basis for this instruction, which in effect licenses men to enter women’s facilities and claim that it is inappropriate, possibly unlawful and a breach of their human rights to challenge them."

The group further stated: "Telling staff supervising single-sex spaces that they must second-guess themselves when they become aware of a man engaging in the deviant behaviour of accessing a female-only space, or risk breaching data-protection law, will lead to unwanted conduct related to the protected characteristic of sex that is likely to meet the definition of harassment in the Equality Act. It 'violates a person’s dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment'."

From article at https://www.thenational.scot/news/26143769.good-law-project-report-sex-matters-deviant-remark/
and at https://archive.is/lLjDq

But if TIM are at risk in male facilities as they claim, surely mixed sex facilities would be just as dangerous, as the men they are so afraid of would also be using those facilities?

So if you want to argue that male violence is not a problem and that there should be more mixed sex toilet provision you should certainly campaign for that.

I'd certainly be interested to hear those arguments!

According to Justice Swift's findings int he recent GLP EHRC case he stated that while accepting it could theoretically be direct discrimination to exclude a man from a women's facility, it depends on the facts of the case. He noted there is scope for a strong argument that allowing a trans woman to use a female facility does not automatically amount to unlawful discrimination against biological men.

Ooh I would like to see that argument in court. How can one argue that dogs men are allowed in and some not? Surely not allowing sons men in on the basis of their gender identity is discrimination? As we are told “cis” is a gender, surely banning men from spaces on the basis of their gender is illegal?

That’s a useful list and the choice of the word “deviant” makes even more sense knowing that Helen Joyce is a mathematician

He noted there is scope for a strong argument that allowing a trans woman to use a female facility does not automatically amount to unlawful discrimination against biological men.

The corollary is that allowing a trans woman i.e. a biological man to use a female facility automatically amounts to unlawful discrimination against biological women.

Yet he still didn't go as far as saying that the EHRC were wrong and that it would be possible to rely on the single sex exemptions if some men were allowed to use a service purporting to be for women.

And you would still have the practical problem of explaining who would be excluded.

Again, your choices come back to single sex or mixed sex.

No one is talking about “every” setting
We are all clear that “sometimes” sex matters
Keep up

The philosophy matters here because values shape whether the evidence in question is relevant to the prevailing cultural expectations. Many western countries don't consider that male violence requires the exclusion of trans people. In fact in France its largely unisex facilities that dominate. The fact there's no cross cultural expectations in other countries shows how materialism isn't the only thing that influences policy.

Depending on the context it might qualify as indirect discrimination.

Michael Foran has presented a strong argument that it would amount to discrimination against non-trans identified men.

In fact in France its largely unisex facilities that dominate.

This hasn't been my experience, but leaving that aside, it's still the same choice - a facility can be for both sexes (mixed sex), either sex (unisex) or single sex.

You can argue for any of these options if you want, and other people can argue for single sex services.

What you can't argue for is a single sex service that can be used by both sexes, because that is not possible.

Yes, misogyny thrives everywhere, including in the hands of policymakers.

Take it up with the TIMs online, threatening to kill, maim, batter and rape women.

100%

For that reason i think it would be counterproductive to get him labelled as a vexatious complainant at this stage. Unlike some of the other legal idiots JM’s establishment links seem to help with wide distribution of his activities, which is very helpful for spreading sunlight.

Hell I’m sometimes tempted to donate to his crowdfunding with all the unintentional good results he gets for the GC side to make sure he keeps going!! Binding case law was a superb outcome of the JR against the EHRC 😊

What wonders might come out of this complaint about the use of the word “deviant” in an appropriate mathematical usage? Why draw attention to that word and attach it to his negative interpretation? Far more people will become aware of it than if he’d said nothing. The man must be a dedicated follower of Barbara Streisand 🤣

Because Justice Swift said this would depend on the facts of the case as to whether there was “less favourable treatment".

Not according to Justice Swift.

In fact in France its largely unisex facilities that dominate.

I live in France. This is totally untrue. You might find the odd toilet that consists of a cubicle a urinal & a wash basin but the overwhelming majority of toilets are strictly segregated by sex. Trying to advance your case with lies is not a good look.

Which is why he’s obviously wrong when you read the SC analysis of the EA2010

??
Most people rarely use a council-run toilet. They use toilets in supermarkets, restaurants etc. For these toilets surely if you had a problem you would not speak to the council? Surely for any problem with a loo in Asda, you would speak to Asda?

No one knows how many non domestic loos there are in this country. We know more about numbers of street lamps than loos. What I can say, is that council-run toilets numbers have been decimated. Sex, drugs, vandalism, crime, threats to cleaners safety all play a part. Toilets are vulnerable places. We have laws especially for public toilets.

You never replied to my last question btw where I gave you more facts on toilets. You can argue against reality all you like but it won’t solve anything.

Unisex in the sense that trans women in France can legally use female public toilets. France does not have national legislation regulating bathroom access by gender or biological sex.

Yes, misogynist don't like women.

Nonetheless, in England we have laws. And if you're male, you need to stay out of women's spaces.

Most people rarely use a council-run toilet.

And you know this how? Are you omni present?

Even Justice Swift can't change the rules of logic.

A single sex service that can be used by both sexes is not single sex.

Justice Swift did not ask the EHRC to change their guidance, so anyone relying on his comment is on rather shaky ground.

But regardless of that, your problem is that there is no way to exclude anyone on the basis of gender which is why services that define themselves as 'inclusive' put up signs asking people not to question anyone's use of the service. These services are for anyone who wishes to use them.

And again, if you want to campaign for mixed sex services you should certainly do that. Just please stop complaining that women who want single sex services are excluding a specific group of men when they are very clear that they wish to exclude all men.

France is a bastion of misogyny and sexism, why use that as an example?