THE UK Government is considering changing the legal definition of “sex” in the Equality Act.
While the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has said such a change could bring “greater legal clarity” in areas such as the provision of single-sex spaces, LGBT+ charity Stonewall said the move risks “opening yet another chapter in a manufactured culture war”.
But what would such a change mean for both women and transgender people in Scotland?
What is the Equality Act?
The Equality Act 2010 aims to protect citizens from unlawful treatment resulting from discrimination of person’s characteristics. These “protected characteristics” include age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage, pregnancy, race, religion, sex and sexuality.
It was brought in to protect people from the potential harms caused by discrimination (such as losing your job for being pregnant) and aims to enshrine equal opportunities in both the workplace and wider society.
Why bother changing it?
The Scottish Government repeatedly stated during debates in Holyrood that the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which was passed by a majority of MSPs last year before being blocked by the UK Government, interacted with the Equality Act in only a minimal fashion.
Indeed, while the legislation changed the process of legally changing one’s gender, it doesn’t alter the protections already offered to transgender people in the Equality Act.
However, after blocking the legislation Scotland Secretary Alister Jack (below) said the UK Government felt it would have “serious adverse impact” on the Equality Act – including on the provision of single-sex clubs, associations and schools.
Women and Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch then tasked the EHRC with considering “the benefits or otherwise” of amending the act’s current definition of “sex” in light of Scotland’s move to reform the process of gender recognition.
The chairwoman of EHRC, Baroness Falkner, has now said that because the Equality Act uses the terms “sex” and “gender” interchangeably, changing the definition of “sex” to refer strictly to “biological sex” – that is, the sex a person is assigned at birth – could make the provision of single-sex spaces that exclude transgender women easier.
What will it mean for women and transgender people if it is changed?
Last year, gender critical campaign group For Women Scotland lost a court case in Scotland over the legal definition of the word “woman” when it comes to legislation that aims to ensure gender balance on public boards.
In her judgment Lady Haldane stated: “The meaning of sex for the purposes of the 2010 Act, 'sex' is not limited to biological or birth sex, but includes those in possession of a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) obtained in accordance with the 2004 Act stating their acquired gender, and thus their sex."
According to LGBT rights charity the Equality Network, this corresponded with the existing exemptions in the Equality Act – which allow single-sex services to exclude trans people when it is “proportionate to a legitimate aim”.
If the UK Government changes the definition of “sex” then there would be no need for organisations or clubs to prove they have a “legitimate aim” when excluding transgender people.
In fact, it could result in a transfer of rights from trans women to trans men – for example, trans men would be allowed to be considered in “women-only” shortlists for things such as literary prizes because of their assigned sex at birth.
Transgender people could also be barred from accessing public bathrooms that accord with their acquired gender, a situation which LGBT charities say could jeopardise the safety of trans people.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel