Legal take down of proposed changes to the GRA by barrister Julian Norman

Isn't a GRC issued after surgery?

Nope

There are many transmen and transwomen who have had surgery of some sort who do not have a GRC, and many transmen and tranwomen who have a GRC but have not had surgery (for some people there are various factors which mean that they are unable to have surgery, either in the short or longer term)

So...to clarify . no surgery required?

Hmm I stand corrected. I've clearly fallen back into the trap of believing in people (men). Thank you both!

Do the people who issue GRC actually claim that their patients (? I don't know if that's the correct word) present no risk? I thought they just diagnosed gender dysphoria.

No, they just certify that they have GD. A serial killer could have GD. The TRAs accuse us of relying on false stereotypes in our arguments. However, they do the same. Trans women are presented as harmless but tortured souls, meaning that if someone has GD, people almost immediately stop questioning whether they could pose a risk. The reality is that TW, like all other male people, are not a homogenous group. Some will be no risk but some will be a risk. You really cannot tell just through a GD diagnosis.

One advantage is that individuals with GD are much more likely to be on hormones and to have had surgery.

But anyone can say anything online can't they?

Stephanie claims to be a lawyer (but there is no record of them as a solicitor or barrister). Seemed to get the legal analysis of the GRC and the EA badly wrong. Spends their time on Twitter slagging off Mumsnet, with no regard for libel laws.

In contrast, anyone can easily google Julian Norman and find thousands of references to her work and qualifications.

And anyone can say that they have a GRC and there is no way for Joe or Josephine Public to verify that.

That is the situation that we are in.

No idea again. If you find out, it would be good to know. Thinking about it, which Dr would put their reputation on the line like that? But then, prisons release people, saying they're no longer a danger to the public. People get bail whilst awaiting trial because they're not considered a danger, despite fairly nasty allegations. I'm trying to get my head around it all still. Maybe I'm getting it wrong. Isn't a GRC issued after surgery?

Do the people who issue GRC actually claim that their patients (? I don't know if that's the correct word) present no risk? I thought they just diagnosed gender dysphoria.

No idea I'm afraid. I'm not one of the doctors who give people GRCs so I don't even know what they test for. To be honest, I think every man has the capacity to be a danger to females, even the "nice guys". But if the medical profession is prepared to tell the DVLA to allow me, an epileptic, a driving licence on the basis that they believe I'm not a danger to the public, then I have to trust that the same medical profession knows what they're doing here, too.

Yes, it’s very true that a diagnosis of gender dysphoria in no way is any form of guarantee or even belief that a person is not a risk. It does however weed out genuine cases from opportunistic or AGP ones.

in my mind, that means the medical and psychological practitioners who passed her believe that she doesnt present a threat to the general female population whilst going about daily life.

Which set of test can prove a male person doesn't present a threat to the general population?

To be fair to Stephanie, she says that she has a GRC. Presumably that means that shes passed various assessments etc and, in my mind, that means the medical and psychological practitioners who passed her believe that she doesnt present a threat to the general female population whilst going about daily life. It's self ID that gives me the Heebie jeebies. Its those who will, inevitably, abuse self ID who haunt me.

Well of course Stephanie will use whatever facilities they wants, because they is obviously incapable of identifying with women, only as one, and so has no ability to understand how women feel.

And just confirm, she said this herself on Twitter:

Stephanie Hayden

@flyinglawyer73
·
10 Jul

I hold a GRC.I will use any space designated as female, or any space designated as unisex. Female bathrooms are single space by definition. I won't be told to use something 'special'. I get the self id objections (I share them) but no one holding a GRC will be discriminated against

Hooray, a lawyer clearly explaining the law and giving a very convincing GC legal analysis.

Maybe Stephanie should call the police if they thinks there’s evidence of a hate crime here? And if they is not prepared to do that, then maybe they should stop with the defamatory commentary?

She also made this extraordinary statement: (my underscoring)

Stephanie Hayden

@flyinglawyer73

Replying to @DemocracyMs, @Gerontia, and @PrideInLondon
A piece of paper cannot change a biological sex; however, where someone has been subject to prolonged hormonal treatment it is a matter of academic debate as to whether one still retains original biological sex. Then there are brain studies. All different arguments of course!
11:50 am · 10 Jul 2018

Well Stephanie currently seems to be sucking up to Julian on twitter, probably because she thinks Julian is a bloke.

Stephanie Hayden is no fan of Mumsnet:

Stephanie Hayden
@flyinglawyer73
Aug 10

For all those making a song and dance about #BorisJohnson and the #burka take a look at the feminism board on @MumsnetTowers and read true hate and bigotry being published by the minute! That is what you call a hate crime! Not jokes about a letterbox! #MumsNet #Bigots

Shit, it’s so well written and logical I have no way to argue with it!

What can I do?

Nice try Liz

Oh that was good, so clearly argued.

And yes yes to this

I would support calls for existing law to be either repealed and re-drafted, or clarified properly so that it becomes accessible to a lay audience seeking to implement it

That’s great. Very clear and helpful. Plus of course don’t forget that the WEC and Stonewall want to remove the exemptions anyway.

Foxyliz you need to get a hobby. It’s hardly an offence if the information is in the public domain.

Here is the article by Stephanie Hayden that prompted the response from Julian Norman:

judicialcat.blogspot.com/2018/08/gender-recognition-certificates-why.html

I knew Stephanie had a GRC she has openly discussed this on twitter, it is public knowledge

Use a private browsing window (might be called incognito depending on your browser) to see it. I'm reassured to see you all so cautious about Google services links.