A week ago, I wrote about the strange silence that had suddenly fallen over the so-called “gender wars.” After years of noise, we had entered a kind of bureaucratic fog - a stalemate created by clashing laws, political withdrawal, and an Equality and Human Rights Commission that had lost trust across the board.
Well… the quiet didn’t last long.
This past week, three things happened that perfectly capture the chaos organisations now face:
- Girlguiding announced a ban on all trans girls.
- The Women’s Institute announced a ban on all trans women.
- And the tribunal judgment in Peggie v NHS Fife was published; a case that should have calmed things, but has instead added even more confusion.
These three events show us exactly why 2026 will be such a difficult year for organisations trying to stay fair, lawful, and inclusive. They also reveal a painful truth: while the courts are offering nuance, Tufton Street is trying to enforce with fear.
Before I offer practical guidance for writing a safe and inclusive policy (and I promise, there is a way through this), we need to understand what has just happened - and why.
The Peggie Judgment: What It Really Said - Not What Was Claimed
I’ve spent a considerable amount of time reading judgments, and this one is a classic example of the gap between legal reality and the headlines.
Sex Matters and their allies have rushed to frame this case as a victory - but in truth, it’s anything but because:
The tribunal rejected the argument that trans women in female spaces are inherently unlawful.
The tribunal went out of its way to say that trans inclusion is not automatically harassment or discrimination. In fact, the only reason NHS Fife lost anything was that they mishandled a complaint. They didn’t act quickly enough. They didn’t communicate clearly. They created uncertainty for everyone involved.
In other words:
The problem was process, not the presence of a trans woman.
Most importantly, all claims against the trans doctor, Dr Beth Upton, were dismissed. She did not harass anyone. She simply used a changing room she had long been permitted to use.
This was a case about organisational behaviour, not trans identity. And that distinction is key to everything that follows.
So Why Did Girlguiding and the WI Ban Trans People Completely?
If the courts are saying inclusion can be lawful, why are organisations panicking and banning trans people outright?
The answer is chilling but simple:
They cannot afford the risk of losing a trial.
Fair Play For Women, Sex Matters, and the Free Speech Union have refined a strategy I can only describe as lawfare - the use of legal threats to force policy change, without even stepping into a courtroom.
Girlguiding changed its policy because one parent (backed by a well-resourced campaigning organisation) threatened to sue. The Women’s Institute said openly that they acted “with regret” because they couldn’t afford the risk of litigation.
Neither organisation said, “We now believe inclusion is unsafe.”
Both said, “We can’t afford to fight.”
This is the chilling effect in its purest form.
You don’t need to win a case.
You just need people to believe they’ll lose one.
And this is where the contrast with Peggie becomes stark:
- The courts are saying: “It depends. Be fair. Be thoughtful. Balance rights.”
- The campaign groups are saying: “Ban everyone now or we’ll bury you in legal costs.”
This is the pincer movement organisations now find themselves in.
And yet - despite the panic - total bans may actually be less legally safe than they seem. Because Peggie also tells us something crucial:
Blanket exclusion without a specific reason can itself lead to harassment claims from trans staff or members.
So organisations now face risk whichever option they choose.
Which brings us to the real question:
How do you write an equality policy that is fair, lawful, and doesn’t expose you to either side’s legal traps?
The answer is surprisingly simple.
The Framework That Works: Don’t Police Identity - Manage Behaviour
The plain fact is that you cannot enforce a policy based on policing identity, and if you try, you will almost certainly land yourself in court, possibly facing criminal charges.
Policing identity is:
- intrusive
- impossible
- unlawful in many cases
- and guaranteed to damage trust
Managing behaviour is:
- lawful
- practical
- fair
- and protects everyone
So here is a simple, uncontentious principle on which you can build your entire policy:
We do not police or question anyone’s identity.
We manage behaviour, expectations, and the use of spaces in a way that treats everyone with dignity and respect.
How to Write a Trans- and Non-Binary-Inclusive Equality Policy in 2026
1. Start with your values - clearly and confidently
Your policy should begin with a simple commitment:
- We treat every person with dignity and respect.
- We do not question, verify, or police anyone’s gender identity.
- We focus on behaviour, conduct, and respectful interaction.
- We manage concerns promptly, fairly, and sensitively.
This immediately removes the most dangerous legal risk: identity policing.
2. Make explicit that you do not check identity
This means:
- No asking for medical details
- No asking for proof
- No “biological tests”
- No recording of trans status on HR systems
- No whisper networks or “lists”
Not only is this demeaning, but it also risks breaching privacy law and, in some cases, Section 22 of the Gender Recognition Act, which makes “outing” someone with a Gender Recognition Certificate a criminal offence.
Despite claims to the contrary, most managers don’t know for sure who is and is not trans, and they absolutely cannot ask.
If your policy relies on managers knowing who is “biologically” male or female, the policy is unlawful before you’ve even implemented it.
3. Set behaviour expectations for everyone
This is where the Peggie judgement is genuinely helpful. It shows that the key issue is not identity - it’s how concerns are handled.
Include simple, universal expectations:
- Respect others’ privacy.
- Use changing rooms and toilets with dignity.
- Don’t challenge or confront others about their identity.
- If you feel uncomfortable, raise the concern privately through the correct channels.
- Bullying, misgendering, or humiliation will not be tolerated. Even though “gender critical beliefs” are protected under the Equality Act, purposely misgendering and humiliating a trans person is still unlawful harassment.
This approach protects all staff and members, not just trans people.
4. Provide multiple privacy options - but don’t segregate
Privacy benefits everyone. It depoliticises the whole issue.
If possible, organisations should offer:
- single-occupancy toilets
- private changing spaces
- gender-neutral facilities
- flexible scheduling where practical
But - and this is vital:
Do not force trans people into separate facilities.
That is discriminatory and will expose you to legal challenge.
Privacy must be a choice, not a penalty.
5. Build a clear, fast process for handling concerns
This was NHS Fife’s downfall.
A good process looks like this:
- A concern is raised.
- A manager acknowledges it the same day.
- A private conversation explores what the person needs to feel safe.
- Temporary privacy adjustments are offered if necessary.
- No action is taken against the trans person unless misconduct is alleged.
- Everything is recorded.
Get this process right, and you remove 90% of your risk.
6. Include training - it’s non-negotiable
I have been delivering training and keynote presentations on transgender awareness for 25 years, and it makes such a difference. So many people have never knowingly met and talked to a trans person, and the combination of lack of understanding and fear of saying something wrong is the cause of most conflict.
Train your teams in:
- dignity and privacy principles
- how to raise concerns safely
- how to avoid harassment
- the limits of “free speech” in the workplace
- why identity policing is unlawful
- how to respond without escalating
When people understand the rules, behaviour improves and conflict declines.
7. State clearly: harassment, outing, and misgendering are misconduct
Your policy must say:
- No one may disclose or speculate about someone’s gender history.
- Deliberate misgendering or humiliation is unacceptable.
- No one may challenge another person about their identity.
- Anyone can raise a concern - but must do so through the proper process.
This aligns with long-standing harassment law and reduces organisational risk dramatically.
8. Communicate the policy positively - not defensively
Almost ten years of toxic debate over gender has divided opinion and left us with an uncomfortable standoff. There has been a campaign of misinformation from both sides of the debate, so it’s very likely that most organisations have staff with strongly held and very different views.
If you present your policy as: “We’re doing this so we don’t get sued…”
That will fan the flames.
If you present it as: “We’re doing this so everyone feels safe and respected…”
That supports both sides of the debate and encourages harmony
9. Review at least annually - the law will shift again
The legal terrain is unstable. Guidance will change. Further cases like Peggie will emerge. The EHRC may (finally) reset its approach in 2026.
So it is important say clearly:
“We will review this policy every 12 months to ensure it remains lawful, fair, and aligned with our values.”
It reassures staff and protects the organisation.
Why This Framework Works
It works because:
- It aligns with the Peggie judgment.
- It avoids identity policing, which is both impractical and unlawful.
- It protects against harassment claims.
- It reduces the risk of lawfare from gender-critical groups.
- It promotes dignity and fairness for everyone.
- It is simple and transparent.
- And it is grounded in your core mission, not political pressure.
This is the only approach I can recommend in good conscience. It’s the only one that respects humanity while staying on the right side of a very tangled legal landscape.
A Final Reflection
I’ve spent more than two decades helping organisations navigate gender inclusion. And I’ve learned this - people don’t fear trans people - they fear getting things wrong.
The tragedy is that in all the noise of this culture war, we’ve lost sight of the simplest truth:
We all just want to feel safe, respected, and able to get on with our day.
Most trans people aren’t activists; we just want to live our lives without fear, without interrogation, and without being turned into a political battleground.
Organisations can lead the way here by building workplaces grounded in dignity and respect. And I am here to help
I offer keynote speeches, leadership briefings, and staff training designed to give you practical, lawful, human solutions.
Let’s bring dignity, respect and clarity back into this conversation - and build workplaces where everyone can thrive.
0 Comments