Spousal veto

My partner is MTF. I'm very happy with them. and I fully support a spousal veto. It doesnt stop them doing anything. They get a temp GRC and a final one later.

It's also not homophobic to not want to be labelled a lesbian. I am not a lesbian. I would not ever be in a relationship with a biological female.

After a long time in the back foot, I think threads like this are an indication that we're starting to win the argument and people are feeling threatened.

I concur. And the political situation has entirely changed. No more easy wins in the pipeline. I would suggest we batten down the hatches because extremist genderism is an authoritarian movement and will not take kindly to being on the back foot.

After a long time in the back foot, I think threads like this are an indication that we're starting to win the argument and people are feeling threatened.

Are midgebabe and mIdgebabe different posters?

Oh! How interesting. I did an AS on ‘midgebabe’ (lower case i), and the search returned results for both the lower and upper case i.

I’ve no idea if they are the same poster. I tried to change my username to pencilsinspace but I was told it was already in use. But I could change it to girldownunder

My contribution doesn’t help and of no relevance to the OP, I was just curious how usernames worked and thought I’d share my non findings 🤷‍♀️

Are midgebabe and mIdgebabe different posters?

I'm not troll hunting, just wondering.

@iamright17:

Ah, but Midge has redefined the meaning of lesbian. No one that powerful is going to worry about others' feelings.

For anyone who wants to understand more about GRCs this is really useful:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/gender-recognition-certificates-t455

I'm grateful for this thread as I hadn't read up on the ins and outs of this previously, so the questions have been helpful actually!

Dear Midgebabe. Your trying to itch us all into a reaction. Midges are a bit like that. Some of us don’t react to the scratch. Some of us come up in welts. Well you have scratched me enough to know you have created a whole body of bites. Thankfully I have the antihistamine right here beside me to counteract your poison. I just want to say you are just an annoyance and we will find the right anti potion to get rid of the itch.
Your lack of respect to our trans widows is appalling. But then one can only assume you are male as no women would encourage another woman to stay in an abusive relationship. As a parent who is also going through the whole relationship definition, I would be thankful if you would apologise to all of us for your total disregard of what relationships mean. Maybe you have not been successful in a relationship and you have not loved anyone enough to respect their feelings. Maybe you don’t care about other people’s feelings as it’s all about you. If that is the case you have no business contributing as it is coming from a selfish perspective. No one on here does selfish. Indeed, we are all here to support others.

*if

Only on page four, but no, you cannot just get divorced in Scotland after two years separation of you have children and any financial issues to settle. You need to have the financial settlement and the child arrangements agreed before you can get divorced. The financial arrangements are usually quite straightforward but if you do not agree the child arrangements, it can take years and/or lots of money. The idea that it is easy to get divorced in Scotland is a complete myth - it is only easy if you agree on finances and child arrangements.

I have not read the draft GRA legislation there yet, but one reason why there may not be a spousal veto (is there? Is there not? Not sure) is simply because if children are involved and matters are complex, divorce can take a good while, or you end up deciding just to wait until your child is 16 and no agreement needed...

If you marry Fred Bloggs you should be allowed to divorce Fred Bloggs and not have to divorce Pam Butterfield. You shouldn't have to file for divorce against someone you did not marry.

Your marriage certificate which you signed and was witnessed should not be changed to say you married Pam Butterfield when you did no such thing.

It says something fundamental about trans people that they aren't bending over backwards to cause as little pain to the people they once claimed to love and cherish.

Agreed Pencils. The push to have the clause removed is very worrying, and it enrages me to see women like Jess Phillips support the TRAs on this.

Oh right. Yes, the trouble is you'd have to go for unreasonable behaviour or 2 or 5 years separation. There would be no way to get out of the marriage contract before the terms changed.

This is why we need the spousal exit clause in the first place.

I think we need to keep things as they are with the GRA until we have no fault divorce. We then need to leave the spousal exit clause in the GRA but change it to allow annulment or divorce on no fault grounds.

Or just scrap the GRA.

Allowing people to alter their birth certificate is special treatment. Letting women know that their husband is about to officially 'change sex' is a very small consideration compared to that.

I don't understand your point.

I was just responding to the poster who said they wouldn't want an annulment.

Well, yes. Spouses aren't asking for any kind of special treatment, we just want the same treatment as anyone else who signed a contract, and we don't want the right to have the marriage contract kept intact as a legal document taken away.
Thats not special treatment.

Does anyone else now hear hooves and think whataboutery?

I hear hooves and think sealions.

My point is that refusal of spousal consent doesn't automatically trigger an annulment.

I don't understand your point.

An interim GRC doesn't automatically trigger an annulment but can be used as grounds for one by either spouse.

If neither spouse applies for annulment and the non-transitioning spouse does not sign consent to remain married then the interim GRC lapses after 6 months.

On what grounds?

In practice, unreasonable behaviour, I guess (with all the potential problems). My point is that refusal of spousal consent doesn't automatically trigger an annulment.

I divorced on Unreasonable Behaviour. I was fortunate that my ex agreed to it.

People can opt for divorce instead

On what grounds?

Yes I agree an interim GRC should be grounds for either annulment or divorce.

Can you imagine that debate though - 'wah wah wah the evil T* are saying being trans is grounds for divorce, just like unreasonable behaviour!!'