this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
37 points (95.1% liked)

UK Politics

3651 readers
277 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
tom@feddit.uk
GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
flamingos@feddit.uk
frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
37
Interim EHRC guidance instructs UK orgs to segregate Trans+ people in public single-sex spaces (www.wearequeeraf.com)
submitted 1 day ago by flamingos@feddit.uk to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has published interim guidance following last week's Supreme Court decision. It instructs organisations that manage public spaces and workplaces to create segregated mixed-sex bathrooms, washing and changing facilities for Trans+ people to use.

It does this on the basis that same-sex spaces can only be used by people that align with the Supreme Court's definition of 'biological sex', while also saying that Trans+ perceived to be of the wrong gender can't use bathrooms that match their biological sex.

If taken beyond interim guidance and made statutory, it would be the biggest human rights disaster since racial segregation and apartheid.

The guidance covers workplaces, schools, and services open to the public, such as hospitals, shops and restaurants.

It stipulates that, where possible, mixed-sex toilets, washing and changing facilities should now be provided. In an interim period, it sets out where this is not possible, trans people should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IcyToes@sh.itjust.works 9 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

When black people couldn't use the same bathrooms as white folk. Here, Trans women including those post op for 20 - 30 years are not allowed to use the women's bathroom and have to use the men's. Likewise, a trans man, born woman, that has been a man for decades has to use the women's bathroom.

Wasn't sure it needed to be spelt out, but needs to be to understand how ridiculous all this is (because of a court case in Scotland about women's representation on boards). Shocking how many rights got trashed with that and how many transhobic politicians got excited.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

I think it's like comparing apples and oranges.

Trans women including those post op for 20 - 30 years are not allowed to use the women's bathroom and have to use the men's.

According to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, you have to be born as a woman in order to be a woman.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

According to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, you have to be born as a woman in order to be a woman.

This isn't accurate, the SC ruled that the only consistent definition of woman for the purposes of the 2010 Equalities Act is a 'biological woman'*. A trans woman with a GRC is still legally a woman, she's just not afforded the protections graned to women in the Equalities Act. (This is a crock of shit, but I'll spare you that rant)

* You might wonder how the SC actually defines 'biological woman' and it has nothing to actually do with biology, it's just if you originally had woman marked down on you birth certificate.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 3 hours ago

Ty for the correction!

[–] IcyToes@sh.itjust.works 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

A court I'd not heard about until now, for a case funded by a transphobe who writes shitty wizard books.

To go further, I think the judgement is wrong and probably has their own biases shining through.

I think it is hard to see injustice if you do not want to see it.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 8 hours ago

That's your opinion in which I respect, but comparing such a thing to apartheid is a bit of a stretch, and I'd strongly recommend against such a thing.