"Girls must bow to trans rights in new rules for schools"

Sophocles
That doesn’t work unfortunately. I read the article last night. Terrible.

If the ECHR puts this in practice it is not fit for purpose.

As the mother of an 8 year old girl I'm now imagining this will at some point affect her and I will be forced to speak out and be labeled a bigot which I am not.
I'm also thinking thaf for genuine trans kids this can only serve to make their life more difficult at school with all the girls outrage or ickiness towards them. If they just provided their own facilities they could just get on with it with minimal fuss and attention being drawn

This will be awful for all girls. However, it will be particularly bad for girls from certain religions, most of whom will probably be removed from P.E.

A group that’s rarely talked about in these discussions is travellers. We have done a huge amount of work in our school to build relationships with families from travelling communities and to improve the attendance their children. Those families trust us to keep their children safe in school, and to tell the truth about how we’re doing that.

I guarantee they would remove their children - boys and girls - en masse if we told them we were allowing boys to change for PE with girls and that our toilets were now mixed sex.

Exactly, bickerin. If the ECHR are proposing actions that they feel are supported by the law, then we will need to have these characteristics defined in the law.

It will, fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your viewpoint, expose how utterly regressive this whole plan is, because the list will consist entirely of sex role stereotypes. Hair, clothes, make up, mannerisms, preferences.

The sharetoken has expired, here’s a new one

To add: in the US, the Obama administration issued a directive that workers at women’s refuges would know that a male seeking admission should be considered a woman if that male displayed womanly “clothing, behavior, and mannerisms.”

And it too failed to define just what are womanly “clothing, behavior, and mannerisms.”

Now, the proposed US Equality Act does away with all that. A man is a woman if he says so, and a boy is a girl if he says so. Women and girls must submit to the word of a male.

This is the Scylla and Charybdis the entire insistence that TWAW sails between : either the law must redefine women in such a way that there are sufficient criteria to determine when a man is a woman, or a boy is a girl, and when he is not, and at some point those criteria have to be spelled out — or it has to be self i.d.

Protecting TW as dysphoric or non-conforming men would have avoided the inevitable sexism in legally defining attributes of female sex beyond the physiological while also avoiding legally codifying the male supremacy inherent in self i.d.

But as we know, TRAs will not accept that.

Which is not the fault of women or girls. Nor is finding a solution the responsibility of women and girls.

Well, I’m sorry. I’m still in the dark.

A person is protected under gender reassignment if they undergoing or proposing to undergo a process for the purpose of reassigning their sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.

I understand the physiological part, and as I understand THAT, no school child can undergo or propose to undergo those changes in the UK: they must be 18.

So it would seem that for schoolchildren to be protected under gender reassignment, these “other attributes of sex” must be elements schoolchildren can change.

Other than physiological characteristics, what is the law defining as attributes, say, of members of the female sex?

Schools would need to know that in order to ascertain whether or not a student is changing one or more of those attributes, or proposing to change one or more of them, in order to reassign their sex and therefore fall under the gender reassignment protection.

What attributes are specifically female that, under the law, a boy must change or at least propose to change if he wants to undress with girls instead of boys?

Does he need to grow out his hair? Or at least propose to? Or does he also have to change his name — are names attributes of sex? Should he made to wear skirts, even though girls wear trousers? Should he be sent to voice lessons to practice a higher pitch and softer tone? What about make-up? Though again, many girls wear none.

The law really does need to clarify all this.i would be quite interested to hear a judge rule on what, beyond the physiological, are attributes of the female that should be codified as definitional.

Headmistresses and teachers, in order to sort which boys are taking the piss and which are not, are going to have to know what criteria to use, since, as we know, self D. is NOT the law. The law clearly does require a commitment to making certain changes. It just fails to state what those changes are.

“Proposing to undergo” also needs clarification. Many of us propose, every day, to make all sorts of changes. And yet....

This will be awful for all girls. However, it will be particularly bad for girls from certain religions, most of whom will probably be removed from P.E.

Definition as per the Equality Act. No treatment required

I’d love to see a definition. Given that performing femininity does not mean female, altering your body does not mean female. It’s entirely based on what’s in someone’s head.

Stating “ I am trans/gender fluid/non-binary” and will be accessing women’s spaces is the verbal equivalent of a pig in a poke.

Gender reassignment doesn’t require a GRC.

Ahhh. I see.

But what constitutes “gender reassignment” under the law? How is it defined?

Surely there must be a definition: how else is one to know when or whether the legal protection applies or not?

On the Times article I initially misread the EHRC statement as "this document is daft" and was all, wait, that's unusually honest, is their normal PR person out sick today?

Certain people will go to appalling lengths to deny that a certain section of men will go all-out to perv on women in toilets and changing rooms. But a look at porn channnels (yes I have looked, and yes, it's pretty sickening) shows how predominant this is in some people's fantasies and fetishes.

Women and girls should not be subjected and put at risk of this in order to valdate a tiny section of society suffering issues with gender identity. Sorry you want to fl validate an'all, but women do not exist for this shit - we are human beings with rights also. OUR human rights have not existed for centuries, and are scant and hard-won even now. We're not about to give them up just because some men think they want to be women.

Best one was the idea that he was actually trying to rob a jewellery store in the mall and just happened to fall out of an air duct and down between the walls of the ladies bathroom.

Occam's Razor, the idiot's version.

Any time someone tried to argue that men wouldn't pretend to be trans just to get into women's spaces because it's too much trouble we need to remind them about septic tank man. Some men will literally wallow in shit for hours, of their own free will, just in the hopes of glimpsing an unwilling woman's vulva.

The body of a man was found behind the wall of the women’s bathroom in a shopping center in Canada just last year. It couldn’t have been more obvious what he was doing there, and yet people still tied themselves in knots trying to find alternative explanations rather than admitting that he was probably just a pervert trying to spy on and/or set up a camera in the women’s loos.

Best one was the idea that he was actually trying to rob a jewellery store in the mall and just happened to fall out of an air duct and down between the walls of the ladies bathroom. Right... Sure he was...

Men will go to stupid lengths to perv on women in any way they can, allowing them to identify their way in just makes it even easier for them.

Gender reassignment does not require a GRC

Well I’m very confused.

Since schoolchildren can not obtain a GRC, in what way are they included under the gender reassignment protections in the Equality Act?

Wouldn’t they instead be protected against sex discrimination, meaning a male child can’t be treated differently than any other male child?

Which raises a further question: if one or two male children are allowed to change with female children, why is it not sex discrimination against the other male children who aren’t granted such licence?

I think the Times needs to rewrite its headline to “Girls must bow down to boys” to make clear what’s really going on here.

Many excellent arguments. Waiting for them to all be ignored and cue accusations of 'transphobic bigots'.
Because that's all you TRAs can do. Your whole philosophy is built on sand and crumbles as soon as anyone with half a brain asks a few questions.

Disabled people don’t wish to move over either. The argument you have used always comes up on these threads. Trans people don’t need to use accessible toilets

If they are truly dysphoric then they may be disabled by this. Though that would mean they have mental health condition that needs treating not affirming...

I’m a teacher and I am horrified. I am also a mum to daughters.

Any time someone tried to argue that men wouldn't pretend to be trans just to get into women's spaces because it's too much trouble we need to remind them about septic tank man. Some men will literally wallow in shit for hours, of their own free will, just in the hopes of glimpsing an unwilling woman's vulva.

There was one guy who hid in a septic tank iirc...

Let’s make a list of the things that males do in order to see unaware women/girls with their clothes off/using loos.

Before hidden cameras

Drill holes in walls and ceilings
Binoculars
Hide in cupboards/cubicles
Find places to view through windows

Then tiny cameras appeared and they get placed in female toilets and changing rooms, but the old school versions of voyeuristic behaviours still happen.

It used to take a lot of effort to be able to view unwilling and unwitting females in a state of undress.

But no one would ever simply use a sentence to be able to do this now would they?

I'm sure an attempt at creating a law like this is coming in some of the more woke areas.

Yes, it could be framed as creating a hostile environment. Someone really needs to sue on the grounds of sexual harassment/creating a hostile environment for women and girls.

Because they don't give a shit about girls, in general, but kind of maybe a tiny bit give a shit about the girls who identify as trans, if only because those particular kids have people lobbying for them.

They're refusing to answer the very basic and logical questions because they know that "who gives a shit about the girls?" is a bit too blunt to play well with parents/the general public.

@stucknoue
Disabled people don’t wish to move over either. The argument you have used always comes up on these threads. Trans people don’t need to use accessible toilets