A fight for change: protection in the UK

[GeoffBrady]

Hi everyone,

I've been away from this website for quite some time. In that time, I've come out. In that journey I read Elizabeth F. Emen's article in the Stanford Law review (you can read it here). It deals with many aspects of asexuality, and the law in particular. Although the article chiefly concerned US law, I largely expected similar issues to be present in UK law.

I found that the biggest piece of legislation in British law that protects its citizens and its visitors — the Equality Act 2010 — protects people on the basis of their sexuality (among others) but not asexuality. The definition absolutely excludes asexuals, and thus we have no legal protection if we were discriminated against.

I ended up writing to my local Member of Parliament (MP) about the issues I had come across. You can see the letter on my personal website. I received a very prompt response from the House of Commons Library. The gist of the response is that I was right, but there is an implied protection provided a court finds in favour of an asexual that has been discriminated against. You can see a more detailed analysis of the response, again, on my personal website.

I'm bringing this to your attention for many reasons, even if it's only for your reading interest! I'd like to know your thoughts on this and whether you're satisfied with the response. I have a number of options of where to go from here. I have not yet written back to my MP, but I'm considering doing so. I could also try to force a discussion in the House of Commons by starting a petition. I could also write to members of the Government in the hope they'd do something (we're coming up to an election, so perhaps lobbying the parties to promise to do something is an option!).

Let me know what you think!

[Chewy]

Unless it is in writing, otherwise it doesn't count. "Implied" might not hold up in the courts.

[GeoffBrady]

Unless it is in writing, otherwise it doesn't count.

Unless what is in writing?

[Hobbes!]

I'm going to say right here that unless you're a UK citizen, don't bother signing petitions, raising awareness or otherwise getting involved. There's no point because, to be blunt, you have no right to have any say.

That being said, I'm positive there's an official government website for this sort of thing. It doesn't force Parliament to debate an issue but it is the best way of petitioning for it

[GeoffBrady]

Well yes, the e-petitions site allows the public to lobby for support for a debate in parliament. This is only for UK citizens. And I am one.

If you're not a UK citizen, you are still quite welcome to post your opinions, experiences and advice here though.

[Hobbes!]

Sorry, GeoffBrady, I didn't mean to imply that I was aiming my comment at you

[GeoffBrady]

Sorry, GeoffBrady, I didn't mean to imply that I was aiming my comment at you

Haha no worries, I suspected it wasn't aimed at me. But you're right. I haven't started a petition yet, and I will post it here if I do. But as you point out, I will make sure readers are aware that if they're not from the UK they should not add their names to the petition (as much as they want to make our fair country a better place!).

[Quintus Crinis]

In the UK, we do have two forms of major law - statute law (like the Equality Act) and case law (like your mp suggest, a court ruling that an asexual has suffered discrimination).

The former is much more re-assuring, but the later can provide some protection. Doesn't mean we shouldn't seek amendments though.

[oldgeeza]

I don't think there is a real understanding of asexuality, I have never been discriminated against by anyone apart from my father & his side of the family, but to be honest, I don't take any notice as they are racist & homophobic, but I haven't had any contact for over 25 years now. At the time, I didn't even know of the term asexual or obviously what it meant, I knew I had no interest in sex since a child, I discovered the term asexual only when I got my first computer at the age of 40, by that time I hadn't had contact with them for 18 or so years, my friends accept that I'm unsuccessful in relationships & I've been single for 23 years, no one has ever questioned the fact I don't have or want sex, acquaintances, I don't discuss issues like this with unless they ask, I will be honest with anyone who asks as I have nothing to hide.

I work for a large supermarket company, they are survey mad, a survey for this, a survey for that, as long as it's not important or likely to cost them anything, they'll survey it, one of the questions they always put on the personal column is orientation, they cover everything but asexual, it's the same with status, if the form goes out to an over 40 year old, it doesn't ask if you are single, married, divorced, separated, widowed, but not single, I guess that's just the way the majority see things.

I guess I'd sign a petition, but I don't really see any discrimination myself, but I guess it must go on, so I'd sign it as discrimination is a form of bullying & I don't agree to any form of bullying.

[GeoffBrady]

In the UK, we do have two forms of major law - statute law (like the Equality Act) and case law (like your mp suggest, a court ruling that an asexual has suffered discrimination).

The former is much more re-assuring, but the later can provide some protection. Doesn't mean we shouldn't seek amendments though.

You're absolutely right. Case law would bring about real change, but statute law would be better.

Mainly because of oldgeeza's experiences. Imagine if protection of asexuality is enshrined in law. There would be far more awareness of what asexuality is. I can imagine how much better I'd have felt as a child knowing that my lack of interest in sex is nothing to worry about.

[ChainSmokingBob]

For asexuality to become protected under the law, it will have to be quantified.

How do you quantify asexuality?

The first point that comes to mind is checking someone's sexual history, yet this is frequently stated to be irrelevant.

[GeoffBrady]

For asexuality to become protected under the law, it will have to be quantified.

How do you quantify asexuality?

The first point that comes to mind is checking someone's sexual history, yet this is frequently stated to be irrelevant.

You don't need to quantify it.

In my letter, I noted that the Equality Act 2010 defines a sexual orientation (which is the thing that is protected) to be:

“a person’s sexual orientation towards—

a. persons of the same sex,

b. persons of the opposite sex, or

c. persons of either sex.”

Sexual orientation isn't quantified there, but it also clearly does not include asexuals. Therefore, in theory, asexuals are not automatically protected by the legislation that protects other sexual orientations.

[ChainSmokingBob]

The question then becomes whether asexuality is a 'real' orientation or not, especially in the eyes of the law in general and the judges making decisions.

I think asexaulity is covered by the three points in your post given that a lack of sexual attraction or desire to people is by its very nature a sexual orientation, but whether that's significant is wholly dependent on whether the law believes asexuality is valid or not.

That's why I think the law needs to have a solid stance on it.

[GeoffBrady]

I think asexaulity is covered by the three points in your post given that a lack of sexual attraction or desire to people is by its very nature a sexual orientation, but whether that's significant is wholly dependent on whether the law believes asexuality is valid or not.

I don't think the three points do cover asexuality: if you don't have a sexual orientation towards one sex or both (putting to one side the issue of gender identity here), then you aren't considered in that definition. The researcher of the House of Commons Library that looked into this issue agrees with me.

But you're right, either the law needs to consider asexuality to be a sexual orientation or the lack of sexual orientation needs to be protected. Or, of course, there's the status quo.

[ChainSmokingBob]

In my letter, I noted that the Equality Act 2010 defines a sexual orientation (which is the thing that is protected) to be:

“a person’s sexual orientation towards—

c. persons of either sex.”

My asexuality is sexual indifference towards persons of any given sex. I think it should qualify and be recognised, though I'd like that understanding to be formalised in the law.

[poindexter]

It entirely depends on whether you consider asexuality to be a sexual orientation or not. I guess because that in itself is a controversial topic, it might be good to clarify that, or mention asexuality as seperate but included with sexual orientation.

If they included: a person's sexual orientation towards:-

d) no persons

then I'd feel more covered.

I'm not sure it covers pansexuality either, considering it only applies to both sexes (bisexuality) and not all sexes (pansexuality).

To be fair, that whole "definition" is a little dodgy - it's circular reasoning to say that sexual orientation is someone's sexual orientation towards x y or z...

[Hobbes!]

Legally, I think - think, I'm not a lawyer so this is speculation - it would be a small change. The stumbling block would be in convincing enough MPs that it's worth the effort of changing at all. Without a quantifiable spate of asexual discrimination, that's going to be very difficult indeed. Defining asexuality legally isn't all that relevant, but when it comes to debate in Commons, I can see usual ignorant argument's we're all familiar with being used as counter-arguments

[GeoffBrady]

Legally, I think - think, I'm not a lawyer so this is speculation - it would be a small change. The stumbling block would be in convincing enough MPs that it's worth the effort of changing at all. Without a quantifiable spate of asexual discrimination, that's going to be very difficult indeed. Defining asexuality legally isn't all that relevant, but when it comes to debate in Commons, I can see usual ignorant argument's we're all familiar with being used as counter-arguments

I expect you're right. The question is, is it worth trying, and is it worth trying now?

My fear is that trying too soon may put others' efforts back. My primary concern is education and knowledge. Children should be aware that asexuality is a thing — at the moment, I'd compare the ignorance to Section 28. Children can, by all means, ask questions (if they're lucky enough to be at least vaguely aware of asexuality), but broadly speaking many adults (I include teachers) aren't aware enough to offer reassurance and support.

Maybe an education campaign would be more worthwhile?

[Quintus Crinis]

Education is certainly going to be important - although I'm not sure the present situation is comparable to section 28.

There was a point when the equal marriage bill went through parliament that there was a discussion to include opposite-sex civil partnerships that was turned down. I think this possibly shows the lack of knowledge about asexuality as it leaves hetero-romantic aces with only marriage to commit to a romantic partner (marriage currently requiring consummation and sexual fidelity - the former being difficult for me; the latter something a sexual partner might find difficult, and I'm not sure if I'd be hapy with that expectation on them.).

[GeoffBrady]

Education is certainly going to be important - although I'm not sure the present situation is comparable to section 28.

Certainly no one is banned from talking about asexuality… All I mean is that, from a child's perspective, it is difficult to get reliable information about asexuality from their adult role models.

There was a point when the equal marriage bill went through parliament that there was a discussion to include opposite-sex civil partnerships that was turned down. I think this possibly shows the lack of knowledge about asexuality as it leaves hetero-romantic aces with only marriage to commit to a romantic partner (marriage currently requiring consummation and sexual fidelity - the former being difficult for me; the latter something a sexual partner might find difficult, and I'm not sure if I'd be hapy with that expectation on them.).

Yes, I agree. What's more is that parliament (I think it's parliament) has committed to recognising other genders. Quite what this means for civil partnerships will be interesting. It seems somewhat discriminatory to exclude heterosexual and/or opposite-sex couples from civil partnering.

[Hobbes!]

I still think it boils down to time in Commons, but under the radar there are some encouraging developments. For the time being I don't think there'll be much legal progress for aces, at least while we're still more or less a passing curiosity as far as visibility is concerned. As for kids and the questioning ... well, that's why we have an internet presence

[GeoffBrady]

As for kids and the questioning ... well, that's why we have an internet presence

How I wish that was enough! Maybe if Facebook had an option to declare ourselves as asexual (or, indeed, other sexualities) then that would be enough to rouse the curiosities of most children! I can only speak from my experience, but there were times when I wondered whether something was wrong.

[Quintus Crinis]

As for kids and the questioning ... well, that's why we have an internet presence

How I wish that was enough! Maybe if Facebook had an option to declare ourselves as asexual (or, indeed, other sexualities) then that would be enough to rouse the curiosities of most children! I can only speak from my experience, but there were times when I wondered whether something was wrong.

It reaches out to many, but agreed it would be helpful if Facebook or politics/the media gave some recognition or advice for those trying to figure themselves out :)

There was, I thought, a story-line hinted at in one of the soaps a while back (which would have greatly increased visibility), but unfortunately looks like nothings come of it yet (although the writers there are dragging their ideas out for long periods atm so haven't lost hope quite yet). :)

[Deleted Person]

While I would love to be covered in a legal sense I can't see it happening until asexuality is well known enough for there to be a lot more visible discrimination (Sadly I suspect it will get worse as we become more visible, simply because people love to attack what's different, irrelevant of why it's different). So legally we won't be protected until someone makes a case study, which, like all these cases, will be difficult to prove in the first place unless someone specifically says "I'm firing you because you're asexual" which we know won't happen.

[GeoffBrady]

(Sadly I suspect it will get worse as we become more visible, simply because people love to attack what's different, irrelevant of why it's different).

I expect you're right, and that's what I want to protect against — the idea that it will get worse before it gets better doesn't rest easy with me, but I understand that it is possibly going to be the reality. I don't want to do nothing, though.

[henshin]

I definitely support the idea of education and furthering awareness, but seeing as even homosexuality is still not really taught to kids at school I doubt asexuality is gonna be on the curriculum any time soon!

With regard to the law, I don't really see the need for asexuals to be especially protected, we are not a segment of the population at risk from hate crime and tbh even if and when awareness increases how is that going to increase harassment or attacks? Most hate crimes are predicated on some kind of physical perception, even gay people are targeted for their overt behaviours or gender presentation and not simply their sexuality, what exactly is going to identify you as asexual to random people to anger them sufficiently to incite a hate attack?

[GeoffBrady]

I definitely support the idea of education and furthering awareness, but seeing as even homosexuality is still not really taught to kids at school I doubt asexuality is gonna be on the curriculum any time soon!

With regard to the law, I don't really see the need for asexuals to be especially protected, we are not a segment of the population at risk from hate crime and tbh even if and when awareness increases how is that going to increase harassment or attacks? Most hate crimes are predicated on some kind of physical perception, even gay people are targeted for their overt behaviours or gender presentation and not simply their sexuality, what exactly is going to identify you as asexual to random people to anger them sufficiently to incite a hate attack?

I don't mean to be rude or condescending, but I'm going to suggest you might be naive.

As you say, there are people that attack gay people based on physical perception and overt behaviours. The fact I have never had a partner — casual or otherwise — is overt. The fact that I am a virgin and make no effort to conceal that fact is overt. Some people perceive the fact I am a virgin to be due to a psychological or physical condition that needs to be treated. That society views "real men" as overtly sexual highlights me as someone that does not conform to the prevailing gender stereotype and marks me as different.

At one time, society viewed homosexuality as impossible to understand: it was contrary to societal norms and expectations; society looked after those that were willing to abide by those norms.

At this time, I'd argue that most people cannot understand asexuality. Most people have no problem with asexuality and are willing to try to understand. There will be a minority that will be significantly challenged by the lack of sexual attraction and will identify us as different, foreign, beyond comprehension. "Not normal". The argument that "we're not harming anyone" won't wash with those people, sadly.

So, I fear, we're next.

[oldgeeza]

whilst on here, they just played Tom Robinsons Glad To Be Gay, I listened to the lyrics more closely, yes times have changed from 1977 when he released that song, I would think it will end up being the same for asexuals, it will take a long time to be accepted, whether it's ever understood is a different matter, as someone earlier quoted, is asexual classed as a "real"orientation in the eyes of those who "judge" these situations.

Obviously, it is a "real" orientation, you wouldn't have sites such as Aven, Ace-Book, Ace Fet etc & all the asexual dating sites, but it's only obvious to those of us who live the life, all these lords, politicians, they turn a blind eye to what they don't know or understand, the only reason gay marriage became accepted is because there are so many gay lords, MP's & members of the church & it all started coming out into the open, possibly though media like we are using now as much as the press, TV etc, I wonder how many lords or MP's are asexual, I wonder how many realise they're asexual or that there is such a term or others alike to them that don't like sex, or they're too embarrassed to admit it, until that happens, I guess asexuals, at least in the UK will not be understood or accepted.

[Quintus Crinis]

I'm sure there are some ace MPs and Lords (just as their must be some ace celebrities) - agreed one of the biggest issues is how many realise that asexuality is a thing and how many would be worried about coming out.

Almost a case of needing someone well-known and respected to take that brave step to be first and then might get somewhere with protection legislation?

[GeoffBrady]

Almost a case of needing someone well-known and respected to take that brave step to be first and then might get somewhere with protection legislation?

Oh, if I had the fame. I'd be dangerous! Maybe one of us should run for parliament…