Cat furniture, cool auntie, and algorithmic witch. Digital rights, and IP law.
Personal account and talks about everything. I usually follow back if you reply or like my post.
Ashleeee 🦄🧚🏻♀️
Loading...
Lol
Wtf
Providing single-sex services in the form of “third space” so we don’t have to check anyone’s “biological sex”. This is surely the most proportionate approach by the EHRC’s (contradictory) standards, right?
Let’s assume the legislature adopted all these contradictory measures. The only logical conclusion is that single-sex services mean side room and third space. So you don’t actually need to check anyone’s “Biological Sex” when providing for their “Biological Sex”.
But all this nonsense would not emerge if:
- No one can demand the exclusion of others from the mainstream provision or part of services, etc.
- Single-sex services can only be provided on a case-by-case basis.
Which is the inverse of what is proposed in the Code.
2/ I have little doubt Goodwin extends the benefit of gender papers to cis folks too, as they now face exactly the same disadvantage as Goodwin.
1/🧵 Whether guidance that undermines all proof of sex (both as a civil status and for specific purposes) is an Article 8 violation for everyone is a good academic question.
