Liz Truss WILL make a statement today

I haven't brought this up with my cousins who live in Ireland, but I often wonder how it's going down in real life there. Ireland has such a poor record when it comes to treatment of women, and they seem to have thrown off the yoke of one oppressive religion only to take on another in its place

Dr Jane Clare Jones on Twitter: This is the first place, anywhere in the world, where a line has been drawn against the effort to unilaterally overwrite sex with gender identity.

And they talk about legal sex.

Which although an absolute nonsense, certainly makes a distinction.

No more conversations that legal sex means biological sex.

Dr Jane Clare Jones on Twitter: This is the first place, anywhere in the world, where a line has been drawn against the effort to unilaterally overwrite sex with gender identity.

Congratulations UK! I do hope other nations are watching. Ireland, I'm looking at you!

Believe me it could have been worse!!

How can a person change their legal sex? Is that not as nonsensical as changing your biological sex? Since when is sex changeable? If I were in the UK, I would not be happy with this at all. I cannot see how people on here are commending it.

I agree with Jane Clare Jones that this is the end of the beginning (as opposed to the beginning of the end to continue the WW2 analogy) but it is still a very significant and important point in the defence of women's rights. The other side will need to find different arguments and, I hope, as they do so, their real objectives will become clearer to a wider audience. The upcoming court cases will be crucial in clarifying how the Equality Act works and how it should be applied. I doubt today's statement would have happened without the women of FWR. I certainly would not have known about the Consultation had I not by serendipity found these boards almost exactly two years ago!

It's an odd statement. There's something a bit craven about it.

But basically, nothing has changed.

Which is what we have been campaigning for, primarily. No to reform of the GRA.

Done. Dusted.

The next bit was always going to be about reversing the regulatory capture.

The very fact that many women are now widely recognised as opposing this, is a real plus.

Nothing is going to happen by stealth anymore. We put the brakes on.

The court cases will be crucial in determining what happens next. And those court cases are not going to stop.

The additional gender clinics sounds good, to me, too. It's widely acknowledged that puberty blockers are experimental, and more research needs to be done. Extra facilities will help.

And fantastic news about the spousal veto, tinsel. That's an unequivocal plus.

And, of course, the other thing is, this report absolutely affirms that women's right to talk about this, discuss it, use the correct language, etc, is 100% legitimate.

I hope Justine can point her advertisers towards this report, and the fact that women's campaigning and activism on here has led to its conclusion.

That should put to bed, once and for all, the erroneous claims that the site is transphobic.

Can anyone hazard a guess - if someone identifies as a women at the police station after being arrested, or in court, but has no GRC what happens? I have a half smile on my face because I think this will have to be ignored, including some tribunal/court cases.

Given that Liz Truss hasn't changed the law but has affirmed women's rights to single sex spaces, these institutions will have to change what they do. This is regardless of Ann Sinnotts case.

Am I right, or wrong?

NearlyGranny yep done it myself and sadly that kindness & tolerance was interpreted as women not noticing or that we didn’t mind & taken as a green light to demand all women’s spaces were opened up

The TRA have done huge harm to women & to all the trans ppl who were trying to quietly live their lives. Women will not ‘be kind’ now and it’s a shame but it’s been a textbook example of giving an inch and watching several thousand miles being taken!

Still a lot of work to be done. Ann Sinnott's case can't come soon enough.

Those who have been pushing won’t go away and be silent. They will either regroup and try another way, or (in the case of the cheerleaders) find some other bandwagon to jump on.

So SELF ID is dead and transgender means "people with a GRC".

So what happens to those institutions operating under SELF ID illegally until now? For example do any school boys have a GRC? if not then school girls can have their privacy back.

Jane Clare Jones has been tweeting about it not being the end, but perhaps the end of the beginning. And she points out that this is the first time the self-id juggernaut has been stopped.

I'm mightily encouraged by this. The mention of how transmen and transwomen have been accepted in some single-sex spaces for years serves as a gentle reminder that women, particularly, have been very kind and accepting for ages. Which of us hasn't shot a wary glance and then a reassuring smile at an unusually tall, well-groomed woman quietly washing her hands or tidying her hair next to us in the ladies, politely ignoring a prominent Adam's apple and size 12 flats?

It doesn't happen often, but I never challenged and wouldn't while everything was calm and polite.

Truss's sub-text is, I think, if you try to force your way in being very male and demanding about it, you might lose what you now have

The BBC's piece at least mentions women and implies that some think there's a conflict of rights between women's sex-based protections and Stonewall's demands. Given where we were a year ago, I think that's a significant change.

I've not read it all but from what I've seen, I'm very, very relieved.
I don't see it so much as winning the battle as winning the right to keep on fighting.

I remember some of the battles for our rights and you know what, if we were to ever lose those rights again then, dreadful as it would be, I believe we could regroup, reorganise and win them back.
But if you lose the legal right to organise and even name yourselves, I honestly don't know how you come back from that.

So no it may not be everything but it's still massive.

Thank you to everyone who's been braver than me.

Instead of 3 new 'gender' clinics, they should've put that money and the money they throw at Stonewall into mental health for teens and got rid of the awful affirmation only model and proper investigations into ROGD in girls.

Agree with those who have some mixed feelings about the statement but on balance happy with it ruling out a self ID process, and thinking a lot of the upcoming court cases are likely to change things
For me personally I'm going to concentrate on 3 things that I think are important and may change the situation in future

The first is medical evidence on treatment/treatment groups/research on transitioning and de transitioning. I think looking at some of the information that is coming out of Sweden and other countries, the paucity of research, audit or reflection in some treatment arenas, and the retractions that are being made from various papers, together with the changing face of what transition means today, will change referral patterns and popularity as it becomes questioned more.

The second for me is lobbying and the influence of lobbying groups - this is an interesting dynamic and definite scandal, and information is now coming out about policy capture and how much influence some groups are having with no democratic oversight. The need to look at organizations encouraging everyone to 'get ahead of the law' is becoming pressing and has a lot of spill-over into other areas where our democratic processes are being swerved or stretched.

The last thing I would love to get behind is a 'Reality Recognition Act' that examines the rationale for the GRA and whether this is still appropriate and helpful. It would be very interesting to re run the debates that led to the GRA being brought in today, with a more aware population and a few of the cases and incidents that have occurred because of a poorly thought through and drafted law. My ideal law would separate out and define both sex and gender in a way that prevented conflation of the two. It would be supportive of peoples diverse gender beliefs and presentations, preventing discrimination against them on these grounds, while recognizing the reality that humans are unable to literally change sex, that sex is also a protected characteristic and the rights of both males and females to privacy, dignity and appropriate care relate to it.

Work to be done, but at least self ID wasn't waved through unawares or linked to other legislation as the various groups involved had planned.

It’s good news a small but important battle has been won, in regards to self ID. But it’s clear by the language used that we still have a way to go.

The full benefit of the increases in clinical capacity that we’ve been able to secure will lead to greater patient choice, shorter waiting times, better geographical coverage and easier access,” Ms Truss said. “It will also make it easier to fulfil the medical requirements of obtaining a GRC [gender recognition certificate].”

Aren’t they lucky to be treated so special? Any new endometriosis clinics? Any cutting down or wait times for women? Any changes to how they diagnose thyroid problems? There are a multitude of women’s healthcare issues that cause enormous distress and suffering and women’s groups have campaigns for years for better care. It’s still quite obvious that the Tory Party don’t prioritise women’s needs or concerns. Tampon tax hasn’t been scrapped has it.

This was clear that female spaces can exclude males, as we already knew, but she didn’t go far enough on that and didn’t address the concerns she knows exist, around transwomen who currently use our spaces. I’m annoyed she says it’s been going on with no problem... women don’t like it Liz, and you’ve been told that. Repeatedly.

[quote Kit19]Lovely piece from James kirkup

www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-women-won-the-war-against-gender-self-id-[/quote]
I see it's currently the most read article on the site.

Like others I see this as a start, something to build on, am pleased that the nonsense of Self-Id has been dismissed by the Government, that now needs to be implemented across all institutions and services who have been behaving as if it is the law.

A lot of work still to do but we are doing so from a much better position than we would be if Self-Id had been implemented.

If Ann Sinnot wins, then we're in a good place. We retain single sex provision where we need it, and women can still be defined in law as a sex class. And those rights are spelled out, and the misleading advice replaced with accuracy. That way, companies and charities can make their own choices, and stand or fall by them, instead of erroneously believing that the law forces their hand.

I don't want trans people unable to have good medical care, or deal with horrendously long waiting lists. (And I would hope that this good care would involve a real exploration of any trauma, or neurodevelopmental conditions that might lead them to mistake their distress as caused by gender, too. Especially with young people.) That's a real step forward, though of course the devil will be in the detail. And I think it's right that given a lot of trans people are low income (we know that, from how many were already exempt from GRC costs as below threshold - and in means assessment for the state, that threshold is almost always very, very low) the cost of a GRC isn't a barrier. Don't see any issue with it being done online, as opposed to hard copy paperwork, either. The two year wait matters most - the commitment is demonstrated by that. It's not fair that a trans person with rich parents could get a GRC with ease, while a low income, but not wageless, one couldn't.

I care that trans widows retain the right to a no-fault divorce before being summarily in a same sex or opposite sex marriage they never signed up for. And I care that we can ensure Nia etc can stay single sex, and not single gender. Sadly, if Labour or Lib Dems got into power tomorrow, they would erase that right as a matter of urgency.

Transphobia is wrong. So is sexism. Denying that sex impacts women especially, and that women need services, protections and recognition based upon it, is sexist. And we have the right to campaign against sexism. In fact, the way that campaigning is demonised, whilst transactivism is applauded, is more evidence of quite how sexist this world remains.

Lovely piece from James kirkup

www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-women-won-the-war-against-gender-self-id-