For example the Code of Practice says that where an employee is transitioning the employer should talk to them about using *different* facilities.
Stonewall say that all facilities are provided based on gender-self identity
"gender identity" they say can be used interchangeably with "gender reassignment"
The impact of this is that they tell employers *not* to monitor the protected characteristic of sex, but only "gender identity"
.... trans women are women you see.
What they subtly misstate here is that the protection against discrimination in the Equality Act does not mean that a person has changed sex
Here they say they don't want to ban the word "mother" they just want to redefine it, and make it impossible to use to describe the rights of actual mothers.
In their view a man who has fathered a child can be a "mother"
Does Stonewall see a conflict between employers obligations to protect "LGBTQ+" (that's not a protected characteristic!) and gender critical employees.
No they say...
Why then did they lead this open letter condemning the EHRC for intervening in my case?
Why did their Head of Trans Inclusion email Garden Court Chambers to complain about Allison Bailey express gender critical views on the internet and chairing a WPUK meeting?
With one breath they say protection for GC beliefs are "very narrow", and with the next they tell employers to go above and beyond the law.
In fact protection against harassment & discrimination is the same for any PCs. That's why its called the *Equality* Act
Its normal to use everyday language to describe the law they say ....
... but also the Equality Act doesn't use the term "biological sex" 🙄
The EHRC's new guidance on single-sex services is confusing therefore.
(everyone knows "sex" means what Judith Butler says, its not confusing at all... )
This is what the Equality Act says.
Sex discrimination includes discrimination related to pregnancy, birth and breastfeeding.
(But its nothing to do with biological sex says Stonewall)
This is nonsense.
There is an *exception* which allows the provision of single-sex services.
The Equality Act sets out a list of circumstances where these exceptions can be applied. It does not mention "gender identity"
Being a Stonewall Diversity Champion or Workplace Equality member does not affect impartiality they say
They email Diversity Champions members and encourage them to tweet in support of Stonewall's preferred legal changes.
And then award them Workplace Equality Index points for doing so.
Are we campaigning to amend the Equality Act. No they. say.
Meanwhile what they told the Women and Equality Select Committee was yes.
This is what Nancy Kelley said about Stonewall's desire to influence the BBC
This is what the Information Commissioner's Office says
"Such is the potential for a scheme to be misused as a campaigning tool, the Commissioner considers that there is an unusually strong public interest in transparency. "
What they don't say is that the advice they have been giving to members to claim "commercial interests" and "confidentiality" is not in line with the law, according to the ICO
Organisations that are concerned: This is bad advice.
Don't look to Stonewall's FAQ or unpublished legal advice to get the facts or the law straight.
Ask your general counsel, not the LGBTQ+ team or your social media colleagues.
Promote real inclusion, which recognises that everyone has equal human rights.
Everyone has a sex, and there are important legal protections against sex discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, belief discrimination and for "gender reassignment".
[ENDS]
And the thread keeps going....
Are they or aren't they involved with nursery schools?
15 months after calling me in for questioning about a tweet, and having sat on the CPS decision that there was no crime for 2 months, the Met bothered to call me up at 7pm this evening to tell me, and then put out this press statement. 🙄
#TheProcessIsThePunishment
Here is the tweet over which they wasted their time, my time, my lawyers time and taxpayers' money.
Minister for Women & Equalities says "We are proud of the EqAct & the rights & protections it affords women. The Govt does not plan to amend legal definitions in the act.”
Hundreds of women are going to Parliament on Wednesday to ask the govt to rethink.
It took 22 more years before 1919 the Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act was passed permitting women to become join professions and to become lawyers and civil servants and to sit on juries.
There is new statutory safeguarding guidance out for schools in England which tells them to consider risks and harms to gender questioning children as part of safeguarding.
When this was out for consultation earlier in the year Adam Jepsen, Chief Health and Sex Education Officer of the Family Planning Association said that the government must withdraw it.
"These changes do not support trans children" he argued.
This is not the only topic where university VCs have not defended academic freedom strongly enough, but it is a very good demonstration of the problem.
@bphillipsonMP
Prof @Docstockk was hounded out of @SussexUni
She has been waiting for 3 years for the results of an @officestudents investigation