Women & Equalities Commitee live today at 2.30

Yup, Ireland being promoted as the best example. One of them has just asserted that everyone who enters a women's loo does so because they identify as a woman — it's the same as identifying as a vegetarian and we all self-identify multiple times every day — and that anyway taking sex hormones makes some people female (with the implication that even if they aren't.)

And now one of them is on and on about moral panics and absolutely no need for anyone to worry. Talking about GC feminism as 'a solution in search of a policy.' Grrr. Now the second panel. Fingers crossed.

Will a transcript of this be made available?

Alex Sharpe: Gender Critical feminism is a solution in search of a problem.
Also is claiming that there's "no empirical basis for alarm" on the interaction with between the GRA and the Equality Act.

Arguing for demedicalisation. So again, why is our NHS paying for treatment if it's not a physical or mental issue?

I may have misheard that one then ...

Self ID, we do and will continue to do regardless.

Beer drinker, a knitter, a footballer are all identities we self identify, and is no different from self ID!

They all use the same slight of hand.

Stating that sex based exceptions will exist against those with a GRC. Until they get rid of sex as a PC.

Sharpe claiming that all transwomen can have the sex-based exceptions in the Equalities Act. Is there a crowdfunder to get that clarified?

Nice to hear the TW (sorry, don't know their name) confirming that sex based exemptions apply even with a GRC, I'm sure it had been argued in some quarters that they didn't..

Census data skewed then. Transwomen will say they are female, according to Ruth Pearce, and why not, as their life experience is female.

I don't agree.

Sharpe saying Gender critical feminism is a solution in search of a problem. Oh really.

"All of us self-identify all the time" -- no we do not.

"As a trans woman my lived sex is female" -- no it is not...

Ha Can I self identify as young then Ruth

Will the non-TRA people be able to correct all of these mistruths / half-truths?

SW "We are totally understanding of the issues raised by gender critical feminists"

LOLZ

The Ireland model was pushed through without consultation, and now it's held up as an 'ideal' model tombs emulated

SW: "I don't think we should call it spousal consent... it's about informing the spouse about a change in their legal contract"
FFS! YOU DON'T JUST GET TO INFORM SOMEONE OF A CHANGE TO A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT, YOU HAVE TO AGREE THAT CHANGE FIRST!!
(Apologies for the CAPSLOCKING but this annoys me so much).

And now Ruth Pearce is mentioning the risk of this enabling abusive behaviour, which having read the TransWidows' stories makes me wonder if she's not considered the risk from the other direction, or is just conveniently ignoring it.

Whittle - don't call it legal consent. Changing document other party should be informed, but it shouldn't stop the process. The trans person has usually been living in their new gender for at least 2 yrs by this point and is unlikely to change back.

Alex - spouse shou!d be informed, but not able to veto. Shou!d be able to arrive at consensus without too much issue.

Ruth - as currently worded gives abusive partners power to control! Trans more likely to experience DV. Divorce should be able to take place alongside GRC.

NB's half trans population, they also need protection. Fluidity and detrans not taken into account when having to state they intend to remain in their gender for ever

I'd like to know the definition of domestic violence Ruth Pearce is referring to here. Apparently a poll has suggested that trans people experience disproportionately high levels of DV so Pearce feels this is a particular reason why partners of trans people should not be allowed to exercise any power of veto over a GRC. Is this the literal violence of misgendering? I find it extremely hard to believe that women married to males who decide to transition are routinely violent to them in the sense most of us use the word 'violent'.

Spousal consent and non-binary people now. Very gracious of Whittle to accept that the spouse of a transitioner might feel the basis of the legal contract of marriage has changed and that should be recognised in law.

Is the sound quite bad? I can hardly make out what Whittle is saying.

I might have to stop watching. They're making me cross.

I struggle to understand how the panel can ask about whether the minimum time of "living in one's preferred gender" is appropriate without asking what on earth that even means... What do they think it means? What are we even talking about?

Whittle trying to say that young people don't have a laptop therefore the online process won't make it easier. Really? Young people are attached to the internet most of the time regardless of economics

Whittle - Advocating for no fee to change gender/sex other than the cost of a new birth certificate.