New Bathroom Guidance for Trans People ‘the Kind of Policy You’d See in Trump’s America’, Campaigners Say

The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s updated code of practice on sex segregation in services has sparked outrage among LGBTQ+ activists, who see it as a betrayal of Labour’s promise to protect trans rights. Critics liken the guidance to a policy straight out of Donald Trump’s America.

At its core, the EHRC’s new code appears to prioritize biology over identity in defining sex. This trend undermines recent progress towards trans equality and sets a precedent for excluding trans individuals from public life. The Supreme Court ruling last year, which clarified that “sex” refers to biological sex under the Equality Act, was hailed as a victory for women’s rights but also raised concerns about trans exclusion.

The EHRC’s guidance suggests single-sex services can lawfully exclude trans patients or customers if deemed incidental to the primary service provided. This is an attempt to justify segregation based on biological sex rather than allowing individuals to use facilities that align with their gender identity. The commission’s chairwoman, Mary-Ann Stephenson, downplays the issue by calling for a “common sense” approach, but this rhetoric rings hollow in light of the guidance.

The implications are far-reaching and worrying: if implemented, it could lead to trans individuals being pushed out of public life, forced to use separate spaces or facilities that do not meet their needs. This is a clear regression from progress made towards equality and inclusion in recent years. The EHRC’s guidance also raises concerns about policing toilets, with critics warning against a return to bathroom bans seen in the US.

The Labour government’s response has been inadequate. Women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson attempted to reassure trans activists by stating that the Supreme Court ruling made it clear sex means biological sex under the Equality Act, but this only reinforces the EHRC’s dubious guidance. The government claims the new code provides “clear, workable guidance,” which is at odds with criticism from LGBTQ+ activists and human rights groups.

The EHRC’s updated code of practice has sparked a renewed debate about the role of policy in shaping public attitudes towards trans individuals. It will have far-reaching consequences for trans people, who already face significant barriers to inclusion in public life. The government must take immediate action to address these concerns and ensure trans rights are protected.

Policymakers must listen to the voices of trans activists and human rights groups as they navigate this complex issue. The EHRC’s guidance may have been published under the guise of clarifying sex in the Equality Act, but its true impact will be felt by trans individuals forced to navigate a system that increasingly excludes them. Labour must act quickly to address these concerns and ensure trans rights are protected.

The international community is watching as the UK grapples with this complex issue. For Women Scotland, which was behind the Supreme Court ruling last year, hailed the publication of the guidance as a “significant milestone” in upholding women’s rights. But for many trans activists, the EHRC’s guidance represents a major setback.

Policymakers must recognize the harm caused by policies like this guidance and take action to prevent it. The EHRC’s updated code of practice may have been intended to clarify sex in the Equality Act, but its true impact will be felt by trans individuals who are forced to navigate a system that increasingly excludes them. Labour must take a stand and ensure trans rights are protected.

The UK has a history of grappling with LGBTQ+ rights issues, from Section 28 to present day. But never before have we seen a policy so clearly aimed at pushing trans individuals out of public life. The EHRC’s guidance is a stark reminder of the need for policymakers to listen to marginalized communities and ensure their rights are protected.

Labour must decide whether this guidance represents a “Section 28 moment” or an opportunity to redefine its legacy on LGBTQ+ rights. The choice is clear: the government must act quickly to address these concerns and ensure trans rights are protected. Anything less would be a betrayal of Labour’s promise to protect trans individuals and a regression from progress made towards equality and inclusion in recent years.