Thread by @ObjectUK

@Docstockk is a brilliant scholar and a champion of the rights of women. Solidarity with her against the abuse and defamation of @WelfareUSSU @USSU. What is happening at the @SussexUni ,it is not a safe environment to be a female academic or student?

The @SussexUni does have a history of failing females, here from 2017 after an inquiry it was found to have failed in its duty of care to a female assualt victim. From the @USSU letter it looks like it may be a breeding ground for misogynistic attitudes. independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…

The investigation into @SussexUni unearthed many reports of alleged sexual abuse and harassment. Is it incubating a culture where women are seen as existing to please men as suggested by the @USSU letter? What about women's human rights and humanity? telegraph.co.uk/education/2017…

Only a few years ago @SussexUni was found to be renting its student accomodation to a Hungarian sex trafficking gang who used it as a brothel. theargus.co.uk/news/10775463.…

Dr John Davies holds a doctorate from the University of Sussex has been on the Interpol watch list for baby trafficking, is a pro-prostitution academic & banned from 2 countries. Could there be an anti-women culture at @SussexUni ?
byline.com/column/7/artic…

Dr John Davies 'spent many years, first as a DPhil candidate and then as a Visiting Research Fellow, at the Centre for Migration Research at the University of Sussex in England' arguing that sex-trafficking was a myth. byline.com/column/7/artic…

Continuing the question of does the University of Sussex have a problem with sexism, it is interesting to note that as the Student's Union at Sussex declares the need for sex segregated spaces when women are vulnerable 'hate speech' the university has a bad reputation for dealing

with rape and assualt. (Thank you @PankhurstEM for screen grabs). This was raised in a student paper which dedicated a piece to 'Sexual Assualt at Sussex'. Here is the link: thebadgeronline.com/2016/04/sexual…

From the 2015 Sexual Harassment and Violence Report: '60% of female respondents said they sometimes feel unsafe when visiting Sussex University in the evening, nearly two-thirds higher than the national average from the 2010 NUS Hidden Marks report'. sussexstudent.com/news/article/u…

With sexual harassment at 'epidemic levels' across U.K. universities, Doctor @Docstockk 's suggestion that young women shouldn't have to be naked or vulnerable around people with male genitalia seems more than reasonable. theguardian.com/education/2017…

Nevertheless, the Student's Union @SussexUni declared, in spite of all the evidence and years of harm to young women, that this was hate speech: "many trans women are still males with male genitalia, many are sexually attracted to females..

and they should not be in places where females undress or sleep in a completely unrestricted way.”
theargus.co.uk/news/16334391.…

The @USSU has released a second statement (attached). They may still be in breach of the Equality Act 2010 Public Sector Duty - EA 2010, Part 11, Chapter 1, Section 149,point 1 a-c & point 3 a-c. (we think the first one was). Will the @SussexUni discipline for breaches in the law

The @USSU and @SussexUni should be clear about this section of the EA2010, it was included (p.7-p.9) in the ‘Inclusive Students’ Unions: Equality and Diversity in Practice’ guidelines issued by the @nusuk and AMSU and Equality Challenge Unit. Under section 2.2 and 3.

To be fair the @nusuk is not listing the correct protected characteristics in the ‘Inclusive Students’ Unions: Equality and Diversity in Practice’ guidelines. They have put 'gender' where it should be the two characteristics of 'sex' and 'gender re-assignment' (GRC).

I think the @USSU statement may be failing to eliminate harrassment,and victimisation based on the protected characteristic of sex and the protected characteristic of belief, further it does not 'foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic

and persons who do not share it'. I don't think the @USSU is encouraging persons who share a relevant protected characteristic -sex- to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low. Ideas @SussexUni ?

The statements from the @USSU suggest that that they do not (3)Have regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.

Which involves having due regard, in particular, to the need to—
(a)remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic; - sex and sexual harrasment for example

and thus (b)take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic - Sex - that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it; - single sex facitlities for safety and dignity.

Any interested party - a @SussexUni student or member of staff - needs to report this to the Director of Planning, Governance and Compliance. If the disciplinary procedure is not satisfactory appeal, then a Judicial Review can be taken.

These two pictures explain Judicial Review - it is the way we hold those bound by the 'Public Sector Duties' in the Equality Act 2010 to account. This is how we enforce equality law.