The obsession with trans inclusivity is making a mockery of equality
When Jenny Watson’s lesbian speed-dating event was cancelled, the news was greeted by some with the sanctimonious smile of the virtuous.
This event must be cancelled because it is not “inclusive”, the pub manager explained. When pressed on what that actually meant, he confirmed that a lesbian event that didn’t include men would not align with the “values” of the pub.
He told us that complaints had been received from men, identifying as women and as lesbians, who said it was unfair that they were not welcome to attend.
This was no surprise to Jenny. The men had already written to her employer and told them she was a transphobe and should be sacked. They contacted the platform she used to sell tickets and attempted to shut down her account. They sent her unsettling emails – “this isn’t going to go away”. She received a threat of gang rape in the post.
Most reasonable people would think it absurd that a lesbian speed-dating event must put men’s desire to attend, above the needs of women who want to meet and socialise in a female-only space. So how did we get here?
The equality diversity & inclusion industry has grown rapidly over the last decade and the chances are that the pub manager, like many people who work for large organisations, will have attended at least one training session.
The source materials for these sessions are supplied by TQ+ lobby groups who misrepresent the Equality Act 2010 so that the rights of trans people can be prioritised.
Replacing the biological reality of “sex” with the nebulous concept of “gender” is commonplace. The result: people who are same-sex attracted are no longer permitted the language to communicate their experiences or the words to describe the discrimination they face.
It means that the level playing field the Act was created to deliver becomes, instead, a hierarchy of the marginalised, with same-sex attracted people at the bottom of the heap.
These sessions are delivered by an unregulated army of consultants, weighed down with flip charts and colourful presentations, but unburdened by an understanding of the law. In place of the facts they insert slogans and obfuscation. They speak, fervently, of kindness, acceptance and, above all else, inclusivity.
It’s an approach that leaves businesses with the erroneous impression that a trans identifying male may do whatever he chooses, whenever he pleases. And, furthermore, that to stand in his way would be unlawful.
It seems that the Stonegate Group, who own the pub in question as well as 4,500 other venues around the country, do understand the Equality Act 2010. When we approached them and made our case in support of Jenny, they swiftly agreed to reverse their manager’s decision.
They appeared to clearly recognise that banning a lesbian event was discriminatory and could be subject to legal challenge.
But they are the exception. Most organisations are not just wrong, but are dangerously blasé about the consequences of their inaccurate assumptions. They are then unprepared for the backlash, from people like Jenny, who believe that equality is a concept worth fighting for.
Lesbian speed-dating, by definition, is not for everyone, and the notion that all events must be “inclusive” make a nonsense of the specific protections afforded by the Equality Act.
That’s why it’s time to move away from the entreaty to “be kind” and instead insist that we “be fair”. A renewed focus on the Equality Act by Parliamentarians and a clarification of the meaning of sex is the first step.
Kate Barker is chief executive officer at the LGB Alliance