It is not excluding on a case by case basis. It's including trans women at any stage of transition and any men who care to try. You turn up. You tell the lifeguard you identify as female. You're in.
Show this thread
-
No I think you are starting in the wrong place here. The single/seperate sex exemption s26 is what allows you to have a womens (& mens) pond in the first place. You dont invoke the exemption to exclude transwomen but to exclude men.pic.twitter.com/eiYqmum3Dy
S.7 defines the PC of gender reassignment, but it doesn't change people's sex. So as the EHRC (belatedly) made clear transwomen without a GRC are legally men, & would be covered by the exemption in the same way as other men (who may also have other PCs) https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/our-statement-sex-and-gender-reassignment-legal-protections-and-language …
-
-
Then the question is should they also invoke Schedule 3 para 28 to exclude transwomen w a GRC who are legally women. Is it proportionate. I would say yes. Because the reason for the single sex exemption in the first place is to allow bodily privacy.
-
The single sex ponds are places where men & women don't expect to be exposed while in a state of undress/half dressed to people of the opposite sex, and therefore to keep that expectation, excluding people of the opposite sex is proportionate, especially since there are 3 pondspic.twitter.com/xZyg8NULpK
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.