A campaign group called Freedom in the Arts (Fita) has sent a letter to the University of Leicester in the UK threatening to sue it over for publishing “misleading” guidance on furthering transgender inclusion in museums and galleries.
Fita has also demanded that the university removes the guidelines, titled “Trans-Inclusive Culture,” from its website immediately.
The guidelines were published by the university’s Research Center for Museums and Galleries (RCMG) two years ago and lay out a framework for cultural institutions to “generate inclusive public spaces and workplaces.” It addresses legal and ethical questions about trans inclusion, which, it says, must be prioritized like “all other forms of prejudice and discrimination.”
Twenty-two cultural and heritage groups support the guidelines, including the International Council of Museums UK (ICOM UK) and the Association of Independent Museums (Aim).
Choreographer Rosie Kay and Denise Fahmy, a former staffer at Arts Council England, together, founded Fita, which accused the university’s guidelines of misrepresenting the meaning of “sex” under the Equality Act 2010. Fita claims this defies the UK Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year ruling that “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act only refer to biological women and biological sex.
The ruling riled LGBTQ+ organizations in the UK’s arts and culture sector, who warned of making life more difficult for transgender and gender nonconforming people. Although the ruling applies broadly to same-sex spaces, the most heated debates have focused on access to bathrooms in museums and galleries.
Fita claims the University of Leicester’s trans-inclusive guidance for museums encourages policies that may violate the law, such as allowing individuals to use toilets based on gender identity. The group argues this guidance discriminates against staff with gender-critical beliefs and discourages open discussion in the arts.
Related Articles
Fita’s “Afraid to Speak Freely” survey, conducted with 483 arts workers, found that 84 percent rarely or never feel able to express views publicly—particularly on issues around sex and gender—due to fear of professional consequences. The group offered to help the university review its guidance, but says this was rejected in July. The university has not publicly responded.
In contrast, thousands in the arts community have expressed support for trans inclusion. Over 2,000 cultural workers signed an open letter defending trans rights, stating they would not police toilet use. “We stand in solidarity with our trans, non-binary and intersex communities… we are unable and unwilling to police the gender of people using our toilets,” the letter read.
Meanwhile Sharon Heal, the director of the Museums Association said: “Museums should be safe and welcoming places for all, including members of the trans community.”
Earlier this year, Richard Sandell, the co-director of the RCMG and a co-author of the guidance, told The Art Newspaper: “If you look back at the original guidance, actually the biggest parts of it are wholly unchanged by the Supreme Court, because there’s so much that museums can, should and are legally obliged to do under their Public Sector Equality Duty [also part of the Equality Act].
“It’s the lawful thing to do [under this duty]: to work hard to commit to advancing trans inclusion, to protect that group from discrimination and prejudice. [The Supreme Court’s ruling] is both a key moment and one that in no way upends or disrupts the central drive to harness the potential of culture to advance trans inclusion,” he continued.
Many groups listed as backers of the guidance refused to talk to TAN when approached for comment. They include the Museums Association, ICOM UK, and Aim. Margaret Middleton, a museum consultant who specializes in inclusive practice, did respond, though, and criticized Fita for “defending gender critical speech” and the promotion of “transphobic” talking points.
“Gender-critical feminism is based on the idea that sex is binary, determined at birth and cannot change and that gender is not socially constructed,” she said. “When applied to policy, gender-critical feminism seeks to socially discriminate against transgender people and limit their access to services including healthcare and public toilets… ‘The Trans-Inclusive Culture’ report responds to a rise in transphobic discrimination with recommendations for making the arts a safer and more welcoming space for trans people.”
When TAN put Middleton’s statement to Fita, it replied: “Respect for people of whatever identity is fundamental. However, our research has highlighted an oppressive and stifling culture in the arts which is supported and compounded by unlawful policies. Our case against the University of Leicester is about restoring a positive and affirming culture in the arts that is free from discrimination.”