Equality Commission on Sex

I think it would have to be all of the above, and personal, checkable references too.

How can a name change be sufficient to show that you have been living as a female?

What if you changed you name to Ashley or Cameron or Lynsey or any other unisex name. Social media accounts and interviews with colleagues, friends and family would be the best way to monitor.

I dunno - maybe similar to how you prove a relationship is real to immigration? Documents, photos, cards and letters from friends and family, bank statements, etc?

You could show a dated bank statement and deed poll to prove new name and have transition photos etc.

These days you need about 6 documents to put your kids name down for primary school in our LA so document collecting isn’t unusual/unreasonable.

And how do you prove all the bits in between?

I suppose the only way a time-dependent self ID would work is by applying at day 1 and getting it 5 years later?

Ok

Give me examples of how you prove your suggestion of 3) Self ID + 5 years.

Talk me through how it provides adequate safe guarding?

In what circumstances would you say that there was a problem with the application?

Google an image of 'birth certificate UK' and it clearly says sex.

The Gender Recognition Act

talks about modifying the gender on the birth certificate, not the sex. Can't anyone get this right?

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/720838/t455-eng.pdf

Under the laws of the United Kingdom, individuals are considered by the State to be of the gender – either male or female – that is registered on their birth certificates. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 enables transsexual people to apply to the Gender Recognition Panel to receive a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). If you are granted a full GRC you will, from the date of issue, be considered in the eyes of the law to be of your acquired gender. You will be entitled to all the rights appropriate to a person of your acquired gender. This will include the right to retire and receive state pension at the age appropriate to your acquired gender.

Seconding everything Wanderabout said. The whole reason for #nodebate and the attempts to police how women could talk about these issues was to prevent the general public from becoming aware of the changes that had been made via back channels, with no public consultation at all. We won that one, and now the scope of what self-ID would mean is dawning on the public. They're not going to stand for it.

My guess is that once self-ID has been defeated the public's attention will shift to the GRC process. Right from the beginning we've been saying that it's old school transsexuals who'll be worst hit when the backlash comes. There's a reason that some of them have stepped up and tried to register a not in my name protest to the more extreme TRA demands - they've seen the writing on the wall too, and are trying to protect themselves.

People like Snappity may think they're helping, but the reality is quite the opposite.

How would the self id be evidenced?

I don't think you could have a high bar of evidence, and I can't really think what could be provided either.

The statutory declaration would be the evidence i suppose. So any time frame eg 2 or 5 years would in effect be meaningless as it's self declared.

I think if self id is introduced it would have to be on the basis that that was what the person wanted, like a name change is by deed poll.

Public pressure in response to ridiculous demands from clearly male bodied or gender fluid self-iding people isn't going to stand for a free for all in changing rooms etc or orgs in loco parentis ignoring biological sex. Lines have become blurrred and the vast majority of women and girls will want to be assured that they and their daughters have the choice of single sex spaces when naked or vulnerable and are aware when this is not the case not hoodwinked with 'single gender'.

Too many people are aware now and you can't put the genie back in the bottle.

Trans lobby orgs have been advising government and other orgs in a biased, secretive and sometimes downright incorrect way to weaken their policy around women and girls rights and protections with no consideration given to the impact on other protected characteristics and now we have this mess because of it. It isn't going to wash anymore for those who are self-iding.

With GRC under current/similar system is a separate matter.

I would also worry about young or vulnerable people being drawn into the surgical route before they were really certain that it was the right thing to do, if surgery were the main requirement to get a GRC.

On the proposals,

1 Surgery + 1 year,
2 Gender Dysphoria diagnosis + 3 years (one more than now)

What is the waiting time for surgery on the NHS? Would these both in effect lead to the same amount of time elapsed?

As in:

• gender dysphoria diagnosis as precondition for surgery - 1 year (I'd think that it wouldn't be much quicker than that?)
• wait for surgery (particularly if there were other obstacles, such as the need to lose weight, or store eggs / sperm) - 1-2 years

In fact, would the self-ID + 5 years end up not being that much longer, given that one could start the self-ID process tomorrow by applying for documents to be changed, a deed poll etc, whereas the other routes will only move as fast as the medical system will allow?

there ought to more emphasis on surgery rather than a diagnosis of gender dysphoria

I see what you're saying but I think this would be illegal.

Their understanding of sex in the Equality Act 2010 is that it means sex on a person's birth certificate, either issued at birth or under the Gender Recognition Act.

Yes, that's the law. s.212(1) EA defines a woman as a female of any age; s.9(1) GRA defines a male-born person with a GRC as a female.

I'm slightly surprised that this is news to anybody.

*Long grass won't work with sex exemptions. Govt needs to do something about clarifying sex vs gender with ridiculous stuff like non binary male bodied people demanding access to teenage girls changing rooms, plus guides and other youth orgs frankly irresponsible hidden mixed sex guidelines

The thing is this is the most controversial element. So they have a few options to address this and none of which are necessarily appealing.

1. Make it up to the place (ie swimming pool , refuge, clothes shop) to decide if an exclusion is proportionate. Anyone wishing to challenge what that place decided has to go to court to arbitrate and it would be for the court to decide if the exclusion was lawful under the new act

1. Be definitive and exclude certain groups despite self id

1. Leave it as is under the EA. Which is very similar to number 1.

All three above are based on the assumption that self id is included in any change to the GRA.

If self id isn't included number 3 stays in place as is, basically.

Agree re the cost issues in snappitys post.

Would you please tell me what constitutes "evidence" and who checks it in your option 3 Snappity?

Erm, no. The consultation doesn't suggest that at all (as I read it).

But the proposal allows it and gives no gatekeeping at all to stop it (unlike your suggestions at least two of which do).

I could personally seriously consider option 1 if it was full SRS surgery + 1 year or option 2 gender dysphoria diagnosis but not option 3. I know others have different views after all that has happened though.

Long grass won't work with sex exemptions. Govt needs to do something about clarifying sex vs gender with ridiculous stuff like non binary male bodied people demanding access to teenage girls changing rooms, plus guides and other youth orgs frankly irresponsible hidden mixed sex guidelines.

I don't see the govt doing something on gender Id conversion therapy in a hurry for various reasons. Anything that supports trans rights without impacting others rights and safety I'm very supportive of. I've found I've become very suspicious of anything proposed now because of the silencing, threats, denial etc from some.

Erm, no. The consultation doesn't suggest that at all (as I read it)

Erm yes... There is no requirement to send in photos of one wearing a dress, or a stash of receipts from Coast showing that one has started wearing typically female attire...

Baroque - I think that IW has a GRC (has definitely had bottom and top surgery). PL definitely doesn't have a GRC - they have said repeatedly that they don't see the point in them. I think PL has had bottom surgery, but has definitely had facial surgery but claims that the boobs are solely as a result of hormone therapy

That's kind of what I said about the sex/gender thing but I take your point. I wasn't trying to start anything about definitions!

It was the broad overview I was trying to say really, just that was why the EA still applied and it was grey.

I agree re the conversion therapy comment. Plus the rules for inter sex people should be sorted out too.

I agree too that it probably appeared to be a simple way of dealing with a very complex issue.

It does not represent progress re acceptance, it basically says ‘OK if you prove to us you are really committed to the gender caste system by adopting the gender role attached to the opposite sex then we’ll grant you rights’