Maya Forstater

How would this apply in situations of sex segregation due to bodily privacy (e.g. Under Schedule 3, s27 6b) "The circumstances are such that a person of one sex might reasonably object to presence of a person of the opposite sex"? This says nothing about preferred gender

And you know, it is rather interesting how those allegedly "against self-ID" and "wanting balance" always show themselves up as being against the current GRA too, for the kind of biological designation enforcement that is illegal across the Council of Europe.

On the contrary, it mandates a change of the "civil status" of sex, based on a diagnosis alone. (There is no ECHR self-ID mandate. There is a PACE recommendation, which is not binding).

The exception that must be invoked to have such services or spaces is section 28 of the EA2010, and indeed it was not contested in the ECHR. Section 27 on its own refers to legal sex.

So Schedule 3 s.27 where the first example it gives is about cervical cancer screening services is referring to legal sex? How does that work??