Summary
The Scottish government should take action to protect women at work: This article addresses and refutes claims made by "Sex Matters," emphasising the importance of trans inclusion by drawing on the Equality Act 2010 and the Amery and Mondon Review.
The Scottish government should take action to protect women at work – Responding to Sex Matters
On the 18th of February the organisation “Sex Matters” posted an article on their website headlined: “The Scottish government should take action to protect women at work. We are not quite sure to whom women need protection from, though the implication is people who are transgender.
The central claim made by Sex Matters would appear to be that transgender people should be discriminated against in accessing services and facilities is, in our opinion, not supported by law – misinterpreting the intent of equality legislation and overlooks the societal harms of ‘othering’ transgender people.
While some groups advocate for restricting the rights of trans people, particularly concerning single-sex spaces, these arguments can rely on a selective reading of the Equality Act 2010 and contribute to a climate of transphobia.
This article responds and debunks these claims, drawing on the Equality Act 2010 and the Amery and Mondon Review to illustrate the importance of trans inclusion.
The Equality Act 2010 protects individuals from discrimination based on gender reassignment. This protection extends to various areas, including employment, education, and access to goods, services, and facilities. The Act defines “gender reassignment” as the process of transitioning from one sex to another, encompassing those who have proposed, started, or completed the process. The Act does not require medical supervision for an individual to be protected under this characteristic.
The Amery and Mondon Review discusses the phenomenon of “othering,” where certain groups are marginalised by constructing them as fundamentally different from the societal norm. Reactionary politics often relies on this strategy, exaggerating perceived threats to create homogeneity within a dominant group.
Organised transphobia frequently employs this tactic by portraying trans people as a danger to women and children, thus justifying exclusionary practices. However, this tactic can lead to the dehumanisation of a group of people.
The claim that the Equality Act 2010 justifies discrimination against trans people in single-sex spaces misinterprets the Act’s provisions and overlooks its core principles of equality and inclusion.
While the Act does allow for some exceptions regarding single-sex services and facilities, these exceptions are not blanket permissions for discrimination. They must be objectively justified, proportionate, and applied case-by-case. The Equality Act 2010 states that single-sex services are permitted in some circumstances, and TransLucent agrees that, on occasion, discrimination can be justifiable. Still, in the incident to which Sex Matters is referring to, it would appear only one staff member had an issue with Dr Upton using a female changing room.
The assertion that trans women pose a threat to cisgender women in female spaces is a common justification for exclusionary practices.
However, evidence does not support this argument and relies on harmful stereotypes. Studies have shown that trans women are not more likely to perpetrate harassment or violence than cisgender women, indeed, evidence shows that trans people are twice as likely to be victims of crime compared to cisgender people.
The Equality Act 2010 aims to harmonise discrimination law and strengthen support for equality.
To achieve this, the Act identifies protected characteristics, including age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.
In addition, the public sector equality duty, which is detailed in Part 11 of the Act, places a general duty on public authorities to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment or victimisation, to advance equality of opportunity, and to foster good relations.
The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful to discriminate unfairly against someone because of gender reassignment.
Excluding trans people from spaces and services not only violates their human rights but also perpetuates harmful stereotypes and contributes to a climate of fear and misunderstanding. Such exclusion can have severe consequences for trans individuals’ mental and physical well-being, increasing their risk of discrimination, harassment, and violence.
It is reasonably clear that the nurse concerned held strong views about sex and gender: Dr Upton has been quoted that she was “upset and afraid.” It can, therefore, be argued that some trans people (both staff and patients) could feel deeply uncomfortable in the presence of NHS staff who may hold gender-critical views. It is a sad fact that Transgender Europe reports that 34% of trans people have reported discrimination in their healthcare system, and given the levels of transphobia in the UK, that figure will be considerably higher than the European average.
Going forward, we believe the NHS needs to recognise these concerns and act accordingly.
The Scottish government should take action to protect women at work – Responding to Sex Matters
