Is Gender Dysmorphia an acceptable term?

Let's talk about women and girls.

Agree with PP, you write well. May be a book might be something to think about?!

I think that scrutiny of the various relevant legislation, and how it works, and doesn't work, together would be good.

Thank you, I possibly do overdo the anecdotes at times. I have always loved writing.

Hence the derailing might be a genuine perception in places. I see that.

But do not think anyone would want me to write a book. That's for sure.

Just happy to help on here when I can.

Yes, JayceeDove, I'm very grateful to you for sharing your intimate knowledge and making it accessible to those of us without your experience. It's very helpful. I haven't seen the 'derailed' thread but I'm sure I'd disagree with that assessment of your contribution.

jayceedove, you are a love here. You are creating an amazing archive of your writing here, I hope you have a book deal!

Researcher in sexual orientation, paraphilias, & gender identity disorders

twitter.com/BlanchardPhD/status/986982376554336257

Listen to a man who knows some stuff

Indeed - which was why I suggested it in the earlier thread.

Ok, thanks. Just as an aside none of this currently takes sex based rights into account whatsoever. So whilst the law wants to know sex in a criminal case we have a female victim of male violence being denied the right to identify the sex of her attacker as male as part of her evidence. It's a mess. And this needs to be sorted out for both of our sakes.

I suggested in another thread the other day that there needed to be a government effort to get legal clarification of the interaction between the GRA and the Equality Act on definitions and exclusions.

I argued this was a positive step that could be taken now by pressing for these. But I left the thread as I had apparently derailed it.

So I don't think anyone progressed that suggestion.

JC Do you know what happened to marriages where one partner transitioned before equal marriage. Did the marriage have to be dissolved?

The original birth certificate is not destroyed but is not openly accessible. But is in cases of legitimate need, such as a criminal investigation.

This is where the guidance given in how to apply the law directly misinterprets the actual law. The guidance states a GRC means should not be excluded in any circumstances. This is an area I would really like clarity on. It's so important to understand that specific issue. And how would an org question a birth cert or is there another way they can ask for proof of sex? Does a DBS check flag it when it's relevant? And if it's not a DBS situation how is this raised and/evidenced?

Then the GRA could be amended to provide a right to a specified ID document(s) for use in everyday situations to avoid 'outing' with no serious effect on the lives of trans people. The alternative is self ID into the opposite sex and all the issues that brings for women. Self ID into a marker on standard ID in situations where sex isn't an issue for women isn't an issue for women I don't think.

There are other exemptions even with a GRC - where there is no protected right of access to spaces such as refuges that can be denied if circumstances are considered reasonable and possession of a GRC does not override that.

Usually these are dealt with on a one to one basis in rare instances where the matter arises given how few people have a GRC.

And also one case where a GRC has no legal affect? Along with inheritance and hereditary peerages etc. The law puts money and power above a GRC.

I have only ever used my birth certificate as proof of age to get a bus pass. It is essentially a copy document for use in such ID situations. At the time, as I was a full time carer, I had no passport or driving licence so it was useful for that purpose.

I think I might have needed it as proof of ID to open a new bank account once too. But cannot recall if they asked to see it when I took it along as again I had no other documents that were usually asked for at that time.

In fact one trans woman who chose not to divorce her wife and so remained legally male later tried to claim back her pension that she did not take early as a woman by remaining male after the point when the same sex marriage act meant she could have legally changed gender and remain married.

She rightly lost the case, as it was a free choice of love over money.

Where love meant more in this instance, despite the cost.

I see that now you've pointed it out. So now the marriage aspect is resolved what is the reason for a GRC to get a birth cert? It's a piece of paper only now unless to be used to access sex segregated spaces/places or just validation alone? Other ID documents can have the sex changed without one and most needs to provide ID can be met without a birth cert?

That’s very sad Jaycee, I’m glad same sex marraige is allowed now.

Yes, except, of course, those who married did not see it as same sex marriage and the law didn't either.

That is the difference between biology and legality in terms of decision making and where a lot of the arguments over transgender definitions arise.

In fact, what it also meant was that a number of transsexual women who had married (when legally male) a woman, and had stayed married to that woman for many years, were not allowed to apply for a GRC unless they divorced first.

Because otherwise that would mean two women were married legally and that was disallowed for another decade.

So married trans women (and possibly some married trans men married to men) had to choose to either divorce and get legal recognition or stay married and remain legally their birth sex.

A number did choose love over legal recognition and so did not claim a GRC.

Fascinating Jay!

Thanks JayceeDove. So transpeople got the right to same sex marriage before LG in effect. I'd wondered why some transsexuals were arguing that same sex marriage meant the GRA was no longer required.

Btw not to be pedantic but dysmorphia is a different condition - along the lines of perceiving your body in a distorted way. Dysphoria is about distress about your body as it actually is.

It's an interesting one from the trans activists point of view. They tell us it causes / worsens dysphoria if we 'misgender' but also state dysphoria isn't something people should associate with trans because it's not an issue for many who ID. From my point of view if you don't have dysphoria then why are we paying for the 'treatment' for something you don't have?