Get the facts sex-matters.org/posts/update...
“It is clear that taking no action at the moment is not a lawful option for the Scottish government.”
We will go to court again if ministers do not act.
Read more in @thetimes ⤵️
www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/...
The Equality Act does not require case-by-case assessment to apply ordinary sex-based rules.
It does not give trans-identifying people the right to use single and separate sex services for the opposite sex.
Read Sex Matters' guidance
sex-matters.org/wp-content/u...
The principles are simple.
There are different ways of providing services.
The Equality Act provides for all of them when they are a proportionate means to a legitimate aim.
The single-sex and separate-sex service exceptions in the Equality Act should be straightforward and easy to use.
The recent judgment by the Supreme Court in the case of For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers made clear that the Equality Act is based on biological sex.
Providing single sex services with confidence: a template for clear guidance
sex-matters.org/posts/update...
Joanne Cash and Sue-Mei Thompson. No idea why they redacted them.
The EHRC met a human rights charity not a "hate group".
There were two members of staff there - one works in legal
Top tip: when you do an "exposé" read the documents. As you will see there was the Chair & CEO, two commissioners and two staff members which EHRC have redacted.
TAKE ACTION: Email your MP!
Calling all sex-realist women and men! Bank holiday weekend action.
Use this tool to write to your MP and tell them how much you appreciate the Supreme Court's clarity and want them to support local organisations to start following it.
sex-matters.org/take-action/...
As the email shows Joanne Cash and Su-Mei Thompson bsky.app/profile/tran...
Guess again 🙄
Lot of imagination going on here 🤣
Calling accurate data on sex "anti-trans" is silly playground stuff.
Everyone has a sex, even trans & non-binary people.
The aim of the DVS is to enable ppl to prove facts about themselves.
And as the UKSC has confirmed sex is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act.
Following the #SupremeCourt ruling, everyone wants to talk about toilets.
The Equality Act, and this judgment, are about much more than toilets. But toilets are important.
Sex Matters' latest blog answers the most common questions. 👇
sex-matters.org/posts/update...
Following the #SupremeCourt ruling, everyone wants to talk about toilets.
The Equality Act, and this judgment, are about much more than toilets. But toilets are important.
Sex Matters' latest blog answers the most common questions. 👇
sex-matters.org/posts/update...
“Those provisions were always there, but the Supreme
Court has set that out beyond a doubt.”
Clear, strong and impressive from Labour's Minister
for Women & Equalities Bridget Phillipson MP speaking for the Government on the #SupremeCourt judgment.
Great to hear! 🙏
Right now a lot of people need to change their mind about the protected characteristic of sex.
The legal accepted wisdom was wrong.
Naomi Cunningham wrote about changing her mind on this in 2022 after some late night debates...
sex-matters.org/posts/update...
We had precooked two statements: one for a win and one for a loss. We didn’t dare hope the result would be better than 8 on our scale – roughly, an FWS win, but with comments designed to deflect criticism from those opposed to sex-based rights.
After Easter, Sex Matters will be writing letters and speaking to key individuals and organisations, and our supporters will be taking action
by local authorities, police forces and NHS trusts; by regulators, trades unions, charities, sports governing bodies, universities and schools; and by industry bodies and every employer.
But organisational inertia is powerful. Our next task is to make sure that this judgment is understood and implemented by the national and devolved governments and all their departments;
sex-matters.org/posts/update...
Those were the angry cries of teenagers, it turned out, encouraged and amplified by adults who should have known better – and some who were willing to exploit their distress.
Every person who has spoken up for reality and faced ridiculous accusations of being a bigot, fascist or Nazi was vindicated by the Supreme Court ruling.
And now scrappy upstart organisations and grassroots groups of dissident women and men have brought most media outlets and many politicians – as well as the judges of the Supreme Court – to the point where they see the issue our way.
Step by step, we became braver and harder to ignore.
That first protection for free speech about sex-based rights started a process whereby each person who spoke up made it easier for the next person to do so, and each thing we said further refined our message and thinking.
Courage calls to courage. And freedom of speech makes us all cleverer, as well as harder to frighten and control.
It has taken us five years to get from a situation where a woman could lose her job for saying that the definition of sex in law should be reality-based to hearing the Supreme Court agree with that position.
The Supreme Court is only five minutes’ walk from my old workplace at the Centre for Global Development, where I lost my job for wanting to talk about protections for women in the law.
