twitter.com/christineburns/status/1309476670357864448?s=21
Some comments here from C.Burns, one of the key transactivists involved in pushing through the GRA 2004. Burns has previously commented in a Guardian article about how pleased transactivists were when they got the legislation passed without any media attention. Now the comment is that they intended the diagnostic information from doctors to be a formality.
Burns complains that the president of the first panel was “the culprit” for requiring detailed medical information. Presumably, given the serious issues raised by Lord Tebbit and others during the debate before the law was passed, the first president took her or his responsibility to keep women safe seriously? Whoever she or he was, I for one am glad that she or he ensured that the very significant process of changing legal sex, with all its potential for harm, was scrutinised properly.
Over time, it would seem that scrutiny has been eroded, but those originally charged with overseeing the process obviously felt this should be a serious process and not a mere box-ticking exercise, as transactivists apparently intended from the beginning.
Please or to access all these features
Please
or
to access all these features
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
C. Burns thread on the original GRA and how transactivists intended it to function
18 replies
AnyOldPrion · 26/09/2020 17:39
OP posts:
Please create an account
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.