Sign in

Karen Hawa

@kazhawa.bsky.social
145 followers 264 following 1.1K posts

Doxastic believe it or not. She/her

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Noelle @finallynoelle.bsky.social · 15/10/2026
So we fly a pride flag in our front yard in a very conservative neighborhood and it’s been there for the last few years. Someone put this in our mailbox and my goodness…
315147582317 14.8K
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Stéphanie says… 🏴‍☠️🦈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️ @stephaniejane.bsky.social · 05/10/2026
“Mary-Ann Stephenson, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said criticism of its updated code of practice had made the "real alarm" felt by trans people worse by wrongly suggesting they had lost protections or would face sex checks.” Has she read her Equality Impact Assessment?
Summary of EHRC EIA
EHRC acknowledges that there are potentially negative impacts for those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment from the updates to the Code as a result of how service providers implement
FWS.
They state that whilst this may have a negative impact on trans people with a GRC (current or future certificate holders), their view is that it is important the guidance accurately reflects the correct legal position.
EHRC note that these updates reflect the law and will facilitate a better understanding of legal obligations and entitlements. These changes aim
to mitigate the risk of unlawful discrimination or harassment by helping service providers balance the benefits, needs and impacts across potential user groups. Subsequently, this will assist providers in determining whether separate or single-sex provision meets the proportionality test. They state they sought to limit any negative effect in accessing services for those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment by advising service providers to consider alternatives and mitigations to separate and single-sex services.
OEO additional impact assessment
As set out in EHRC's ElA, the updates to the Code are expected to have a significant impact on people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. In addition to the concerns detailed in that EIA, there are further impacts to note as follows.
Exclusion: The updated Chapter 13 provides guidance on when it is lawful to exclude trans people from services aligned with their acquired gender (e.g. domestic violence refuges, hospital wards, and changing rooms) based on their biological sex. It also covers competitive sport which may leave trans people with access to sport. Chapter 12 also provides guidance on restricting membership to an association based on those sharing one or more protected characteristics. Some organisations such as the Women's Institute and Girl Guiding have already made the decision to restrict…'Double exclusion': It is possible that trans people could be barred from both the space aligned with their gender (because of their sex) and the space aligned with their birth sex because of possessing the protected characteristic of gender reassignment), effectively leaving them with no service at all.
Alternative provision: While the Code states it is "unlikely to be proportionate" to leave a trans person with no service (especially for essentials like toilets), providers may lack the funding or space to offer
'third-space' or gender-neutral alternatives.
Involuntary disclosure: New guidance explains how service providers can request information about an individual's sex at birth. This may force trans people to "out" themselves in public or professional settings.
Similarly trans people have expressed concern - as in the Good Law Project litigation against EHRC - that having to use disabled toilets will
'out' them.
Policing of gender: Potential 'policing' of gender presentation, which could lead to increased harassment for trans people and cisgender people who do not conform to traditional gender stereotypes.
Safeguarding risks: Concern that excluding trans women from female services could mean they have to use male services, where they could face a disproportionate risk of violence and sexual assault (although this will depend on the nature of the service in question).
Relations between groups: The debate on single sex services and the treatment of trans people is particularly divisive at this time. The Code of Practice may exacerbate these tensions. This may be somewhat mitigated through careful communications surrounding the Code's publication.
Our assessment is therefore that the likely impacts on gender reassignment as a characteristic are negative, in relation to each of the 3 limbs of the PSED. Mitigating factors are the ability of service providers to create 'third-space' provision for trans people, and the guidance in the Code on when it is, and is not, p…
813534 135
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Samantha Asumadu @samanthaasumadu.substack.com · 22/09/2026
'New analysis on UK media: British media is not delivering the news to its readers. They are delivering an agenda. The seven days after Channel 4 filmed James Orr are a damning indictment of the British press. Orr is a Cambridge associate professor.' via @newscord.org
5472221 472
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Natacha @natacha.bsky.social · 18/09/2026
Trans women in sport: This table shows how massively out of place the UK is in Europe. The UK is the only country that bans trans women from most sport. Even recently-fascist Hungary is fairer than the UK. Britain is a transphobic outlier.
Trans Legal Recognition and Amateur Sport in Europe
Adult amateur women's competition • September 2026
Country
EU
Recognition
Equality-law sex


Adult amateur women's category

Football
Hockey
Cricket
Netball
UK 2024







UK 2026















Belgium







Denmark

•
•





Finland
•
Germany







Iceland







Ireland







Luxembourg







Malta







Norway

•





Portugal

•

、、



Spain

•





Switzerland

•





OTHER LEGAL RECOGNITION







Ancona

•





Austria

•





Bosnia & Herzegovina







Bulgaria







Croatia

•





Cyprus







Czechia







Estonia







France







Greece







Italy







Latvia







Liechtenstein







Lithuania







Moldova







Montenegro







Netherlands
Poland







Romania







Serbia
Slovenia







Sweden







Türkiye







Ukraine







NO / VERY LIMITED RECOGNITION







Albania







Armenia
Azerbaijan







Georgia







Hungary







Monaco







North Macedonia


スズズズメ




San Marino







slovakia







Broad legal recognition
Partial / very limited

No functioning domestic route


Specific sport exclusion


Uornpro yods sds on /
Sport: adult amateur women's competition. HRT/estosterone eligibility requirements count as not excluded.
UK 2024/ UK 2026 comparison reflects the pre- and post-2025 Equality Act interpretation.
Sources: ILGA-Eurooe (2026): national aovemina-body policies: UK Supreme Court 120251 UKSC 16: EHRC Code (2026)
7279104 279
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Assigned Media @assignedmedia.org · 03/08/2026
A new study out of Canada looked at four youth gender clinics. Out of 445 patients only four who started gender affirming hormone therapy ceased taking it, and only one did so due to a re-identification with their birth sex. assignedmedia.org/breaking-new...
assignedmedia.org
A New Study from Canada Again Finds Less Than 1 Percent of Trans Youth Detransition - Assigned Media
Out of 445 patients across four gender clinics only one who started hormone therapy stopped due to a change in gender identity.
9386160 386
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Jess O'Thomson @jessothomson.co.uk · 28/07/2026
A short thread explaining trans exclusion in the law, and the Code of Practice, in response to a load of questions 🧵 Obviously this is necessarily simplified. I cannot write a legal textbook on Bluesky.
2377117 377
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Ethel Weapon @lousadzak.bsky.social · 28/07/2026
Who wants to go on a deep dive into the new NHS data standard, and marvel at the way it builds in the complete maceration of privacy and medical care for trans people? Let's go.
314752 147
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Alejandra Caraballo @esqueer.net · 21/07/2026
The anti trans crowd was outraged by this study because it included clinicians who actually practice gender affirming care. Yet another systematic review that follows Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Utah, and Louisiana that finds this care is safe and effective with rare regret.
112536757 2.5K
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Crash Krylova @crash-w.bsky.social · 16/07/2026
I've written about the Outer House's decision in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2026] CSOH 59, a case about the placement of trans people in Scottish prisons, for the @ukcla.bsky.social. ukconstitutionallaw.org/2026/07/16/c...
ukconstitutionallaw.org
Crash Krylova – Trans people in prison: For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2026] CSOH 59
Introduction On 19 June 2026, the Outer House of the Court of Session handed down judgment in the case of For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2026] CSOH 59 (“For Women Scotland 3”). This piece…
05822 58
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Philippa East (Author) @philippaeast.bsky.social · 15/07/2026
Whenever you reference the Code of Practice, it’s worth including a link to *this* equality impact assessment, which sets out just how grim this policy of trans exclusion will be for so many. www.gov.uk/government/p...
gov.uk
Equality impact assessment
719183 191
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Q. McLamore @ghawinriver.bsky.social · 13/07/2026
What folks don't get about these groups is just how powerful, well-connected, and legally literate they really are. The research Abigail cited here, we took to no less than 20 press outlets before putting it out online, and most of them folded under legal threats, killing the stories dead.
2989341 989
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Ashleeee 🌊🪭 (ᯟ︿ᯏ)” @reactiveashley.cat · 11/07/2026
1/🧵 Hilary Cass wrote to MPs and Lords last week to defend her conversion therapy and fishing expedition to falsify evidence against puberty pausing treatment. She frames hate groups’ obstruction as merely a difference of opinion, whilst presenting gender-affirming care as harm.
Parliamentary Briefing
The Puberty Blocker Trial (PATHWAYS) - Evidence, Context and Considerations
Purpose
This briefing responds to issues raised during parliamentary debates (23-25 June) regarding the proposed puberty blocker trial. It clarifies the evidence base and current clinical context, and addresses common criticisms. The emotions in the Chamber made it clear that those participating were all passionate about protecting the young people at the centre of the debate but were arriving at different conclusions. This is not surprising - the issues are complex, challenging and not amenable to black and white answers, so different views are understandable. Many very sound questions were raised, but there were also several incorrect assertions which I hope to correct within this briefing.
I understand that people hold disparate ideological views on this subject, but that is not relevant to this study; the key question for the study is how best to mitigate the distress of a subgroup of young people with gender dysphoria, improve their wellbeing, functioning and engagement, and give them the ongoing support and psychosocial intervention that they need to make carefully informed decisions about their future.
I committed during debate in the Chamber to providing this information, but wish to emphasise that this is in my capacity as the author of the Cass Review and a Crossbench Peer, and not a response on behalf of DHSC or Government.
I very much hope that those with an interest, and particularly those who participated in the debates, will take the time to review this information.
Lhave covered 5 broad topics which reflect questions raised in the recent debates:
1. Why don't we have other ways to answer the questions without a trial?
2. Why was the study recommended and how was it designed and approved?
3. What is happening to children and young people now?
4. What are the potential benefits of the puberty blocker trial?
5. What are the potential risks of puberty block…
719671 196
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Dr Kevin Guyan @kevinguyan.bsky.social · 08/07/2026
Trying to make sense of gender pay gap reporting after the UK Supreme Court ruling on 'sex'? 🔢 @jenitennison.com has written a guest post for the Gender + Sexuality Data Lab explaining why organisations should continue to report gender data. gensexdatalab.business-school.ed.ac.uk/updates/orga...
A white background with lots of numbers in black.
03416 34
Karen Hawa @kazhawa.bsky.social · 01/07/2026
Yet another discussion of the UKSC decision in FWS … and it’s a long one. Note it’s not a legal analysis and it won’t tell you what it means. Instead it covers some of the history the court ignored and discusses some false assumptions and facile arguments it used instead. medium.com/@edsc639/the...
medium.com
The TBD Interpretation of the Gender Recognition Act 2004
Introduction
020 2
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Natacha @natacha.bsky.social · 20/06/2026
Melanie Field, independent adviser on human rights on the problems with the EHRC “guidance” and what the EHRC commissioners need the do to put it right. LinkedIn article.
linkedin.com
Has the Equality and Human Rights Commission done its job?
The EHRC’s draft Code of Practice for services, public functions and associations Last November, I wrote on Linked In about my concerns that the EHRC’s draft Code of Practice submitted to government o...
713638 136
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Abigail Thorn @theabigailthorn.bsky.social · 12/06/2026
As I’ve said before, any serious attempt to ban conversion therapy needs to confront the fact that the NHS has been doing it for decades.
31649374 1.6K
Reposted by Karen Hawa
KD Smith @kd-smith.bsky.social · 09/06/2026
With Alt Text. The Chair of the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission, follows 38 accounts on Bluesky that have transphobia labels and/or are on one or more transphobia block lists due to their content. It appears she does not follow any trans people, nor any trans-supportive organisations.
A screen shot of accounts Mary-Ann Stephenson follows on Bluesky, nearly all of which are flagged by the Transphobia labeller or on one or more Transphobia block/mute lists.

The Caption is "Spot any GC transphobes in Mary-Ann Stephenson's following list??"

On this screen shot is Lisa MacKenzie, Sonia Sodha, Hannah Barnes, Akua Reindorf, Susan Dalgety, Audrey Suffolk, Jane Clare Jones, Rachel Hewitt and Emma Burnell.Additional accounts on the Bluesky Following list of Dr Mary Ann Stephenson, Chair of the Equality & Human Rights Commission. All are individuals or groups known to openly oppose trans people's human rights.

Caroline Criado-Perez, Michael Foran, Sianuska (Sian Norris), Frances Crook, Ali Ceesay, Aurora New Dawn, Selma Taha, The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht, Labour Women's Declaration and Janice Turner.

The title at the top is, "What about here?"Another screenshot from the Bluesky following list of Dr Mary Ann Stephenson, Chair of the Equality & Human Rights Commission. All are individuals or organisations that have transphobia labellers or are on one or more transphobia block/mute lists.

Thangham Debbonaire, Sarah Ditum, Gia Millinovich, Maryam Aldossari, Naomi Cunningham, Helen Lewis, Jess Phillips, FiLIA and Women's Place UK.

The title at the top is "Recognise any GC transphobes???"Final page of 4 listing people Dr Mary Ann Stephenson is following on Bluesky. All have either transphobia labels or are on one or more transphobia block/mute lists.

Judith Green/Womans Place UK, The Radical Notion, Professor Alice Sullivan, Liz Kelly, Karen Ingala Smith, Cathy Devine, Susanna Rustin, Victoria Smith (Gloswitch) and Suzanne Moore.

The Caption reads, "Stephenson followed 4 paged of "gender critical" transphobes but not a single Trans person or org."
6304135 304
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Ashleeee 🌊🪭 (ᯟ︿ᯏ)” @reactiveashley.cat · 05/06/2026
1/🧵 I see MPs are finally making a constitutional point. The Supreme Court’s role is to apply the law to specific facts and controversies. Where facts are distorted and those affected are denied participation, the court is likely not fulfilling this role.
39525 95
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Matthew Hodson @matthewhodson.bsky.social · 24/05/2026
Section 28 was passed on this day in 1988. It didn’t come out of nowhere. It came from a society where 75% of people thought homosexuality was wrong. It came from a society that believed ignorance was better for children than any knowledge of lesbian or gay lives. 🧵 1/16
20689361 689
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Ethel Weapon @lousadzak.bsky.social · 10/05/2026
So, here it is, a single article that does a deep dive into the nonsense infesting the NHS policy proposal on banning gender-affirming hormone therapy for under 18s If you're going to reply to the consultation - and I understand if you feel it's futile - I hope this gives you some ammo to use
kim-hipwell.medium.com
A Medical Mess: An Analysis Of The NHS’s Proposal To Ban Hormone Therapy For Trans Youth
Introduction and Background
515061 150
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Rob Mullins @robertmullins.bsky.social · 08/04/2026
A blog post by legal experts @antoineduval.bsky.social and @michelekrech.bsky.social: verfassungsblog.de/ioc-genetic-...
verfassungsblog.de
The IOC’s Great Leap Backwards on Genetic Sex Testing
222 2
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Williams Institute @williamsinstitute.bsky.social · 17/04/2026
Among U.S. adults, over 2.1 million people -- 0.8% of the population -- identify as transgender. Minnesota has the highest percentage of transgender residents at 1.2%. Read the full report at bit.ly/TranspeopleUS
03712 37
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Jakub Jaraczewski @jakubjaraczewski.bsky.social · 21/04/2026
🇪🇺🏳️‍🌈⚖️🇭🇺 A legal earthquake - CJEU finds Hungary to have violated EU law on multiple counts with its anti-LGBT+ legislation (as expected) but also for the first time in history, in an EU law-reshaping precedent, finds Hungary to violate Art 2 TEU in a self-standing manner.
10820304 820
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Karen Hawa @kazhawa.bsky.social · 20/12/2025
Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights published a report on the Draft Gender Recognition Bill in Nov 2003. In Paragraph 31 they expressed concern courts might fail to recognise the effect of a GRC particularly for e.g. the Sex Discrimination Act. 🧵 publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200203/...
Paragraph 31 from the report:

31. In a nutshell, the potential problem is as follows. The legislation which has been held to be incompatible with Convention rights, and other legislation which adversely affects transsexual people, is either cast expressly in terms of a person's physical sex or has been interpreted by courts in this country as applying in that way. This is true of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, section 11(c), as noted in paragraph 5 above. It is also true of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, which has been interpreted by courts as protecting people against discrimination on the ground of their physical sex at birth, not their gender or (except in relation to employment and vocational training, affected by Community law and to some extent operating retrospectively12) their status as transsexual people. Clause 5(1) of the Draft Bill provides, 'Where a full gender recognition certificate has been issued to a person, the person's gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender.'13 The Draft Bill does not define 'gender', so presumably it would be interpreted by courts in accordance with the previous case-law which distinguished between sex (physical) and gender (psychological and social). If this is correct, it is far from clear that recognition of a person's acquired gender would be regarded as giving them a new sex for the sex discrimination legislation, or making them male rather than female (or vice versa) for the purpose of deciding the validity of a marriage under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, section 11(c).
1246 24
Karen Hawa @kazhawa.bsky.social · 20/12/2025
Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights published a report on the Draft Gender Recognition Bill in Nov 2003. In Paragraph 31 they expressed concern courts might fail to recognise the effect of a GRC particularly for e.g. the Sex Discrimination Act. 🧵 publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200203/...
Paragraph 31 from the report:

31. In a nutshell, the potential problem is as follows. The legislation which has been held to be incompatible with Convention rights, and other legislation which adversely affects transsexual people, is either cast expressly in terms of a person's physical sex or has been interpreted by courts in this country as applying in that way. This is true of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, section 11(c), as noted in paragraph 5 above. It is also true of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, which has been interpreted by courts as protecting people against discrimination on the ground of their physical sex at birth, not their gender or (except in relation to employment and vocational training, affected by Community law and to some extent operating retrospectively12) their status as transsexual people. Clause 5(1) of the Draft Bill provides, 'Where a full gender recognition certificate has been issued to a person, the person's gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender.'13 The Draft Bill does not define 'gender', so presumably it would be interpreted by courts in accordance with the previous case-law which distinguished between sex (physical) and gender (psychological and social). If this is correct, it is far from clear that recognition of a person's acquired gender would be regarded as giving them a new sex for the sex discrimination legislation, or making them male rather than female (or vice versa) for the purpose of deciding the validity of a marriage under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, section 11(c).
1246 24
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Ethel Weapon @lousadzak.bsky.social · 25/03/2026
Having looked at the farce of the "evidence reviews" across two threads, here's a third thread looking at the decision made by NHS England to stop hormone therapy for trans people under 18 years old. The start of these threads is here:
18344 83
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Ethel Weapon @lousadzak.bsky.social · 24/03/2026
A second thread on the NHS England Evidence Review on "Children and Young People Masculinising and Feminising Medicines" (their terminology) The first thread, about one of the ten evidence review papers, is quoted here
14018 40
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Emma Kennedy @emmakeddev.bsky.social · 20/03/2026
A school leadership team has misused safeguarding procedures against a librarian for stocking 'controversial' books - which, by the way, are not controversial at all. This makes me feel sick to my stomach.
814088 140
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Natacha @natacha.bsky.social · 13/03/2026
Anti-trans hate group advertises globally to get 70 “detransitioners” together for a propaganda photo. It fails to do so and only gets 42. Meanwhile effortlessly 100,000 people attended Trans Pride London last July and 10,000 were at TransMission in Wembley Arena this week.
111834 118
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Colin Murray @colinmurray.bsky.social · 12/03/2026
Today's CJEU decision in Shipova has major implications for legal protections for trans people in Northern Ireland, where relevant EU law still applies. First the Court underlines that different treatment of trans people vs biological sex is not generally acceptable: share.google/MKNxuwd2oXHB...
215054 150
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Alejandra Caraballo @esqueer.net · 10/03/2026
The reviews searched over 12,000 references. They screened 547 full-text papers for inclusion. They included 17. That's a 96.9% exclusion rate at full text. 530 studies were relevant enough to survive initial screening, then rejected by the review criteria. 6/10 reviews found 0 included studies.
4900266 900
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Nika @nikavia.bsky.social · 09/03/2026
The very first paper in the very first review (Allen et al 2019) found a huge decrease in suicidality, from 45% of subjects suffering from suicidality prior to HRT, to just 13% after, p<.001. But it didn't test for boys and girls separately, so this result appears in neither of the relevant reviews.
18822 88
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Rob Mullins @robertmullins.bsky.social · 05/05/2025
I've written a brief note on the Supreme Court's interpretation of s7 of the Equality Act in For Women Scotland. I'd welcome any comments. open.substack.com/pub/robmulli...
open.substack.com
A Note on the UK Supreme Court's Interpretation of s7 of the Equality Act
I had initially not intended to write about For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers—the recent decision in which the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom concluded that references to gendered terms lik...
2239 23
Reposted by Karen Hawa
The Pub-Liking Universal Friend @johnb78.bsky.social · 06/03/2026
Genuinely impressed that these loons did an entire book on gays and failed to pick up traces of an accent (this was 1962, Kenneth Williams, Frankie Howerd and John Inman are well established media personalities) ia601906.us.archive.org/11/items/the...
2297 29
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Cal Horton (they/them) @fiercemum.bsky.social · 01/03/2026
Oh yes this is the proof Cass is relying on:
Bakwin 1968 Deviant gender role behaviour in children: relation to homosexuality.
Lebovtiz 1972 Feminine behaviour in boys
Money 1979 Homosexual outocme of discordant gender identity/role
Zuger 1984 Early effiminate behavior in boys
Green 1987 The sissy boy syndrome and the development of homosexuality
Kosky 1987 Gender-disordered children: Does inpatient treatment help
36613 66
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Jesspooka Kant 🎃 @jessdkant.bsky.social · 28/02/2026
I think people think we're exaggerating when we say the widespread use of the term "biological sex" as a term itself isn't organic. This data isn't anomalous, it comports with everything we've seen about the specific use of the term.
google trends showing no searches for "biological sex" before 2008 or sogoogle trends showing no searches for "biological sex" before 2008 or so (image 1), compared to "gender identity" which is far more numerous and goes back to the start of the datasetgoogle trends showing no searches for "biological sex" before 2008 or so (image 1), compared to "gender identity" which is far more numerous and goes back to the start of the dataset (image 2) plus transgender, where the term "transgender" is always higher and goes to being ten to a hundred times higher than the other two
101070268 1.1K
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Bellingcat @bellingcat.com · 13/02/2026
This week, @amnestyuk.bsky.social's Gender Justice Director Chiara Capraro shared how her team mapped 65 anti-rights groups in the UK. From funding streams to the crossovers with the US, find out what this means for human rights by searching 'Stage Talks with Bellingcat': rss.com/podcasts/bel...
rss.com
"Mapping the Anti-Rights Movement From the US to the UK" with Amnesty International UK | Podcast Episode on RSS.com
In this week's Stage Talk we were joined by Amnesty International UK’s Gender Justice Director Chiara Caparo. In a recent report, Chiara and her team mapped the structure and funding of 65 anti-rights...
320884 208
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Ashleeee 🌊🪭 (ᯟ︿ᯏ)” @reactiveashley.cat · 22/01/2026
I’ve seen drafts of this guidance several times before, but I’ve only just come across it in its published leaflet form.
A dark blue and red leaflet, titled A GUIDE TO THE SEX DISCRIMINATION gender reassignment REGULATIONS 1999, with gender reassignment in larger stylised letters. Logo of the DfEE, Department for Education and Employment.Page 14 
Section. Flexibility regarding Dress Codes
Many employers operate a Dress Code system. It is good practice to allow enough Rexibility in the dress code to accommodate the process of transition from one sex to the other.
Good practice example: M was working as a sales assistant when she began her transition to female. Her employer discussed the possibility of temporary redeployment out of the public gaze, but M preferred to remain with her team.
The company dress code was therefore relaxed along similar lines as for Muslim women and other groups, giving M flexibility over hair length and style, jewellery and makeup, prior to the point at which she felt comfortable in a skirt rather than trousers and without reference to any specific point of change of social gen-der. For a period some customers perceived her as female and others as male, but M felt happy to accept this, and indeed used the perceptions of customers as an indicator of when to begin presenting as unequivocally female.
Section. Use of Single Sex Facilities
The employer and employee should agree the point at which the use of facilities such as changing rooms and toilets should change from one sex to the other. An appropriate marker for using the facilities of the employee's "new" sex may, for example, be the point at which the individual begins to present permanently in the sex to which they identify. It is not acceptable to insist for the long term on a transsexual employee using separate facilities, for example a disabled toilet.
Transsexual employees are entitled to expect support from their employer including any necessary discussions and explanations with other members of the workforce or members of the public. Similarly, a transsexual employee should be granted access to "men only" or "women only" areas according to the sex in which they permanently present.

New page

Section. The role of the Equal Opportunities Commission
612133 121
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Senthorun S. Raj @senthorun.bsky.social · 23/12/2025
“In terms of public perception of the act, I think most Irish people don’t care. They’re happy to let trans people get on with it.” Ireland has allowed people to self-declare their gender for 10 years and the sky did not fall. People just got on living their lives. 🇮🇪🏳️‍⚧️
theguardian.com
‘For the first time, she could tell people who she was’: Ireland’s gender recognition decade
Ireland’s 2015 Gender Recognition Act was born in an era of optimism and consensus, but as gender-critical activism grows so does debate whether it can hold
1303 30
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Illusn @illusn.bsky.social · 21/12/2025
🧵 1/? Going through the recording: 6:00 Cass: "there was a fair amount of noise [...] about the fact that I wasn't an expert in this field, but that was a deliberate selection that NHS England made because people who were working in the field were so polarised*" * read: support trans rights
514545 145
Reposted by Karen Hawa
Alejandra Caraballo @esqueer.net · 19/12/2025
At the HHS announcement yesterday announcing proposed rules to ban GAC, they said trans people are "at the root of the evils we face" and are "a hatred for nature as God designed it and for life as it was meant to be lived.” Just in case you thought it was about concerns for proper healthcare.
431413461 1.4K
Reposted by Karen Hawa
sasha baker @sasha98.bsky.social · 18/12/2025
Alice Sullivan tells universities to suppress pro-trans research to protect GC staff. However, HER OWN DATA shows pro-trans research is already more suppressed. When I told the BBC this, they edited out any reference to the data. They have now corrected the record. www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedb...
bbc.co.uk
Corrections and Clarifications
The BBC's responses to editorial, technical and corporate issues.
4229104 229
Reposted by Karen Hawa
The Green Party of England & Wales @greenparty.org.uk · 28/11/2025
Hope is here. Help us beat Reform in May. Donate today ⤵️
942407905 2.4K