A coalition of more than 140 LGBT<\/a>+ and feminist organisations have warned that \u201ctrans people<\/a> in Britain are facing an existential threat, while businesses, employers and service providers are being dragged through the courts for defending their inclusive practices\u201d.<\/p>\n In a letter coordinated by the Trans+ Solidarity Alliance and sent to hundreds of MPs, seen by The Independent, parliamentarians have been urged to press the prime minister and the minister for women and equalities to take action to protect trans-inclusive spaces from the risk of expensive legal action after last year’s Supreme Court judgment.<\/p>\n It comes after charity Sex Matters took legal action against the City of London Corporation, which operates the men\u2019s, ladies\u2019 and mixed bathing ponds in north London. <\/p>\n The gender-critical organisation argued the policy of allowing trans people to use the facilities for the gender with which they identify amounts to sex discrimination.<\/p>\n However, last month a judge ruled that the case cannot proceed, saying the \u201cappropriate forum\u201d for the claim is the county court, rather than the High Court.<\/p>\n The judge\u2019s decision comes after the Supreme Court ruling last year, which said that a person\u2019s legal sex under the Equality Act is the one they were biologically assigned at birth.<\/p>\n But Sex Matters has said it was disappointed with the verdict and that it is considering its legal options \u2013 meaning the Hampstead Ladies Pond could face further action.<\/p>\n Last year, Girlguiding described their move to bar trans girls as \u201ca decision we would have preferred not to make\u201d, while the Women\u2019s Institute said that ending decades of inclusion was done with the \u201cutmost regret and sadness\u201d. <\/p>\n The letter, signed by 146 organisations, says: \u201cFighting for inclusion is hard: 86 per cent of respondents to the City of London\u2019s recent Hampstead Heath swimming ponds consultation want to remain trans-inclusive, and yet the Corporation continues to face the prospect of expensive litigation.<\/p>\n \u201cThey don\u2019t want this. But law-fare against inclusive organisations will continue, whatever the courts decide, with public money and business budgets spent defending against it – unless you act.\u201d <\/p>\n It adds: \u201cAnything else risks forcing businesses, charities and public services to police everyone\u2019s gender – with reports suggesting that the EHRC recommends this be done based on looks, putting all women at risk of misogynist abuse. This would be dangerous and unworkable.\u201d <\/p>\n The letter urges MPs to ask Sir Keir Starmer and Bridget Phillipson to \u201cwork to ensure our equalities law and guidance protects the norm of trans-inclusion\u201d and to \u201ccommit to ensuring that all UK legislation protects the human rights of trans and gender non conforming people\u201d. <\/p>\n Jessica Fortune, co-chair of Amnesty Feminists, who signed the letter, warned that \u201cfeminism that doesn\u2019t include trans people isn\u2019t feminism\u201d. <\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s just reinforcing the gender hierarchy we’ve always fought against\u201d, she told The Independent. \u201cBeing silent is not neutral. When gender policing intensifies against trans people, all women are harmed\u201d. <\/p>\n Ms Fortune warned that anti-trans \u2018lawfare\u2019 is a \u201cdangerous distraction from the real threats facing women’s safety\u201d, saying: \u201cWe must direct our anger at the right target\u2014the groups trying to divide us and the government failing to act.\u201d <\/p>\n Meanwhile, Heather Paterson, from LGBT+ Consortium, another one of the letter’s signatories, said: \u201cTrans inclusion is the norm across the country. Our members work every day to create safer, more inclusive spaces across the UK, and we have seen before where exclusion leads. <\/p>\n \u201cWe will not be silent while trans lives, inclusive organisations, and the values that bind our communities together are put at risk.\u201d<\/p>\n The latest intervention comes amid further delays in introducing new guidance on transgender people\u2019s use of single-sex spaces following the Supreme Court ruling.<\/p>\n A code of practice, updated in the wake of last April\u2019s decision that the term \u201cwoman\u201d in equality legislation referred to biological sex, was shared with the government more than four months ago at the start of September.<\/p>\n A leaked draft of the guidance was reported in November as suggesting transgender people could be banned from single-sex spaces based on the way they look – which trans rights campaigners dubbed a \u201clicence to discriminate based on looks, plain and simple\u201d.<\/p>\n Left-wing Labour MP Nadia Whittome told The Independent that “policing people\u2019s gender is fundamentally harmful for all women, whether they are trans or not\u201d. <\/p>\n Throwing her weight behind the letter, she added: “I sincerely hope that my fellow MPs will listen to them. <\/p>\n \u201cWe must pressure the government to uphold the rights of our trans constituents and prevent businesses and organisations from being bullied into excluding trans people via legal threats.”<\/p>\n Helen Joyce, director of advocacy at sex-based rights charity Sex Matters: “As the Supreme Court confirmed last year, equality law can only protect women from sex discrimination if sex is understood in law to mean sex, not paperwork or self-ID. Any organisation with policies that do not comply with this understanding is acting unlawfully and harming women.”<\/p>\n A government spokesperson said: \u201cWe expect all duty bearers to follow the Supreme Court ruling and seek legal advice where necessary.”The EHRC has submitted a draft Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations to Ministers, and we are working at pace to review it properly. This will provide further guidance to duty bearers on how to apply the Equality Act.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Your support helps us to tell the story From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":412853,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[59,57,58,50,56,54,55],"class_list":{"0":"post-412852","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-united-kingdom","8":"tag-gb","9":"tag-great-britain","10":"tag-greatbritain","11":"tag-news","12":"tag-uk","13":"tag-united-kingdom","14":"tag-unitedkingdom"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/412852","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=412852"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/412852\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/412853"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=412852"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=412852"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=412852"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"The](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/PA-79790199.jpg\")
The letter comes in the wake of last year\u2019s Supreme Court judgement (PA)<\/p>\n