Written submission from Ms E Collar (EEA0054)

I apologise for my lack of knowledge in how to lay this out: the guidance appears to be for professional organisations used to such submissions rather than ordinary members of the public and as such I can only do my best.

I have very serious concerns about how the Equality Act is working, both personally and professionally.

• Sex and Gender have now become such conflated terms that sex based rights are rapidly being destroyed. This has already caused serious damage to the rights of women and girls.
• The Equality Act current protects gender reassignment. Due to the protection being evoked as soon as someone states intent to transition, this offers useful protection to transgendered people in a range of necessary situations. However it has also been conflated to mean simply gender identity and used as a means to gain access to women only provisions that should have been protected under sex based rights and/or safeguarding.
• When a clash comes between gender identity and sex based rights for women to privacy and dignity in situations of vulnerability, undress, intimate care, toileting, in practical terms any basic research demonstrates that gender identity wins every time. Sex based rights are not being enforced. Organisations are afraid to use the exemptions that exist, are told that the ‘bar is set extremely high’ which discourages them from believing it is possible, themselves prioritise gender identity over women’s rights, and are also afraid of the high level of harassment, legal threats and stigma that comes from enforcing women’s rights instead of prioritising gender identity rights.
• The EA sex based rights state that it is possible to exempt and exclude to keep a group/space etc women-only if proportional to do so. This should have been used to manage conflicting rights and needs. However it has not worked in the case of women’s refuges, hospital wards including locked psychiatric wards, girls organisations such as Girl Guides, in cases of safeguarding (the expectation that women and girls must be prepared to undress and shower and sleep alongside male bodied people without right to embarrassment, fear or protest if the male bodied person identifies as a woman.) Many organisations have been vigorously lobbied to overturn their exemptions in favour of gender identity. If the EA has not worked to protect women in these fundamental things, where biological sex is central to meeting the need and sex based rights were essential, it is hard to think where it might work.
• Sex based rights mean nothing if anyone of any biological sex can identify into whatever sex they like and must be treated as a member of that sex. There is no use in protecting women only changing rooms or hospital wards if any man can at any time identify as a woman and be treated as such. In this case, there becomes no logical justification to continue separating men and women at all or continuing with existing safeguarding policies – there is no physical difference in body between 80% of transwomen who choose not to pursue full sexual reassignment genital surgery and of any other men. The objective experience of women being requested to undress, shower, sleep alongside etc is no different in either situation.
• If anyone can identify at any time, and to be asked for identification would be intrusive and unacceptable, then in practical terms this means any male entering a woman’s space has self identified by the act of doing so, and immediately must be seen as a transgender woman who should not be made uncomfortable or distressed by their presence or agenda being questioned.
• This is an abusers and sex offenders charter. This has the effect of ending the right of women and girls to change out of the sight of men, to shower or sleep away from men, to have any groups or activities separate from men, or to be in situations where men are not fully able to access them for sexual enjoyment at will. It is not possible to wish away sex offences, much as it would be lovely to do so. Most women have experienced being groped, harassed, received sexual comments and shouts from unknown men in public places, been sexually harassed, assaulted and raped in their lifetime, frequently from before the age of ten. This enables this behaviour to freely follow them into spaces where they are vulnerable and in states of undress. It is on record that when a self ID day was created in a Swedish bath facility, many non trans men on understanding that the gatekeeping into the women’s facilities had been removed, simply went into the women’s section and openly enjoyed voyeur behaviour. A number of women complained, and were told that this was inevitable and there was nothing that staff could do, and had a choice of either tolerating the low level sexual harassment or to leave.
• In the long term the effect must be considered on society and on women’s rights and equalities if these attitudes become normalised. In particular, the practical outcome that it will no longer be possible for women to meet anywhere outside of the presence of men. Is this a proportional loss to the perceived gain?
• This will significantly and disproportionately affect vulnerable groups of women and girls. Those whose religion and cultures do not permit the presence of unknown and unrelated males in their spaces will not be able to access them. Older women fully used to a lifetime of privacy from males, the massive proportion of women who have experienced domestic violence, sexual assault and rape, many of them will not be able to share spaces with male bodied people no matter what the justification or expectation of society that they should do so. Many more women will simply not want to, due to embarrassment and a desire for bodily privacy and security. Particularly as gender identity provides rights to people who may outwardly dress, present and look entirely male, instead of gender reassignment where an individual has transitioned. In effect, this makes all women’s spaces and all women only provisions, groups and activities mixed sex.
• The only option for these women, and there will be very significant numbers of them as we are talking about 51% of the population, will be to self exclude. This will include access to gyms, sports facilities, public changing rooms, public toilets, social groups that are women only, and other spaces that at Local Authority level a huge amount of work has taken place for years to get women to access. Particularly women from the above mentioned groups whose public engagement and ability to access community resources has already been a challenge. This has already lead to and is likely to lead to widespread occurrences of women discharging themselves from hospital care if they do not feel safe or in a situation where they have privacy or are experiencing harassment, and also refusing intimate care or medical tests if they may be required to accept a self identified but male bodied health care professional when they ask for a same sex hcp. Is it fair and proportional that these women should be excluded from access to public spaces or from equal healthcare because of feelings, beliefs and cultural values that are incompatible with losing sex based protected spaces?
• What is needed is strong gender identity protections alongside equally strong sex based protections. In situations where biological sex is essential to meeting the needs of women – 51% of the population – those situations must be protected. Additional spaces and options will need to be provided to ensure safety, privacy and dignity equally for all without rights competing. What is also needed is a clear definition and separation of the term sex and gender. While gender choices are absolutely the province of the individual and based on flexibility, sex is fixed, immutable and sex based rights for women are based on biological states that women cannot opt out of and which are the entire basis for their need of equality legislation.
• Without this equal provision and balancing of needs I am one of those women who has already had to self exclude due to the removal of sex based protected spaces. The Equality Act is about the balancing of rights, about reasonable adjustments and about no one protected characteristic outweighing another: it is crucial this balance is not lost.

October 2018