What does it mean to live as a woman for a year?

'intrisive' = not affirming at every available opportunity

So exactly where in the process is the intrusive and humiliating medical examinations, the highly personal and degrading stuff, of which we are often reminded?

They don't exist. The NHS is basically operating on affirmation for the diagnosis. And the only intrusive stuff the panel does is write to the lazy arses who have only sent two gas bills or similar when they were asked for four and say "can you send another two, please".

being described by others in written or other communication using female language

The circularity, it hurts

In order to force people to pretend you're biologically female, you must first make people pretend you're biologically female

Or perhaps "female language" means something else?

It means that the original GRC law is sexist nonsense to try and legitimise sexist nonsense which changes documentation and replaces sex with gender. It fundamentally undermines women's rights by suggesting that discrimination against women is effectively just all in our heads because we feel like women and make an active choice to 'live as women' rather than are materially merely are women who have no choice in the biological reality of that.

Isn't the problem that anyone wanting to change gender because they're uncomfortable in their born gender needs to demonstrate that they're serious about it. How can they do that? We need a process that recognises they're dilema and wishes, whilst protecting women. I'm not sure how to do that.

*cant see

So exactly where in the process is the intrusive and humiliating medical examinations, the highly personal and degrading stuff, of which we are often reminded?

Because I can’t the degradation and humiliation and nobody has ever explained what this bit entails.

*3. be living as a woman

This would not require the person to dress, look or behave in any particular way. However, it would be expected that there would be evidence that the person was continuously living as a woman, such as – always using female pronouns*

How does that work? You don't use female pronouns about yourself. Unless you speak in the third person, I suppose.

being described by others in written or other communication using female language

What if others are only doing this because they’re compelled to. Hmm.

So, to become a member of group holding a protected characteristic under EqA, all you need to do is change the name on your gas bill.

Get a doctor to confirm that you're uncomfortable presenting as a man.

And that's it.

Anyone could do it.

But nooooo. It's demeaning, humiliating, intrusive, too difficult, arduous.

I suspect the main problem is it takes two years.

The delayed gratification is a killer.

It's widely assumed that "living as a woman" includes using women's spaces. Does it?

Getting proof that 'you take a long time figuring out what to wear' would surely convince the panel - this is the hardest part of being a women (according to Jenner).

There are also some names that are masculine in some cultures and feminine in others. E.g. Dara is a boy's name in Ireland and a girl's name in Indonesia.

So if you're called Dara, are you living as a man if you're from an Irish background, and a woman if you're from an Indonesian family? If you had an Irish Dad and an Indonesian Mum, are you non-binary? Or could you decide to identify as Indonesian, thereby keeping the same name but changing gender?

Here is the Scottish Government's definition of a woman in the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland)2018 Act

*The definition of ‘woman’ for the purposes of the Act

2.12 Section 2 of the Act provides that for the purposes of the Act, “woman” includes “a person who has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (within the meaning of section 7 of the Equality Act 2010[9]) if, and only if, the person is living as a woman and is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of becoming female”.

2.13 To be included, a trans woman without a UK Gender Recognition Certificate or without gender recognition from another EU Member State[10] must therefore meet the 3 following criteria:
have the characteristic of gender reassignment as defined in the Equality Act 2010.

The definition of gender reassignment in the Equality Act 2010 is – “a person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex”. This definition includes those reassigning their sex from male to female as well as those reassigning their sex from female to male. A person who meets this definition is not covered by the definition of “woman” in the Act unless they also meet the following two criteria. The person does not need to have undergone any specific treatment or surgery[11

. be proposing to undergo, undergoing or undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of becoming female

This element of the definition means that the person has taken a decision to undergo a process for the purpose of becoming female.

1. be living as a woman

This would not require the person to dress, look or behave in any particular way. However, it would be expected that there would be evidence that the person was continuously living as a woman, such as – always using female pronouns; using a female name on official documents such as a driving licence or passport, or on utility bills or bank accounts; describing themselves and being described by others in written or other communication using female language.

2.14 This definition in section 2 provides clarity that, for the purposes of applying the provisions of the Act, “woman” includes a trans woman who meets the definition set out. This provision only relates to the meaning of “woman” in the Act. This does not have the effect of creating a new legal definition of woman in any other context.

2.15 The Act does not require an appointing person to ask a candidate to prove that they meet the definition of woman in the Act.*

If this was an honest requirement:
Be paid less than you were as a male
Have male doctors dismiss your medical concerns
Be turned down for jobs if you're of childbearing age
Be expected to do all childcare and elderly parent care in your family
Do all "wifework"
Be the target of harassment
Etc

In reality:
Change your name on a bill

I am sure there must be another marker of being accepted in to your local women’s/lesbian group and destroying it.

using female facilities.

How would you prove you've been doing this? By taking selfies inside the ladies'?

So it would mean doing everything most women do so changing name at work and (ironically enough) using female facilities.

No, it doesn't. There is no check on behaviours. It is a paperwork process only. As per the bloody government website I just posted.

you have to satisfy a gender recognition panel

By post. With documentation such as gas bills and no more. See report from one of the main judges involved on p15 and 16 here:

www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Tribunals-Journal-Edition-2-of-2019-1.pdf

As an initial group of judges sitting down to consider the 2004 Act we determined from the outset that our approach would be a facilitative one. Although the law was set out in the Act we had control over our processes and we wanted to give people every opportunity to show their entitlement to a GRC, even if that meant a number of chances to provide the appropriate documents. Panel Directions are normally the follow-up to a letter from the Administrative Team explaining to an applicant what documents they haven’t sent in that they need to produce.

Paperwork only. Nothing more.

You do need medical reports as well.

The only medical report required for a GRC is a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. According to those campaigning for a change in the law, obtaining this diagnosis is humiliating, demeaning and intrusive.

But nothing to do with the living as a woman requirement.

It's two years and you have to satisfy a gender recognition panel.

So it would mean doing everything most women do so changing name at work and (ironically enough) using female facilities.

I think initially they expected applicants to dress stereotypically for their desired sex. They also suggested that part of the requirement was to start using facilities (like toilets) for their desired sex.

After the obvious stupidity of both these things was pointed out (and what checks would there be that they were doing this on a daily basis?) all they could come up with was changing the name on their paperwork. How this works for someone with a unisex name is unclear.

You do need medical reports as well.

Which is nothing to do with the living as a woman requirement.

...they would get questioned if not womanly "enough". So skirts and makeup a bit of a requirement.

For a while now I've been coming to the conclusion that the correct appellation ought to be transfeminine.

A feminine name? That's easy: Veronica Ivy