Transgender people can be turned away from female only spaces government says

The bureaucracy involved for my family member - trying to get their OAP age MIL a UK visa - when she has no immediate family left in her home county is unbelievable. The cost has run into thousands, and she has just had her application refused.

When did this change and why? Because I had an F marker on my passport 10 years before the GRA was even created. And I had to do nothing to get that. It was granted on a 'case by case' basis, presumably because I had had medical assessment.

That is the real elephant in the room here. It takes time and effort to get medically assessed so that it then becomes straightforward to get a GRC.

So the preference is to abandon all of that and go on trust instead of diagnosis.

Helpful to the person wanting a GRC, perhaps. Not reassuring to those (largely women) concerned about the impact of what was medical gatekeeping to such access becoming 'trust me I'm not a doctor and did not go to see one but I am okay, honest'.

This is where self ID falls down. Benefits the taker and disadvantages the rest of the world.

What is all this bureaucracy that keeps being mentioned? How does it compare to other, significant processes in the UK such as applying for a visa / British citizenship? Getting married? Registering a birth? Being approved to adopt a child? Joining the armed forces?

Considerably less than obtaining a right to reside, for example. Plus government assurance that the panel is minded to grant all applications unless there is a glaring reason not to. I do not think the Home Office provides similar assurances!

Because in order to do something simple like changing your passport you need to go through a GRPC (Gender Recognition Panel) session who make case by case desicions to grant an "F" or "M" marker.

Incorrect.

"You have a valid British passport in your birth gender but wish to apply for a new one in an acquired gender.

Please follow the guidance on how to make changes to your existing passport in the “Applying for a passport” booklet.

You should select the “Changes to your existing passport – New Name” option under section 1,as we do not record gender change as a specific category on our application form.

Under section 2, you should complete the details relating to your acquired gender, but you will also need to include previous names used in your birth gender.

In addition to your old passport, you will need to include one of the following as part of your application:

• a birth or adoption certificate in your acquired gender
• a Gender Recognition Certificate
• a letter from your doctor or medical consultant confirming that your change of gender is likely to be permanent, and evidence of your change of name such as a deed poll."

From: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/251703/Applying_for_a_passport_additional_information.PDF

So, a letter from your doctor will do, no panel necessary.

That is a good thing though. I wouldn't want to remove all the checks. That would be awful.

I admit to being mystified by this argument. What does bureaucracy have to do with "being who you are"?

What is all this bureaucracy that keeps being mentioned? How does it compare to other, significant processes in the UK such as applying for a visa / British citizenship? Getting married? Registering a birth? Being approved to adopt a child? Joining the armed forces?

----------------------

Because in order to do something simple like changing your passport you need to go through a GRPC (Gender Recognition Panel) session who make case by case desicions to grant an "F" or "M" marker. Like the SIA or other government departments you need to pay for this to be done and the outcome is not always guarenteed.

www.gires.org.uk/gender-recognition-panel/

There are set requirements in place for this to go through and even then it is not always guarenteed and no refunds given should the panel not be satisfied with the outdated requirements.

What is all this bureaucracy that keeps being mentioned? How does it compare to other, significant processes in the UK such as applying for a visa / British citizenship? Getting married? Registering a birth? Being approved to adopt a child? Joining the armed forces?

Self ID will help trans people with beaurocracy mostly. In order to change a gender marker and actually be who they are is quite a long, arduous, expensive and invasive experience.

I admit to being mystified by this argument. What does bureaucracy have to do with "being who you are"?

I don't think helping people with bureaucracy should come at the cost of endangering women and girls.

No, of course it shouldn't. Add to that the fact that a large proportion of those loudly supporting this ideology don't actually need any help with bureaucracy. That video yesterday with the non-binary Madison, spitting hatred with all her mates about pronouns really illustrated this. An obvious female, maybe a lesbian, it wasn't disclosed, but demanding to compel other people's language. Why? Because she doesn't identify with female sex stereotypes? Neither do most of us. She wasn't transsexual, she was self obsessed. The only oppressed group she belongs to is females. And all her mates support this and on the back of that changes which endanger women and girls and erode their rights.

I don't think helping people with bureaucracy should come at the cost of endangering women and girls.

James Kirkup's commentary (link includes evidence):

Some facts about the events that preceded the Government statement here that the coming consultation on the Gender Recognition Act will be narrowly drawn and not affect the Equality Act’s single sex exemptions.

I offer these facts because some are claiming “there was never any question of removing/amending EA exceptions.” Those claims are either mistaken or dishonest.
August 2015
Stonewall submission to the Women & Equalities Select Committee says MPs should amend the EA to
“remove exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces”

Jan 2016
Women & Equalities Committee says EA should be amended so that

“occupational requirements provision and / or the single-sex / separate services provision shall not apply”.

July 2016
Govt response to W&E Committee says: “we agree with the principle of this recommendation” on EA exemptions and seeks evidence for “future policy discussions”

July 2017
Govt promises GRA reform “ as part of a broad consultation of the legal system that underpins gender transition.”

July 2017
Stonewall commits to “advocate for the removal” of EA provisions allowing sex-based discrimination.

June 2018
Govt says:

“We are clear that we have no intention of amending the Equality Act 2010, the legislation that allows for single sex spaces.”

In sum: MPs and others told govt to amend/remove Equality Act single-sex exemptions. Govt considered doing so. Then govt ruled it out. / ends

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1004635839480164352.html

See also current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3288905-WPUK-and-the-attack-on-the-Equality-Act-exemptions?msgid=78954060#78954060

It is so bizarre to believe that a man is a woman because they have said: 'I am a woman'. It's extraordinary that a single person on the planet believes this.

Maria, I'd hate to encourage anyone to have drastic surgery in the hope that it will make them 'more of a woman/man'

Maybe. But if someone is determined enough to go through invasive surgery?

I feel like it's a bit less likely they're just doing it for frivolous reason. Or because they feel like being a woman (or man) occasionally.

They're probably also less likely to use their penis and the physical 'advantages' (in a physical confrontation) of male puberty to rape someone... (Especially not people that had vaginoplasty)

*I really think that self ID is the biggest problem.

People that actually get therapy, take hormones maybe have a surgery etc...?

It's imo much more acceptable / probably (hopefully?) less dangerous.*

Self ID will help trans people with beaurocracy mostly. In order to change a gender marker and actually be who they are is quite a long, arduous, expensive and invasive experience.

I can smell XY people too.

No great surprise, I’m a mammal - my female dog has the same ability (although mine is only useful with other humans, she seems to be able to do it with other dogs AND humans - she’s a rescue who is scared of men but not women. Pretty certain she’s not deciding who’s who based on gender-role stereotypes).

EeveePhd
Perhaps if you want to talk about toilets start a thread in AIBU?

We're not saying the facts on the ground have changed. We're saying the media framing of the facts on the ground has changed and that this is a good thing because media framing is a precursor for changing public opinion and/or awareness.

Except no one can ban anyone from a toilet. There is literally no legal reason to stop someone legitimatley using a toilet. It all comes down to a case by case basis. false "facts" are NEVER a good thing.

As far as I remember, all small children identify their school jumpers by the sniff test rather than the name label, and there's that particular tang to teen-boy-sweat that you don't seem to get from the girls, so I can quite believe that some posters here can discriminate between that sexes on pong alone.

Maria, I'd hate to encourage anyone to have drastic surgery in the hope that it will make them 'more of a woman/man'.

I really think that self ID is the biggest problem.

People that actually get therapy, take hormones maybe have a surgery etc...?

It's imo much more acceptable / probably (hopefully?) less dangerous.

I love all the lurkers coming out.

Yay.

Delurking and posting for the first time to assure you marvellous women that the bullshit posted in this thread in an effort to derail it doesn't fool anyone. How you kept pulling it back on topic against the onslaught of nonsense was bloody brilliant.

It seems to me that the framing of yesterday's news (transwomen explicitly being told 'no', rather than less specific generalisations about single-sex protections) is what hit a raw nerve with certain narcissists, and this is why they tantrummed all over this thread.

Mordaunt may have just been reasserting the status quo, but for once the message was clearly aimed at who it's meant for. That's why it was important and that's why so much effort was put into derailling.

I have lurked for months and months, agreeing with you all the way. But that ridiculous display of petulance from the derailers made me want to tell you regulars how much you are appreciated.

I can smell when a man has been in the meeting room I'm using, and when a biological male was using the women's loos at work I could tell if they'd been in there recently. The pink trainers and ponytail didn't disguise the male smell.

Almost = mostly