If the GRA goes through is anyone planning on changing their gender?

In Keira Bell's Ask Me Anything thread from April 2020, she says it's not possible to get a Gender Recognition Certificate annulled. So, legally she is still male.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3881347-Keira-Bell-from-Tavi-case-here-AMA?pg=3

Tower of Babel springing to mind

[quote Lamahaha]...but for anyone considering a change, it's simply important to know exactly who you are. The choice posted above is just a tiny selection. Here's a handy guide to them all: www.myumbrella.org.uk/guide-to-lgbt/gender-identities[/quote]
Oh my god- that's not even a parody website is it?!? Jesus. It's like Pokemon.

There is no such thing as hate crime against women but there is such a thing as hate crime against transpeople. So if you identify as male or even non binary you can then get the crimes recorded and the perpetrator 'spoken to' by the police.

I think if self ID does go ahead all women should do this and absolutely flood the police with hate crimes against them, as transgender people.

It's still only a proposal.
Leeway to change to and fro could be included, if MSPs get a lot of persuasive lobbying for it.

So, if it is just people not wanting to say sex and using the word gender instead, does that mean the real title is 'The Sex Recognition Act'? Or is the correct title 'The Gender Recognition Act'?

The correct title is The Gender Recognition Act. It changes your legal sex. There’s no difference in law between sex and gender (afaik).

The 'Sex Recognition Act' is slightly problematic as a statement of fact. It is doing the opposite of recognising you sex; it is legally allocating you a different sex.

Well I didn’t write it. You can read what it does in the actual legislation:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/9

Just "penalties for swearing a false oath

Swearing an oath invokes God? I think, so the penalty for swearing an untrue oath in court is perjury which rarely leads to jail time. However this was mooted as swearing an oath in front of a solicitor. Different standards apply.
Also depends if you get caught and how important it is.
Consider living as a woman means little apparently and no changes need to be made (see Alex drummond) who's to say your lying?
And how important is it that you lied in this case? Not earth shattering. So penalties will be minor and probably unenforceable.

So to live as a man I need to use the gents ( can't see that going well ) . Anything else or is that it
Pretty much nailed it.

So to live as a man I need to use the gents ( can't see that going well ) . Anything else or is that it?

Re "And what are these penalties? " I think the idea is to use existing penalties for making a false statutory declaration, so they avoid having to define a new form of crime. I'm not 100% certain but I think swearing a false oath counts as a form of perjury or something like that. So the penalties are theoretically pretty severe (years in prison) but I imagine they would treat this on the "less severe" end of the scale (probably fines?).

But, to me, the scary thing is there's no clear statement about how severe (or how light) the penalties might be. Just "penalties for swearing a false oath".

And all the stuff about waiting periods was pretty clear in the Scottish proposal, at least. It seems that it simply won't be usable by "gender fluid" people (or protesters) to declare a different sex/gender on different days. From those waiting periods, it seems like it's a change that takes several weeks and would take at least as long to change back (and maybe even longer to change back because it's worded as a supposedly a"permanent" declaration?).

Seriously, I had a look through the proposal with things like this in mind (using it for protest purposes), and, if anything, it looks like there could be a risk of getting "stuck" and finding is difficult to change back.

However, if that ridiculous example was accepted as 'man living', I would be 'a woman who is living as a man'. The category for me therefore would still not be 'Man'.

What could a male who 'lives as a woman' do that would incur a penalty for not 'living like a woman'?

My biology is the one thing I can think of that makes me a woman. I remember a secondary school biology book which showed the human skeleton. It gave the female skeleton in a perforated line outside the reference human skeleton (obviously male) as women have proportionately wider hips due to our biological function.

So, what sort of things could you refer to which nullifies you being a woman?

I put the bins out this week and am wearing a pair of jeans today. Am I living as a man?

From what I've heard, the process is likely to include a statutory declaration where you commit to "live as" your declared gender permanently ... and apparently possible penalties if you don't.

I don't see how it can be proven or enforced. Who decides if an action is gendered? Will it apply to trans men who conceive?

The Scottish proposals include a penalty for fraudulent declaration.

This doesn't mean claiming to be female so you get into female hospital wards etc.

It means claiming to be female or, more likely, male in order to gain some financial advantage.

As Stonewall say, no-one can tell you what your gender identity is. They also tell us that gender is fluid and on a spectrum. In which case, how could any declaration even mean anything, let alone be enforceable?

Surely the idea that one has a permanent gender identity is transphobic anyway?

From what I've heard, the process is likely to include a statutory declaration where you commit to "live as" your declared gender permanently ... and apparently possible penalties if you don't.

Crikey, a gift for the TRAs. A win-win.

Not only will it encourage people to stick with their appropriated 'gender' and minimise detransition stats, but they can also claim this as yet another oppression against their 'community'.

Except, of course, to the activists such as Press for Change who lobbied politicians to create this legislation, and who had a long term plan.

From what I've heard, the process is likely to include a statutory declaration where you commit to "live as" your declared gender permanently ... and apparently possible penalties if you don't. And I think something like that was in the Scottish proposals too. Not certain what that commitment would entail but I can imagine it might be seen as a sign of "breaking" that commitment if you didn't consistently use toilets etc of the gender your had declared. It would probably also mean you'd be expected to change the sex/gender on your driver's license, passport etc. and that not doing so could also be seen as a sign of breaking the commitment in the statutory declaration.

Meh. I already "live as a man", or to choose a random one of that list of genders doesn't matter which. My 35 year old son is living with me atm and there is no difference between the way he lives, and the way I live. If it means using the gents toilets and changing rooms, because the ladies is mixed sex, I'm happy to do so, as I believe the more sensible men would be in there.
Happy to wear trousers all the time, if that's what it takes. In my late 60s, so no periods or pregnancies any more. Nobody can accuse me of being a woman as it's my identity that counts.

We women should all do this. Throw society into the total chaos it would deserve under such a law.