Women & Equalities Commitee live today at 2.30

If any of those three women ran for MP I would vote for them in an instant. So much knowledge and insight compared to the rest. I don’t think that most members of the committee were listening to what was being Sid. Minds already made up. [Wine] and to these wonderful women.

Finished, finally!
Professor Sullivan was also excellent, but at the time of my last comment hadn’t been given much opportunity to contribute.

Her points about data collection are of course, incredibly important, because if the data had been collected accurately in the past, many of the gender identity ideologist v feminist arguments would be immediately resolved, and we wouldn’t have ended up in the contentious climate of that spilled into the public consciousness due to the GRA consultation (ie, we’d know exactly how the offending rates of transwomen compared to those of other males, in this country, in the 15 plus years since the original GRA was passed).

I do not appreciate those MPs who seemed to posit that this fraught climate is the fault of women defending our rights to such basic things as a female health care professional to conduct our intimate examinations.

Thank you to the great women quoted here and the write ups here. Just watching it a bit late.

Still wading through it but my goddess, Professors Stock and Freedman are kicking arse.

(If I can properly title them, why can’t this government committee? )

Well, that was enlightening. And I thought all the MPs asked good questions and came across as open-minded and really listening, bar one who stood out like a very irritating and petulant sore thumb.

[quote stumbledin]I thought Committees were made up of those eager to influence certain areas, but it looks like the Chairs are no elected by secret ballot. And I suppose then each party asks for volunteers to make up the actual committees.

I have seen it said that some people now feel that Committees are now the democracy that the HoC is meant to be. And of course could be said to attract those who want to be on tv as they often show clips on tv news, particularly if there is a gotcha moment. I wonder how much of this committee will make it onto the main tv news!

I didn't read all of this as I was put off by the picture, probably accurate showing mainly men sitting round a table!
www.parliament.uk/about/how/committees/select/[/quote]
The Chair of the committee made her view very clear in October:

"It's time to end the delays over trans equality"

It ends "Five years on from the first committee’s inquiry, it is hoped that the coming recommendations will improve equalities and rights for trans people everywhere, and that the government will act on them."

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-is-time-to-end-the-delays-over-trans-equality-cx2zsh0tw

Yes, I noticed that. Never mind what the authorities feel they need to know on the census, the respondent knows better. Nothing to see here.

Yet the exact same group of people complain that the government doesn’t provide enough specialist services for them?

Face palms round.

I thought Committees were made up of those eager to influence certain areas, but it looks like the Chairs are no elected by secret ballot. And I suppose then each party asks for volunteers to make up the actual committees.

I have seen it said that some people now feel that Committees are now the democracy that the HoC is meant to be. And of course could be said to attract those who want to be on tv as they often show clips on tv news, particularly if there is a gotcha moment. I wonder how much of this committee will make it onto the main tv news!

I didn't read all of this as I was put off by the picture, probably accurate showing mainly men sitting round a table!
www.parliament.uk/about/how/committees/select/

Thanks to everyone who posted during the debate. It all sounds so depressing that the MPs seem to be TWAW and no matter how brilliantly the 3 GC professors answered the questions, it's feeling like it's a bit pointless.

Except for non-binaries who, apparently, don't know what to answer if asked for their sex.

Yes, I noticed that. Never mind what the authorities feel they need to know on the census, the respondent knows better. Nothing to see here.

But did one of the respondents on the first panel actually say it doesn’t matter what info a form asks for, because trans people will just fill it in however they feel?

Yes.

I’m having to watch this bit by bit because a)the sound quality is so terrible to be frustrating and b)it makes my blood pressure rise.

But did one of the respondents on the first panel actually say it doesn’t matter what info a form asks for, because trans people will just fill it in however they feel?

Thanks Stumbled

Maybe someone needs to write up a thread about Parliamentary procedure.

Might be useful if anyone can face it!

Sometimes we do seem to repeat ourselves, or because nobody pulls out the salient points of recent threads.

This is NOT another consultation. This is the procedure that always happens after a minister puts forward a proposal. The relevant Committee discusses the implications of putting that into practice.

So after how every many delays Liz Truss made an announcement in the HoC about her response to the consultation. see link I posted earlier in thread.

So Women and Equality Commission have asked people to respond to Liz Truss' proposal and along with written submissions are taking verbal submissions.

Maybe someone needs to write up a thread about Parliamentary procedure.

I must admit I dont know what happens if say a Committee says well we listened to a range of submissions and it seems that the proposals from X Minister (the Government) just aren't going to work!!

Nicola Gibson MP

Thanks for the Nicola Gibson MP article on the GRA @Kit19

a bland repetition of 'received knowledge' with no critical thinking ("Having this certificate does not add any “extra” equality rights, impact the inclusion of trans people in single-sex spaces, or the provision of services.") which would be ok if she then started critically thinking after hearing the evidence, facts and common sense this afternoon which show her statement is inaccurate... there's more to it than that.

Why did Nicola Gibson MP effectively accuse the professors of saying transwomen are predatory when they'd only said that there's no difference in the offending rates of males whether they are men or transwomen?. and then after the professors explain again that there's no difference in the offending rates of males whether they are men or transwomen, Nicola Gibson MP talks again of saying saying transwomen are predatory. how does someone like this become an MP?

It really didn’t seem as if there was Arabella. The entire committee seemed made up of “TWAW no debate” types

I’m genuinely gobsmacked that MPs don’t seem to understand the importance of being clear about definitions when drafting or amending laws. In what other area of law is this level of ambiguity left to slide?

Is it the prison one that was postponed?

Ooh, possibly Ova, thank you.

I can't see why this needed to happen so soon if there hasn't been pressure from external organisations, but also from within the committee.