Transnegation Roundup/2020/09/20/1 - Revision history

Woozle: header, clarification

2020-09-20T15:50:18Z

header, clarification

Woozle at 15:48, 20 September 2020

2020-09-20T15:48:43Z

Woozle: Created page with "* {{show/tweet|AnnMSinnott|1307635037756628992|2020-09-20 06:57|This a distortion of the law. {{hilite|Trans people do not have a legal right to access single-sex spaces.}} Th..."

2020-09-20T15:45:18Z

Created page with "* {{show/tweet|AnnMSinnott|1307635037756628992|2020-09-20 06:57|This a distortion of the law. {{hilite|Trans people do not have a legal right to access single-sex spaces.}} Th..."

New page

* {{show/tweet|AnnMSinnott|1307635037756628992|2020-09-20 06:57|This a distortion of the law. {{hilite|Trans people do not have a legal right to access single-sex spaces.}} They can be excluded if it is a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim. Such exclusion doesn't equate to gender reassignment discrimination -Equality Act Sch 3, Part 7, s28}}

So much for equality.

However, the law doesn't seem to back up Ann's conclusion that "trans people do not have a legal right to access single-sex spaces". As far as I can tell, it says the opposite: they may not be denied access or harassed, regardless of the provider's religion or sexual orientation. Details are in "Section 29", see below.

* [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents Equality Act 2010]
** [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7 Explanatory Notes: Commentary on Sections: Part 16: Schedule 3: Part 7: Separate and single services]: '''item 738''' refers to "paragraph 28", which is presumably what is meant by "s28"<ref name=note1>The [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3/part/7/paragraph/28 link given] is bad. Hunting through archive.org, it was apparently ''never'' correct, but in May 2013 there was a redirect in place which had disappeared by 2018. I got the correct link by letting archive.org follow that redirect.</ref>, which goes to:
*** [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3/paragraph/28 Equality Act 2010: SCHEDULE 3: Part 7 - Gender reassignment: '''Paragraph 28'''] "A person does not contravene section 29, so far as relating to gender reassignment discrimination, only because of anything done in relation to a matter within sub-paragraph (2) if the conduct in question is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim." Sub-paragraph two is basically provision of sex-segregated services.
**** [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/29 Equality Act 2010: Part 3 - Provision of services, etc.: '''Section 29''']: long list of rules, mostly "service-provider must not" harass, discriminate, victimise, etc.
*** '''Item 738''' in the "notes", meanwhile, lists some specific exceptions to the Section 28/29 rules, none of which affect the general principle that trans people have a right to access same-sex spaces matching their gender identity. The exceptions are all about practical considerations (no medical need, lack of demand) or personal services where a provider's comfort is important.

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 * {{show/tweet|AnnMSinnott|1307635037756628992|2020-09-20 06:57|This a distortion of the law. {{hilite|Trans people do not have a legal right to access single-sex spaces.}} They can be excluded if it is a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim. Such exclusion doesn't equate to gender reassignment discrimination -Equality Act  Sch 3, Part 7, s28}}
-At all? Did she really mean to say that? That would be, like, unless there's a "trans bathroom", you can't use the loo.
+At all? Did Ann really mean to say that? That would be, like, unless there's a "trans bathroom", you can't use the loo.
-However, the law doesn't seem to back up Ann's conclusion that "trans people do not have a legal right to access single-sex spaces". As far as I can tell, it says the opposite: they may not be denied access or harassed, regardless of the provider's religion or sexual orientation. Details are in "Section 29", see below.
+However, the law doesn't seem to back up her conclusion that "trans people do not have a legal right to access single-sex spaces". As far as I can tell, it says the opposite: they may not be denied access or harassed, regardless of the provider's religion or sexual orientation, except for certain practical reasons as given in '''item 738''' of the Notes:
-* [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents Equality Act 2010]
+* [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents Equality Act 2010]: index to the whole thing
 ** [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/16/20/7 Explanatory Notes: Commentary on Sections: Part 16: Schedule 3: Part 7:  Separate and single services]: '''item 738''' refers to "paragraph 28", which is presumably what is meant by "s28"<ref name=note1>The [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3/part/7/paragraph/28 link given] is bad. Hunting through archive.org, it was apparently ''never'' correct, but in May 2013 there was a redirect in place which had disappeared by 2018. I got the correct link by letting archive.org follow that redirect.</ref>, which goes to:
 *** [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3/paragraph/28 Equality Act 2010: SCHEDULE 3: Part 7 - Gender reassignment: '''Paragraph 28'''] "A person does not contravene section 29, so far as relating to gender reassignment discrimination, only because of anything done in relation to a matter within sub-paragraph (2) if the conduct in question is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim." Sub-paragraph two is basically provision of sex-segregated services.
 **** [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/29 Equality Act 2010: Part 3 - Provision of services, etc.: '''Section 29''']: long list of rules, mostly "service-provider must not" harass, discriminate, victimise, etc.
 *** '''Item 738''' in the "notes", meanwhile, lists some specific exceptions to the Section 28/29 rules, none of which affect the general principle that trans people have a right to access same-sex spaces matching their gender identity. The exceptions are all about practical considerations (no medical need, lack of demand) or personal services where a provider's comfort is important.