October 6, 2010 11:41 AM BST
Protection for transsexual people as customers and service users
The Sex Discrimination Act (SDA) was amended in April 2008 to protect transsexual people undergoing supervised medical treatment, against discrimination and harassment in the provision of goods, facilities and services. This adds to the previous protection in employment and vocational training.
The law applies to both public and commercially run services and enterprises.
Amendments April 2010
* It is unlawful for a publican or shopkeeper to refuse to serve a customer because they are **
intending to undergo, are undergoing or have undergone gender reassignment.
(1)A person (a “service-provider”) concerned with the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not) must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.
(2)A service-provider
must not, in providing the service, discriminate against a person
—
(a)as to the terms on which A provides the service to B;
(b)by terminating the provision of the service to B;
(c)by subjecting B to any other detriment.
(3)A service-provider must not, in relation to the provision of the service, harass B—
(a)a person requiring the service, or
(b)a person to whom the service-provider provides the service.
(4)A service-provider must not victimise a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.
(5)A service-provider
must not, in providing the service, victimise a person
—
(1)A person (a “service-provider”) concerned with the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not) must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.
(2)A service-provider
must not, in providing the service, discriminate against a person
—
(a)as to the terms on which A provides the service to B;
this means the conditions of sale, provision of goods, or contract must not
carry penalties or surcharge or differ from the same terms to any other person
(b)by terminating the provision of the service to B;
(c)by subjecting B to any other detriment.
(3)A service-provider must not, in relation to the provision of the service, harass—
(a)a person requiring the service, or
(b)a person to whom the service-provider provides the service.
(4)A service-provider must not victimise a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.
(5)A service-provider
must not, in providing the service, victimise a person
**
this is the important amendment as it no longer directly states a person must be under medical supervision, the emphasis is on intending
Anyone with any questions please post in the law forum, I will try and answer them, if I cannot do it immediately I will seek clarification and advice.
October 6, 2010 6:42 PM BST
Hi Femmy,im so sorry to hear what happend to you.it's never happened to me and I hope it never does.Tara made a great point if you name the shop we could boycott it. There's a hell of a lot of uk members on here and that could hit them where it really hurts. Try to not let a few idiots get you down..keep smiling. Take care love lillith x
October 6, 2010 11:14 PM BST
Hi Femmy,
I don't remember having any problems in shops, but I did have an experience in a coffee shop at the end of August. This may help some to understand the difference between the UK and the USA as mentioned in this thread and Cristine's followup one.
On Saturday afternoon I got a panicked call from a friend who has occasional mental collapses. I drove about 40 miles to her house and spent the evening calming her down. We went out to dinner and I had a glass of red wine at about 8pm. That was the only drink I had had in at least 24 hours. At about 4am she had calmed down and I started back to home leaving her asleep.
I was dead tired and decided to stop and get a little breakfast at a coffee shop, part of a national chain in the US. I was dressed in jeans, a sweatshirt, tennis shoes, a bit of jewelry and makeup and an auburn wig. Not very fashionable, but certainly nothing outrageous.
I took a small booth in the back and ordered juice, ham and eggs. There were maybe 4 other customers in the place, mostly at the counter. My waitress wasn't exactly friendly but I didn't think anything of it - I'm sure I didn't look like a big tipper at 6am on a Sunday morning.
A family came in and took a booth directly across from me - they obviously were either coming from or going to church. Even the little boys were were in suit and tie. After a while I noticed they were looking at me and laughing and the kids were pointing at me. I was very tired and I really didn't give a damn. I ignored them. They called the waitress over and they talked with her for a while. After which she came over to me as I was eating my breakfast and said, "SIR, you will have to leave right now!" The food wasn't very good and I didn't need the hassle, so I picked up my bag and walked towards the door. As I opened the door to leave she said quietly, "If you ever come in here again, I'll call the Police!" My reply would not get by TGS's automated Forum censor.
I later wrote to the corporate headquarters of the coffee shop complaining about how I was treated. I got a form letter apology and a voucher for 4 free meals in return.
This company has been sued for discriminating against African Americans several times in the past so I gave the vouchers to a black family in my neighborhood - I certainly am never going to patronize the coffee shop ever again - the food was lousy.
Best,
Melody
October 11, 2010 9:06 AM BST
Sorry, Femmy, but your national flag on your profile pic is UK and threw me.
October 11, 2010 10:04 AM BST
Hiya Femmy,
It confused me as well, I'm sure you used to live in Hamburg, assumed you had returned to the UK, Whilst i'm sure the EHRC should cover the situation you found yourself in, but the only references I could find, on German law itself was rather suprising.
Article 2f
In Germany there’s no law that protects transsexual women against discrimination. Altough there’s a law called „Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz“ (like ENDA, the employment non discriminiation act in the US) who protects for example homosexual people, transsexual women – women who are born as girls with penis and gonads – aren’t protected.
Why did the German Government forget transexual women respectively gender identity in their laws against dicrimination?
Article 3
Although the German Laws should protect women against sexual harassment, transsexual women aren’t protect as long as they have a male gender marker. If someone abuses a transsexual women she has to go to court legally as a „psychic ill man“.
Why are transsexual women not protected especially against malpractice and sexual abuse of the psychiatric „experts“ in the legal name-change-process in the German Law Of Transsexuals (there are numerous cases of psychic violations and sexual abuse in the name-change-process)?