Rights Aren’t One Size Fits All

Closing the Legal Gap in NSW Anti-Discrimination Law: The Case for Inclusion of Physical Appearance as a Protected Attribute.

Scroll to the end to learn how you can support our advocacy to include physical appearance as a protected attribute under the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act.

In August, End Weight Bias made a formal submission to the New South Wales Law Reform Commission as part of its review of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW). Our recommendation was clear: physical appearance, including body size and shape, must be included as a protected attribute under NSW anti-discrimination law.

This wasn’t a symbolic ask. It was a response to a legal gap with real, ongoing consequences.

A legal blind spot with everyday impacts

Right now, discrimination based on physical appearance is largely lawful in New South Wales.

People can be denied employment, refused adequate healthcare, excluded from housing, declined insurance, or blocked from adoption or fertility treatment because of how they look, particularly because of their body size. These are not rare or hypothetical scenarios. They are documented, measurable, and widely reported by people living in larger bodies.

Yet under the current Act, there is no clear avenue for redress.

The absence of protection does more than deny individuals justice. It sends a broader message about what harms are taken seriously, and which are not.

Discrimination doesn’t have to be loud to be systemic

Appearance-based discrimination is often dismissed as interpersonal, subjective, or risk-based. In reality, it is deeply embedded in systems and institutions, with much of the so-called evidence about ‘risks’ linked to higher-weight bodies is rooted in bias, outdated assumptions, or studies where conflicts of interest may influence the findings.

Appearance-based discrimination shows up in hiring practices framed as “professionalism” or “culture fit”. In healthcare policies that rely on weight-based assumptions rather than individual clinical need. In insurance risk models, education settings, and public services. It is reinforced by outdated narratives that frame body size as a personal failing rather than a neutral human variation.

Weight bias is structural. It produces poorer health outcomes, reduced economic opportunity, and significant psychological harm, not because of body size itself, but because of how people are treated because of it.

Despite decades of evidence, the law has not kept pace.

Why naming physical appearance matters

Our submission called for physical appearance, explicitly including body size, shape, and weight, to be added as a protected attribute under the Act.

This matters for three key reasons:

• First, harm. The evidence is overwhelming. Appearance-based discrimination causes measurable social, economic, and health harms, particularly for people in larger bodies.

  
  

• Second, clarity. Without explicit recognition, people experiencing discrimination are forced to argue that their experience “fits” elsewhere. This creates inconsistency, places an unfair burden on complainants, and weakens deterrence.

  
  

• Third, dignity. Anti-discrimination law is not only about complaints processes. It is a statement of values. Excluding appearance-based discrimination implies that some forms of harm are less serious, less credible, or less deserving of protection.

Naming physical appearance in the Act would affirm a simple principle: people deserve equal treatment and protection under the law, regardless of how they look.

Lived experience belongs in law reform

Our submission was informed not only by research and analysis, but by lived experience.

Members of our community shared personal accounts of being dismissed, bullied, and traumatised in healthcare settings, devalued in workplaces, subjected to public harassment, and negatively judged because of their bodies. These stories are not outliers. They reflect a broader social pattern in which appearance becomes a proxy for worth and credibility.

We are deeply grateful to everyone who contributed their experiences. Their willingness to speak up underscores why this reform matters.

This is why the law must change

The Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 was introduced nearly five decades ago. While it has evolved over time, it no longer reflects the full spectrum of discrimination experienced in contemporary society.

Including physical appearance as a protected attribute would not solve stigma on its own. But it would close a significant legal gap, provide a clear pathway for redress, and help shift the cultural norms that allow appearance-based discrimination to persist unchecked.

This reform is evidence-based, workable, and overdue.

NSW has the opportunity to modernise its anti-discrimination framework in a way that reflects lived reality, affirms human dignity, and strengthens protections for those currently left out.

Where to From Here

If you support the recommendation that physical appearance should be included as a protected attribute under the Anti-Discrimination Act, we encourage you to engage with the review process and make your voice heard. You can:

• Visit the NSW Law Reform Commission website to learn more about the review.

• Subscribe to their mailing list to receive updates on the reform.

• Email the Commission directly to let them know you support our submission.

Protection from discrimination should be one size fits all. With so many forms of discrimination already recognised under the Act, excluding physical appearance sends a clear message about which harms are socially acceptable, and allows them to thrive unchecked. Rights must be one size fits all. Every person deserves equal protection under the law.

You can read our full submission to the NSW Law Reform Commission below.

Click Me