SCOTTISH GRA REFORM ANNOUNCEMENT BROUGHT FORWARD

For everyone asking how we “live like a woman” ( wtf 😂 ) this individual has the answer. Unless you’re in a ball gown right you’re not womaning properly I guess? I’m not clearly 🤔

TRAs demand the moon and then complain that they are literally dying because they weren't given Jupiter, Saturn and Mars as well, and politicians fall over themselves to do their bidding. Women ask merely to be 'consulted' on our own annihilation as a legal category and they feel free to patronise or ignore us. Women think that if we keep compromising and giving ground, people will like us more and maybe even start listening to us. That isn't how negotiating works. That isn't how power works.

Shift the Overton Window. Make 'abolish the GRA' a politically speakable idea, even if it's not a realistic short-term goal. Long term, our aim must be to end the legal fiction of 'sex change' worldwide.

Completely agree. Fantastic post, Donkey.

I would like it gone - and even if that's never going to happen, I think it should be one of the demands from women - as you say, to shift the overton window

This is a good idea^ At the moment the argument is the current GRA is unfit for purpose so should be improved. Let's make the argument the current GRA is unfit for purpose, is no longer necessary and should be repealed.

Inebriati - it looks to me like Appollo posted too soon & was pipped to tagging the remainder on to their post by you getting in between.

Was that directed at me? I dont. Read the last sentance of my post.

Eexplain why cross dressers and people who fetishize being a woman need access to women only spaces

I dont think that 'suspecting someone is trans' is an reasonable way to run a society. It shouldn't be hidden, and it shouldn't be a problem.
If you can conceal it then you cannot ringfence womens rights.

If we can't abolish GRCs at this time we must explicitly reject Stonewall's definition of Trans for who is entitled to apply for a GRC. Flush this crap out into the open they have hidden their agenda under the carpet for too long. Make them

Absolutely agree, Donkeyskin.

I genuinely would like the GRA revoked - and this is not a position I was in 2 years. But the past 2 years of TRAs making the most outrageous demands on government, policy-makers and organisations like schools, the NHS etc have just opened my eyes to what a ridiculous legal fiction the GRC is.

I would like it gone - and even if that's never going to happen, I think it should be one of the demands from women - as you say, to shift the overton window. The category of woman: biological sex must remain a legally protected characteristic without any male-borns being able to barge their way into it.

I am completely bloody sick of TRA - aggressive, demanding, science denying, misogynists. Every last one of them.

We could extend the "reasonable suspicion" clause granted to ministers and priests to single-sex services. If a Catholic priest for instance is asked to marry a man and a woman and the priest suspects that either party is trans, they are allowed to refuse to perform the ceremony.

Given that most males who identify as trans don't pass, this would solve a few problems (there will inevitably be some false positives, but im sure we would get that fixed.)

Where a tw has a GRC, and therefore a new birth certificate that says 'female', there appears to be no way of preventing them from claiming to have always been female.

Yes, this is something I've never gotten an answer to.

We've got the supposed EA exemptions but how can they be applied if you can't ask who had a GRC and who doesn't (and there's no obligation to disclose)? I don't understand it. Are we going to be checking genitals before allowing participation in women's sport, for example. Of course not! The exemptions are unworkable (unless there's something I've missed).

Donkeyskin I wholeheartedly agree, bad laws can't last, legal fictions can not be allowed to stand, now that we are all aware of them!

I wholeheartedly agree DonkeySkin and while we're at it, let's make all set asides intended for women and girls, and all sex segregated services, spaces and provisions allowed by the Eqality Act apply its exemptions by default.

Unless such services and set asides apply to opt out from the exemptions they must remain single-sex.

And unless these providers can prove they have done Equality Impact Assessment (which obviously are meant to include public and private consultations with all affected groups) such an exemption will mot be granted.

And for that we need to demand that the funding restrictions requiring opposite-sex inclusion for all sex-seggregated provisions must be rescinded. Instead, the government itself could ensure that additional services ie separate services are provided independently of single-sex provisions.

The GRA needs abolished not filled with exemptions.

I agree. I also think that is vanishingly unlikely to happen in the near future.

Just because politicians are unlikely to support it now doesn't mean that women shouldn't demand it. In fact, it's all the more reason to put the idea on the table, because it shifts the Overton Window.

Demanding more than the measly 'exceptions' being offered will put women in a stronger negotiating position, put TRAs on the back foot and, most importantly, force politicians to acknowledge the root of the problem, which is their establishment of an unworkable legal fiction back in 2004. (In this the UK is not alone - most Western countries have similar legislation.)

All the current problems are rooted in the lie that it is possible for human beings to change sex. It isn't, and governments around the world must stop enforcing this lie. I agree with Barracker who said in the 'top three feminist issues' thread that legal recognition of women as a biological sex class has to be the primary goal of feminists at this time. Without that, we have nothing. Men can and will take everything from us while denying us the language to even describe what is happening.

That isn't to say that women shouldn't fight to strengthen the EA, or come up with creative solutions and workarounds to the current legal situation, but I do think we HAVE to stop asking for the minimum and being grateful for crumbs.

TRAs demand the moon and then complain that they are literally dying because they weren't given Jupiter, Saturn and Mars as well, and politicians fall over themselves to do their bidding. Women ask merely to be 'consulted' on our own annihilation as a legal category and they feel free to patronise or ignore us. Women think that if we keep compromising and giving ground, people will like us more and maybe even start listening to us. That isn't how negotiating works. That isn't how power works.

Shift the Overton Window. Make 'abolish the GRA' a politically speakable idea, even if it's not a realistic short-term goal. Long term, our aim must be to end the legal fiction of 'sex change' worldwide.

Here you go

I wondered what would happen with the voice recognition banking - there was a case not that long ago with a trans woman being very upset that their voice wasn’t recognised as female so they had problems doing phone banking.

A credit card company is offering cards with your chosen name on it.

Really so do you apply in your real name but they print whatever you like on it?

I shall be Princess Consuela Banana-Hammock next time I order a credit card then.

Interestingly I have worked for several major banks and at the last one I noticed if you want to change your ‘gender’ with them they ask for NO proof
When I got married I had to provide original copies of marriage certificate etc. to be able to change my name. Seems to be one set of rules for some and different for others.

Indeed. I was saying elsewhere yesterday that living as a woman evidentially essentially comprises changing the name on your gas bill now. And, if the medical diagnosis criterion for getting a GRC is removed, that is all it will mean.

That sums up the absolute contempt women are held in.

A credit card company is offering cards with your chosen name on it.

Making gender identity all about the official name you go by could be confusing in a county where Pat, Ally and Sandy are all blokes.

Will it be argued that ‘living in the acquired gender’ means accessing single sex spaces?

'Living in the acquired gender' currently means getting 5-6 documents in your new identity to span 2 years. Both consultations have suggested getting rid of this requirement altogether. The suggestion in Scotland now is that the 2 years is cut to 6 months. I have seen no suggestions that the nature of the evidence should change - if the requirement survives it will still be documents with new name and sex marker.

The GRA needs abolished not filled with exemptions.

I agree. I also think that is vanishingly unlikely to happen in the near future.

Meanwhile, adding an exception to the GRA so that it's not an offence to disclose when it comes to EA single sex exceptions, PLUS making it an offence for the GRC holder to fail to disclose in those circumstances, would mean we could actually use the EA to secure single sex services and spaces (we also need new statutory code but the EA itself is sound).

Best of all, what possible reason could they give to object?

I wonder if any detransitioners will be consulted?

It would be good if they could be empowered to do so as a group - perhaps Transgender Trend could help facilitate?

Detransitioners worldwide have reported great difficulty with putting their documents back in order.

Here, I believe you would have to do the whole GRC process in reverse (change name and live 2 years as your birth sex before submitting written evidence to a panel) for the birth certificate.

Stressful, but at least equal. It would be awful if we end up with a situation where it’s easier to assert a legal fiction than it is to revert to historical and biological fact.

what about detransitioners?

yes, this occurred to me. the very last thing we should be doing is making it harder for those teenaged girls who have been victims of rapid onset gender dysphoria to de-transition

the statutory dec is essential un enforceable in terms of gate keeping, and could encouage people to keep harming their bodies with hormones and surgery when they're not sure it's what they want

if public responses are invited, I will be arguing against it vigorously on that basis