Equality Bill Publication

[Robyn]

Hello everyone,

After a little delay, the bill is now available for reading.

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/200 ... ality.html

Please read.

Yours,
Robyn

[Alison]

Hi Everyone,

There are a few points that I have picked up from a VERY QUICK reading of the bill that I thought I would share with you. In general, the Bill seems reasonably positive for all gender variant people of all ages.

Schools
Gender reassignment protection is extended to schools, however, there is an exception in the case of harassment – what exactly this means is a technical matter and needs further explanation. The exception for harassment also applies to sexual orientation, religion or belief.

From the explanatory notes:
“283. However, the prohibition on harassment of pupils or prospective pupils does not cover
gender reassignment, sexual orientation or religion or belief.”

Association and perception
Discrimination is to be extended to those who associate with a person who has a “protected characteristic” or someone who is wrongly perceived to have a “protected characteristic”.

From the Bill:
4 The protected characteristics
The following characteristics are protected characteristics.

age;
disability;
gender reassignment;
marriage and civil partnership;
pregnancy and maternity;
race;
religion or belief;
sex;
sexual orientation.

13 Direct discrimination
(1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.

From the explanatory notes:
71. Direct discrimination occurs where the reason for a person being treated less favourably than another is a protected characteristic listed in clause 4. This definition is broad enough to cover cases where the less favourable treatment is because of the victim.s association with someone who has that characteristic (for example, is disabled), or because the victim is wrongly thought to have it (for example, a particular religious belief).

Definition of Gender Reassignment
The wording of the clause is somewhat different and important as it removes the requirement for medical supervision. To give the example in the explanatory notes:

“An unemployed person who was born physically female decides to spend the rest of
her life as a man. He starts and continues to live as a man. He decides not to seek
medical advice as he successfully .passes. as a man without the need for any medical
intervention. He would be undergoing gender reassignment for the purposes of the
Bill.”

From the Bill:
7 Gender reassignment

(1) A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person.s sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
(2) A reference to a transsexual person is a reference to a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
(3) In relation to the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

(a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a transsexual person;
(b) a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to transsexual persons.

From the explanatory notes:
57. This clause replaces similar provisions in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 but changes the definition by no longer requiring a person to be under medical supervision to come within it.

Alison

[nipclaw]

It's also perhaps worth looking at http://www.equalities.gov.uk/equality_bill.aspx on the Equalities Office website since it also links to related documents.

[nipclaw]

There's a;so the Noddy guide to the bill at http://www.equalities.gov.uk/PDF/EasyRe ... %20Acc.pdf

[clairefromhudds]

I've read through how the Bill is proposed to improve fairness for the different groupings of people on http://www.equalities.gov.uk/equality_bill.aspx.

I'm a little disturbed to see that how transgender people were the last on the list to show how they'd improve fairness for us(but of course not surprised) .Maybe we were last to be mentioned there because the government knows how uncomfortable a lot of the general public are with us and may show how Government themselves are uncomfortable with us to be the last group that are mentioned.Though it may be just a number thing, that there are less TS s than there are people belonging to the other groups that we were the last group to be mentioned.

It seems that people associated with transgender people who face discrimination are protected but the actual transexuals aren't.

Alison Whelan on ts_uk thought after just a brief initial read through that it is recognised when transexuals face discrimination yet we are not protected from Harrasment.

What reasons have the Government given for protecting those associated with transexuals fromn discrimination but only recognising we face it and not protecting us from Discrimination or Harrasment ?

[clairefromhudds]

Just thought of another quick point. What are the punishments for people who break this law? No law is any good unless it has teeth and those that break it will be punished for breaking it.

Yes it may help to educate the general public that we shouldn't be discriminated against. But if it's true it will only recognise discrimination against us yet not maybe protect us from it and it appears we are definitely not protected from Harassment we need to find out why the government won't protect us and people of a different sexual orientation, because of their religion or belief.

As those groups together with us seem to be included in the anti discrimination part, yet no good if people who do discriminate aren't punished.I'm sure the bigots even more so because they know the law is meant to protect us will enjoy more being awful to us if they know they won't get punished for it.

So if we don't know already we need to ask the Government or someone on or behalf should do, why us and those other groups are included in anti discrimination part yet us and them are not included as being protected from Harassment.

We need to find out why and if there is no good reason, then maybe ask why are we seen to be less important than the groups that are protected from Harassment ?

I do think that introducing education of what it is to be gay, lesbian, bi or transexual into schools everywhere is what's needed though.

And to teach them that none of these things is chosen and to perhaps discuss possible genetic reasons, though maybe to say nothings proven yet of course.

Though I wonder when the evidence on the genetic reasons will ever be accepted.We have to remember that skeptics in any field and particularly those who are dead against something and are either bigoted or ignorant in their views will do anything, sometimes coming up with more bizarre and less proven findings of their own to put down something which has better evidence because they don't like it.

So we will always have skeptics somewhere coming up with some reason to not accept any evidence about the genetic reasons for being Ts.

I know there have been parliamentary sub-committees, set up to discuss transsexual issues, but has any of the genetic study evidence ever been presented to any MPs to see what they think of it? I'm sure many of them know that is very difficult to totally prove many things and that there will always be skeptics hell bent to dismiss any genetic evidence in our favour.But if the MP shown the best most likely evidence ofcourse thought it was more likely that the conclusions from the study evidence shown to them was correct then it may affect their thinking over Bills to protect us or help to encourage them to introduce some of that thinking into educating children about us.Maybe it's been decided that none of the evidence is good enough yet to dare show to any MP.But I think it may be worth showing them the very best evidence which has the most likely conclusions in our favour.We would have nothing to lose if it didn't improve things for us.So it'd be worth showing them what I've said I think.



Anyway apart from that I think the best way to prevent discrimination and abuse of transexuals in the future is through teaching kids about us, at least that mkost of us are nice people and that it's not a choice and we're not strange just because we don't fit in to their taught stereotypical views of what it is to be male or female.Schools are where most of the general public are taught the ideas that most of them will continue to have for the rest of their lives when they are an adult etc.

[Alison]

There's a;so the Noddy guide to the bill at http://www.equalities.gov.uk/PDF/EasyRe ... %20Acc.pdf

And such a lovely Noddy guide too - can you work out which strand each of the characters represents?

[Swarmy]

Oh my. I think doing guides like that is a really, really good idea, but some of that is unintentionally hilarious. It took me a while to realise the butch lesbian with the femme hanging off her arm wasn't actually meant to be a man (I thought they were being very bi-positive for a moment!) and this made me giggle:

Many young lesbian and gay peopleare bullied at school. Some of them feel very unhappy because of this.

Anyways, thanks to the links to the guides all, will save me a bit of time. I remembered about the publication of the equality bill earlier today and immediately came here, I was glad to see there was already discussion! Will post a fullr response later.

[James Morton]

Here is my first-read understanding of the coverage offered by the Equality Bill:

Gender Reassignment Definition:

The "Gender Reassignment" legal definition is slightly widened in the Equality Bill - the new definition is "A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex."

The difference from the current definition is that the current one requires the process to be under medical supervision - that requirement has been removed from the new definition. The bill also uses the term "transsexual person" to mean a person to whom the gender reassignment definition applies.

So Gender Spectrum UK might want to concentrate on campaigning to get the protected characteristic changed to gender identity. It would be better for ensuring coverage of all gender variant people if the definition could be changed through lobbying to something like: The protected characteristic of gender identity meaning whether or not a person’s gender-related identity, physical appearance or behaviour conforms to the sex they were legally assigned at birth, or to the identity, physical appearance or behaviour traditionally associated with that sex.

Public Sector Equality Duty:

The Equality Bill contains a public sector duty covering the seven strands of age; disability; gender reassignment; race; religion or belief; sex; and sexual orientation. As a result, it requires public authorities to have due regard to the need to-
(a) eliminate transphobic discrimination, harassment and victimisation;
(b) advance equality of opportunity between transsexual people and non-transsexual people; and
(c) foster good relations between transsexual people and non-transsexual people.

Association and Perception:

Discrimination is banned in the Eqaulity Bill if it is done "because of" gender reassignment (the old definition was "on grounds of" gender reassignment). "Because of" includes because the victim associates with people with a protected characteristic, or because the victim is wrongly perceived to have a protected characteristic. Therefore, rather than only covering transsexual people, the direct discrimination protection for employment, vocational training, goods, facilities and services proposed in the Equality Bill also covers their friends and families and also non-transsexual people (who might have a different type of transgender or intersex identity, or who might not be transgender or intersex in any way) wrongly perceived to be transsexual.

The definition of harassment is slightly different to the current definition. The new definition bans harassment "related to" gender reassignment (the old definition was "on grounds of" gender reassignment) - except in education services. The new definition is a bit better thsn the old definition - it makes it clearer that, for example, transphobic harassment is unlawful even if the victim is known by the harassers not to be transsexual.

School Education:

The Equality Bill extends goods, facilities and services protection against discrimination because of gender reassignment to include school education. However, it does not cover harassment related to gender reassignment within school education.

Another potential key campaign point is to get the harassment coverage put in place for education.

Insurance Premium Calculations:

The gender reassignment rule for insurance is unchanged - the premium that will apply is the one for the person's legal gender, so that the premium changes when they get a gender recognition certificate, not when they start living full-time as their acquired gender.

Religious Exceptions:

The religious exception for gender reassignment discrimination in employment is tightened up. Religious bodies will only be allowed to discriminate in employment for posts where the employment wholly or mainly involves-
(a) leading or assisting in the observation of liturgical or ritualistic practices of the religion, or
(b) promoting or explaining the doctrine of the religion (whether to followers of the religion or to others).

The other gender reassignment exceptions (e.g. for single sex services) don't appear at first glance to have changed from what's already in the Sex Disscriminaton Act but I intend to double check in detail over the next few days.

--
James

[Robyn]

Hi there,

It really does not look as it it goes as far as I would have liked it to have.

I still need to completely read through the bill and make some notes. I have been reading a few of the comments posted here and elsewhere, and also sent in privately.

The issue over single sex facilities seems to be worse than useless. If it is phrased in the manner that someone has implied, then I have a little protest method up my sleeves for any meetings in London.

As for the issue of Schools, I find it disgusting that they are specifically excluded. Why should it be possible to include some many other areas when we know that gender variant children do need protecting as well?

Yes we do need to push for a broader definition, but I suspect that the one given comes from a medical source. We need to get others included, otherwise they will never be covered. I am specifically thinking of IS people who have specific characteristics that could be misread and also those who fit outside the gender binary.

Yours,
Robyn