Restoring Single-Sex Spaces in the UK
A Policy Proposal on Legal and Policy Reform
For Reference of: Great British Political Action Committee
Date: March 2025
Disclaimer: This policy proposal focuses specifically on legal and psychological considerations related to the restoration of single-sex spaces in the UK. It does not take into account other legislation or regulatory frameworks that may also be relevant to the provision and management of such spaces. Further analysis would be required to assess the impact of laws related to privacy, human rights, and public sector duties to ensure a fully coherent legal approach.
Executive Summary
This policy proposal addresses the legal and policy challenges surrounding single-sex spaces in the UK and outlines necessary reforms to ensure their lawful operation. While the Equality Act 2010 provides for single-sex services and spaces, ambiguities in its interpretation - compounded by the Gender Recognition Act 2004 - have resulted in legal uncertainty. This has led to inconsistent policies, fear of litigation, and difficulties for organisations seeking to uphold sex-based provisions. The proposed reforms aim to clarify the law, reinforce the rights of service providers, and safeguard privacy, safety, and freedom of association.
Beyond legal considerations, this paper examines the psychological and developmental differences between men and women as a key rationale for maintaining single-sex spaces. Research demonstrates that boys and girls develop distinct cognitive, emotional, and social patterns from early childhood, which has practical implications for privacy, well-being, and safety in single-sex environments. An international comparative analysis further explores how other legal systems approach single-sex spaces, offering insights into potential reforms for the UK. Based on this analysis, the proposed policy recommendations include:
- Amending the Equality Act 2010 to provide explicit legal certainty that service providers may lawfully exclude individuals of the opposite biological sex in single-sex spaces where necessary.
- Clarifying that obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate under the Gender Recognition Act 2004 does not override single-sex exemptions under the Equality Act.
- Strengthening protections for organisations, including women’s refuges, hospitals, prisons, and private clubs, to maintain single-sex policies without legal repercussions.
Providing clear government guidance on single-sex exemptions to support service providers and public institutions.
By implementing these reforms, the UK can restore legal clarity, uphold sex-based rights, and ensure that single-sex spaces continue to serve their intended purposes with fairness and integrity.
Introduction
Men’s and women’s-only spaces have historically existed to serve specific social, cultural, and practical needs. These spaces include women’s refuges, male and female-only gyms, separate hospital wards, and private clubs and associations. However, recent legal challenges and policy shifts have made it increasingly difficult to operate such spaces with legal confidence. Organisations providing single-sex services have faced pressure to adopt broad inclusion policies, often leading to concerns about safety, dignity, and fairness. The primary legal frameworks governing this issue are the Equality Act 2010, which provides single-sex exemptions but lacks clarity, and the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which allows individuals to change their legal gender but creates complications regarding access to sex-specific spaces.
Beyond legal considerations, the psychological and developmental differences between males and females further highlight the importance of maintaining single-sex spaces. Research consistently demonstrates that boys and girls develop differently in areas such as language, socio-emotional regulation, and temperament. A meta-analysis found that girls aged 7 to 48 months consistently outperform boys on language and emotional development tests, suggesting that even from a very young age, females tend to develop more advanced communication and emotional skills. Similarly, studies on childhood temperament reveal that girls typically score higher on measures of sociability and emotional regulation, while boys exhibit higher activity levels and externalising behaviours. A recent UK study found that girls as young as two years old engage in less outdoor play than boys, potentially leading to reduced physical confidence and different risk assessment behaviours later in life. These early psychological and behavioural differences support the argument for maintaining single-sex spaces, particularly in areas where privacy, safety, and emotional well-being are key concerns.
Issues with the Current Legal Framework
One of the main problems with the Equality Act 2010 is the ambiguity surrounding single-sex exemptions. The law allows organisations to restrict access to single-sex spaces if doing so is a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.” However, fear of legal challenges has led many providers to air on the side of inclusivity rather than risk accusations of discrimination. This has been particularly contentious in areas such as healthcare, sports, and women’s shelters, where biological differences between men and women are relevant to privacy and safety.
Another complication arises from the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which grants individuals with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) the legal status of their acquired gender. This has led to legal uncertainty over whether a trans woman with a GRC must be treated as a woman in all contexts, even in spaces where biological sex is relevant. In some cases, organisations have felt legally compelled to admit individuals into single-sex spaces based on gender identity rather than biological sex, leading to public concern and legal disputes.
Additionally, private men’s and women’s clubs have faced challenges under anti-discrimination laws. While private associations can set their own membership criteria, legal scrutiny and social pressure have made it difficult for single-sex clubs to operate without accusations of exclusion or discrimination. This has led to the closure of some traditional clubs that once served professional, social, or cultural purposes for men and women separately.
Case Studies: The Impact of Legal Uncertainty on Single-Sex Spaces
Case Study 1: Women’s Refuges and Domestic Violence Shelters
In recent years, some women’s refuges in the UK have been forced to close or change their policies due to legal uncertainty over single-sex exemptions. Organisations that have sought to maintain female-only spaces have faced legal and funding challenges, despite evidence that many survivors of domestic abuse feel unsafe in mixed-sex environments. A 2018 Parliamentary Evidentiary Committee raised that the presence of biological males in women’s refuges can lead to a reluctance among female victims to seek support, highlighting the need for clear legal protections for single-sex services.
Case Study 2: Women’s Prisons
Concerns over single-sex spaces have also arisen in the UK prison system. Reports have emerged of male-born individuals being housed in women’s prisons under gender self-identification policies, leading to incidents that have raised questions about safety and fairness. In contrast, Trumps executive order has introduced a law ensuring that prisoners are housed according to biological sex rather than gender identity in order to prioritise safety.
Case Study 3: Sporting Competitions
The issue of biological differences has also affected women’s sport. In cases where male-born athletes have been permitted to compete in female categories, concerns have been raised about fairness and competitive balance. The UK government has acknowledged these concerns, with sporting bodies such as World Athletics and the Rugby Football Union implementing policies that prioritise biological sex in order to maintain fair competition.
Legal Cases Highlighting the Challenges in Single-Sex Spaces
Case 1: Peter Wilkins v. Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL)
Peter Wilkins, a scientist at Porton Down, faced harassment and discrimination due to his gender-critical views, which assert that biological sex is immutable. After expressing these views, Wilkins encountered a hostile work environment and was constructively dismissed in November 2022. An employment tribunal found that DSTL had unlawfully suppressed Wilkins’s freedom of speech and failed to address the discriminatory behaviour he faced. This case underscores the tensions between gender-critical beliefs and organisational policies, highlighting the need for clear legal guidance on balancing these issues.
Case 2: Sandie Peggie v. NHS Fife
In December 2023, nurse Sandie Peggie was suspended after refusing to share changing facilities with a transgender doctor, Beth Upton, at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy. Peggie argued that employment law requires employers to provide single-sex changing facilities and that the Equality Act identifies sex as a protected characteristic, thereby justifying exclusive spaces for biological women. The employment tribunal, which began hearings in February 2025, has attracted significant attention and is set to resume in July 2025. This case highlights the complexities surrounding single-sex spaces in healthcare settings and the legal ambiguities that organisations face.
Case 3: S Brook v. Tasker
In 2012, S. Brook was refused access to the women’s toilets of a pub in Halifax and subsequently barred after complaining. Halifax County Court awarded £1,500 in damages to Brook, marking one of the few litigated cases since the Equality Act 2010 was enacted. This case illustrates the challenges that service providers face in interpreting and applying single-sex exemptions under the Equality Act, particularly concerning gender identity and access to facilities.
International Comparisons
United States
In the US, legal approaches to single-sex spaces vary by state although, Donald Trump’s executive order may now formalise a nation-wide approach. Some states, such as Texas, have enacted legislation requiring access to bathrooms and changing rooms to be based on biological sex. Others, such as California, have implemented self-identification policies that allow access to facilities based on gender identity. This patchwork legal framework has resulted in ongoing legal disputes and social controversy.
Canada
Canada has adopted a policy of gender self-identification in many areas, including prisons and women’s shelters. However, this has led to legal challenges from women’s rights groups who argue that the policy undermines the protections originally intended for single-sex spaces.
Scandinavia
Some Scandinavian countries have taken a more mixed approach. Sweden, for example, has maintained single-sex spaces in areas such as prisons and healthcare settings while allowing for some gender self-identification policies in less sensitive areas.
Proposed Legal Reforms
To restore clarity and legal certainty, amendments to the Equality Act 2010 should be introduced. The law should explicitly state that providers of single-sex spaces and services are legally permitted to exclude individuals of the opposite biological sex, regardless of gender identity, where necessary for privacy, safety, or fairness. Strengthening legal protections for service providers will ensure they are not vulnerable to discrimination claims when enforcing single-sex policies.
Reforms to the Gender Recognition Act 2004 should also be considered. Specifically, it should be clarified that obtaining a GRC does not override single-sex exemptions under the Equality Act. Further legal provisions should ensure that vulnerable spaces, such as domestic violence shelters and female prisons, can lawfully exclude individuals of the opposite biological sex, even if they have changed their legal gender. This would prevent conflicts where biological differences are relevant to safety and dignity.
Additionally, the UK’s licensing and club regulations should be amended to confirm that private membership organisations may operate on a single-sex basis without breaching discrimination laws. This would protect the right of men’s and women’s clubs to exist without facing unnecessary legal challenges.
Policy Recommendations
Beyond legal changes, government-issued guidance should clarify the application of single-sex exemptions in public institutions. Hospitals, schools, prisons, and other services need clear rules allowing them to maintain sex-based spaces where appropriate. Public funding for women’s refuges and other gender-specific services should not be contingent on admitting individuals based on gender identity rather than biological sex. Additionally, organisations enforcing single-sex policies should be protected from legal action, ensuring that their compliance with the Equality Act is recognised and upheld in law.
Furthermore, policy should recognise the psychological and developmental differences between men and women that justify single-sex spaces. Research shows that these differences emerge as early as infancy and manifest in areas such as emotional processing, physical activity levels, and risk assessment. Public institutions should take these differences into account when designing spaces for children, adolescents, and adults to ensure that environments support their developmental needs.
Conclusion
Legal and policy reforms are essential to restore clarity and protect single-sex spaces in the UK. The current legal framework, particularly the Equality Act 2010 and the Gender Recognition Act 2004, has created uncertainty, leading to inconsistent policies and challenges for organisations seeking to uphold sex-based provisions. By amending the Equality Act to explicitly affirm the legality of single-sex spaces and clarifying that a Gender Recognition Certificate does not override sex-based exemptions, the government can provide much-needed legal certainty. Additionally, strengthening protections for service providers—such as women’s refuges, prisons, healthcare facilities, and private clubs—will ensure that they can operate in accordance with their intended purpose without fear of litigation or funding restrictions. Clear government-issued guidance will further support organisations in applying single-sex exemptions appropriately and consistently.
Beyond legal considerations, recognising the psychological and developmental differences between men and women reinforces the justification for single-sex spaces. Ensuring these spaces remain available is not only a matter of legal clarity but also of safety, dignity, and fairness. By implementing these reforms, the UK can uphold the rights of individuals, balance competing interests, and preserve the integrity of single-sex spaces in law and practice.
Bibliography
Attenborough, F. (2025). Scientist Forced Out Over Gender Beliefs Wins Two-Year Legal Battle. [online] The Free Speech Union. Available at: Scientist forced out over gender beliefs wins two-year legal battle – The Free Speech Union [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Bando, R., Lopez-Boo, F., Fernald, L., Gertler, P. and Reynolds, S. (2024). Gender Differences in Early Child Development: Evidence from Large-Scale Studies of Very Young Children in Nine Countries. Journal of Economics, Race, and Policy, 7(2024). doi: Gender Differences in Early Child Development: Evidence from Large-Scale Studies of Very Young Children in Nine Countries | Journal of Economics, Race, and Policy.
BBC News (2025). NHS Fife Manager Defends Suspension of Trans Row Nurse Sandie Peggie. BBC News. [online] 14 Feb. Available at: NHS Fife manager defends suspension of trans row nurse Sandie Peggie - BBC News [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Forstater, M. (2020). Revisiting the Brook Case. [online] Single Sex Spaces. Available at: Revisiting the Brook case – single sex spaces [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
GOV.UK (2004). Gender Recognition Act 2004. [online] Legislation.gov.uk. Available at: Gender Recognition Act 2004 [Accessed 23 Mar. 2025].
GOV.UK (2010). Equality Act 2010. [online] Legislation.gov.uk. Available at: Equality Act 2010 [Accessed 23 Mar. 2025].
Harrison, H. (2018). EEA0082 - Evidence on Enforcing the Equality Act: The Law and the Role of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. [online] Parliament.uk. Available at: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/95670/html/ [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Healy, Z. (2024). ‘Very Chill’: The Changing Face of Working Men’s Clubs. BBC News. [online] 23 Dec. Available at: 'Very chill': The changing face of working men's clubs [Accessed 23 Mar. 2025].
Maguire, L.K., Niens, U., McCann, M. and Connolly, P. (2015). Emotional Development Among Early School-Age Children: Gender Differences in the Role of Problem Behaviours. Educational Psychology, 36(8), pp.1408–1428. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1034090.
Rutherford, N. (2023). Isla Bryson: What Is the Transgender Prisoners Row All about? BBC News. [online] 25 Jan. Available at: Isla Bryson: What is the transgender prisoners row all about? [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Sachdeva, M. (2025). GB News Presenter Michelle Dewberry Cancels Her Virgin Active Membership After ‘Encountering a Man in the Female Changing Rooms’. [online] Mail Online. Available at: GB News presenter Michelle Dewberry cancels her Virgin Active membership after 'encountering a man in the female changing rooms' | Daily Mail Online [Accessed 23 Mar. 2025].
Stacey, K. and Stacey, K. (2024). UK Culture Secretary Urges Ban on Transgender Athletes Competing in Female-Only Events. The Guardian. [online] 16 Apr. Available at: UK culture secretary urges ban on transgender athletes competing in female-only events | Transgender | The Guardian [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Texas State Senate (2017). Sec. A769. 052. [online] Texas Legislature Online (.gov). Available at: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/85r/billtext/pdf/sb00006i.pdf [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
The White House (2025). Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government. [online] The White House. Available at: Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism And Restoring Biological Truth To The Federal Government – The White House [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Walker, J. (2016). Legislative Summary of Bill C-16: An Act to Amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. [online] Library of Parliament. Available at: https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/LegislativeSummaries/421C16E [Accessed 25 Mar. 2025].
Weale, S. (2024). Girls Play Outside Less Than Boys Even at Two Years Old, UK Survey Reveals. [online] The Guardian. Available at: Girls play outside less than boys even at two years old, UK survey reveals | Education | The Guardian [Accessed 23 Mar. 2025].
