CALL FOR ACTION Women&Equalities committee calling for evidence on GRA reform - again?!?

I thought there were specific exceptions (in the GRA?) that things like changing rooms could be exempt. No man has a right to change with women.

AskingQuestions 👻🎃

Also, as enshrined in the Equality Act 2010, transgender people can access single-sex spaces that align with their gender identity. This includes public toilets and changing rooms.

This is a lie. There is nothing "enshrined" in the EA relating to this.

By suggesting that the Lords should look at these issues, that’s definitely not saying it’s not worth responding to the Women and Equalities Commons Select Committee call for evidence. It’s really important.

But it’s going to be essential that they allow evidence to be submitted and published with guaranteed anonymity, so more individual people can respond.

I think my previous post about there being an overarching committee to appeal to, about this aspect of submission process was wrong, I had misunderstood the explainer on the Parliament website. it says ‘If you're having trouble, you can contact the House of Commons Enquiry Service:

Email [email protected]
Call 0800 112 4272 (Freephone) or 020 7219 4272
Talk through Text Relay on 18001 020 7219 4272.’

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/written-evidence-guidance.htm

So I guess if there’s enough of us asking about this to them, then the Enquiry service can raise that as an issue outside of the Women and Equalities committee. It does seem like the committee itself aren’t really grasping this point which doesn’t say much for their overall understanding of the issues.

There is an overarching committee: the Liaison committee, which is a committee made up of all select committees’ chairs. But their brief is wide so I don’t know if they’d make a comment on anonymity in committee submissions as a theme, without them collating numerous examples from different select committee calls for evidence.. which could take forever. Still worth contacting them to raise it maybe, because it might cause someone with influence to ask the Women and Equalities Chair why they don’t apparently consider these issues to be ‘personal’ and ‘sensitive’.

Hopefully someone with actual Parliamentary knowledge will come along..

One of the questions asks whether gender dysphoria is necessary to change your legal status. Is there any good peer reviewed research into why anyone would feel the need to identify as a member of a different sex class to their own if they didn't have gender dysphoria?

That last post was not addressed to ChattyLion.

Oh, and carefully attending to the actual subject of this thread, which is nothing to do with your personal (and frankly by now a bit boring) perceptions of how everyone else looks, behaves and ought to think.

ChattyLion
jj1968 Posters on here are listening to all your points.

Well, some of them may be. To some of them. Many of us are probably making gingerbread instead, it being Halloween.

You can't just handwave away concerns about the dramatic societal shift that gender ideologues would like to see enacted jj. The Gender Ideology movement is attempting to overturn established sex classification - males have small gametes, females have large gametes and everything that stems from there - in favour of a hotch potch of inconsistent ideas. Google 'biological sex' nowadays and the nonsense of articles that appear on the first page includes a feature about humans having 'six sexes'. The Gender Ideology movement asks women to set aside everything the know about being female - that they are oppressed because of their biological sex (just look at Poland right now), and everything they have been taught about how biology works, and support the reorganisation of society around woolly notions of a 'female/male essence'. Notions that chain us to feminine stereotypes - that we are overly obsessed with appearance, we are passive and worse still the movement asks us to own our subordination by calling ourselves 'cis'. The gender ideology movement asks to accept all of this without evidence and then insists we agree to dramatic shifts in the way we live to accommodate this - to allow men into female prisons, health wards, toilets, to change our language so that we can only refer to ourselves as a biological set of parts (even though biology doesn't exist as we know it, apparently), and are forced to refer to men as women, to allow men into women's sports when women hadn't remotely achieved parity in their fields anyway. Anyone who objects to the attempt to make a hand-break turn on female progress, (that we can see happening before our eyes in real time) is slurred with 'terf' or 'bigot'. You 'handwave' away our concerns on these boards on a daily basis. It could have been so different, the Gender Ideology movement, which places so much emphasis on 'inclusivtiy', could have reached out to women at the start, asked us to work together on a solution, but the movement favoured backroom deals and getting one over on women. Why? Because it never had respect for females in the first place, we see time and again on these boards that people who claim to feel female hold us in contempt, in fact the movement holds the people it insists accept their subordination in contempt. Where do we go from here then jj?

I would like to know how many people identify as trans who don't have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria (after assessment). There is a requirement for the diagnosis for a gender recognition certificate, but not for identifying as part of the community. (Eg. Extreme case but Barbie Kardashian in Ireland)

www.stylist.co.uk/news/trans-equality-inquiry-uk-explained/443159

When I knew stylist it was a weekly women’s mag given out free to commuters so I don’t know what it’s readership is currently. It’s really giving out the stonewall line on this inquiry.

The current process by which a person can legally change their gender on their birth certificate requires an individual to pay a fee, gather evidence that they have been living as their gender for at least two years, and to submit this evidence to a panel who will decide for them. If a person is successful, they will be given a Gender Recognition Certificate, which will allow them to get married and access their pension as the gender identity they know themselves to be.

However, transgender people can legally change their gender on documents such as their passports and with the NHS without obtaining a GRC. Also, as enshrined in the Equality Act 2010, transgender people can access single-sex spaces that align with their gender identity. This includes public toilets and changing rooms.

Continues later..

However, not only do these claims have no evidence to back them up, they also completely misunderstand what the Gender Recognition Act is. It does not have any bearing whatsoever on whether transgender people can access the spaces that align with their gender identity.

Having read this useful explainer below and seen the narrow questions the Women and Equalities Commons select Committee are asking around the GRA.. Do we need to lobby for an ad hoc Committee in the Lords to look at the GRA?

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/select-committees

Select Committees in the House of Lords

Ad hoc committees consider a specific issue for a single parliamentary session, or for around 12 months in a two-year session. Some ad hoc committees are tasked with conducting post-legislative scrutiny of a piece of legislation. These committees are normally dissolved once they have reported. Ad hoc committees help the Lords respond flexibly to topical issues, such as intergenerational fairness.

Why is it considered essential to allow a change of legal status solely by self id in this instance when the same would never be contemplated when it comes to divorce or adoption ? One cannot self id as the adopted parent of a child without taking into account the other person involved in this change to your status, so why would you be allowed to change your status to join another group without taking into account the needs of that group?

You can't just handwave away the impact of this on gender nonconforming and gender ambiguous people. Any attempt to police spaces on the basis of phyisical sex will impact on those who don't typically resemble their physical sex. Loads of gender non-conforming people have told you this will be a problem for them. Why don't you listen?

jj1968 Posters on here are listening to all your points. This is apparent by the fact that all of them have already been answered, even though nobody posting on a public chat forum is ever ‘owed’ an answer by other posters. Nothing has been ‘handwaved away‘.

Your issue seems to be that posters are politely and civilly disagreeing with your points in their replies? A lack of agreement with the arguments you’re making isn’t anyone else’s job to help you out with, though.

Least of all for women to do, as the group who (together with kids) are most negatively affected by the practical impact of what you are arguing for, the removal of single sex options for women. To the extent that women can no longer use those facilities or that service or whatever it is at all because it has now become mixed sex. Even for essential services that were designed for women specifically. For which there are no alternatives.

Also, we’ve posted over many years on thousands of threads on here on all these issues and more before, it’s all publicly available. Everyone is welcome to read them.

So according to jj, 'the GC movement' includes Posie, Venice and Glinner, but it doesn't include people who post on mumsnet. Except Posie, Venice and Glinner have all posted on mumsnet. But it's definitely not us.

non-feminine women
What does this mean?

Have you ever been asked for your birth certificate as FPFW seem to demand?

And what does this mean,?

*the GC movement"
A pp keeps referencing this as if it's commonly understood but I actually have no idea who they mean.

Yes some people's sex can be difficult to discern, especially in the time it would take a security guard to take a quick look at someone to make sure they were going in the right toilet. There is ample evidence of non-feminine women being questioned about their sex in toilets and other gendered spaces, sometimes somewhat unpleasantly.

Ah, you're a toilet obsessive. Let's look at the bigger picture, shall we?

Do you think people are allocated to prisons according to their appearance, or that they should be?

Do you think which sports category people are allowed to compete in depends on their appearance, or that it should?

Do you think which hospital ward someone is treated in depends on their appearance, or that it should?

Do you think schools decide which changing room a child uses depends on their appearance, or that they should?

Appearance doesn't matter. Sex matters.

Thanks testing

You just create a document to submit, there's a couple of dozen questions. You can choose which to answer. Link is in OP.

The call for evidence ... Is the format a form with questions similar to the Scottish consultation or do you just email in a response to all or some of the questions ?

What do you mean by this? How many of the people who are posting on here have you met in real life?

I said the GC movement not mumsnet. As I said, I can make a pretty good guess from a photo how visibly gender conforming someone like Posie, Venice or Glinner is.