Why do you think so few people have applied for / acquired a GRC?

OldCrone - thanks for that real-life example. Deary me... There's no end to how far idiocy can go once it's part of a bureaucracy, eh?

it will never cease to strike me afresh how many further lies have to be accommodated, because of the one big one.

Helen Joyce has brought this up repeatedly (from her maths background) you can't allow one falsehood into the system or the entire thing just dissolves.

Or putting it another way - "there was an old lady who swallowed a fly..."

And yes, the idea that you can buy a document to lie about the sex you were born and, apparently, even the date of your marriage (!) is simply wrong.

And that's not meant to imply that I believe a fictional marriage date is worse than a fictional sex.

It's more that I didn't know that, and it will never cease to strike me afresh how many further lies have to be accommodated, because of the one big one.

It would be unethical to say 'you must have surgery', so other requirements were put in to the legislation in an attempt to separate genuine transsexuals from people such as crossdressers.

Indeed. Which is why, my opinion, it needs scrapping entirely. Its original intention is no longer necessary. And it is now being exploited by a cohort for whom it was never designed.

There is nothing at all to indicate, for example, that rapists being put in female prisons was a desired outcome. Quite the opposite.

And yes, the idea that you can buy a document to lie about the sex you were born and, apparently, even the date of your marriage (!) is simply wrong.

Related - does anyone know what the procedure would be for someone wanting to get a record change on the grounds of actually being assigned the wrong sex at birth? No dysphoria or gender identity claims, you just were recorded wrong - likely due to a DSD or maybe a "Brazil"-style clerical error?

I don't know what happened to this woman who was in the news a few years ago after she discovered she had been wrongly recorded as male at birth. Her parents were given a birth certificate saying that she was female, but it was wrong in the birth register, so she didn't discover the error until she applied for a copy of her birth certificate as an adult.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2618898/Mother-five-told-illegal-gay-marriage-birth-certificate-error-recorded-BOY-UK-law-means-CANT-changed.html

I would think most people think that there is still input from a psychiatrist requiring surgery being undertaken etc from brief chats I've had with your average/regular/straight men on the subject they mostly have no idea that the trans person that has gone to the lengths of having facial surgery etc would still be intact - when that fact is mentioned they assume even deeper psychological issues are at play than they first assumed of just wanting to appear the opposite sex etc

I have a vague understanding of the issues and am shocked and appalled but haven't had time to dig deeper, I think many more people will have much less of an understanding that I do and wouldn't actually believe where things are if they had the time to take it on board.

The dangerous situation is that there is clear method in this madness: to confuse everyone in plain sight so they can't say they didn't understand the implication later down the road.

Maybe that’s where they are going with this.

If trans women are women then why would they need a GRC anyway?

There were cases in France taken under Human Rights legislation that I think resulted in changes to the law in EU member countries.

It's my understanding that in cases brought before the ECHR, the rulings only apply to the specific country, in this case, France. So the Goodwin v UK ruling only applied to the UK.

Also, the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court extend much further than just the EU and include all 47 states in the Council of Europe.

www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-convention

Do people really still think that issuing a government document would require someone to have gone under the knife? How do they imagine that works ethically?

The GRA came about because the government had to find a way to allow transsexuals to marry someone of the same birth sex without legalising same sex marriage (see the twitter thread that Datun posted a link to).

It was sympathy for such transsexuals who had had surgery to transform their bodies into a facsimile of one of the opposite sex, and the fact that there was only a very small number of such people, which led to the GRA and its legal fictions being seen as an acceptable solution.

But then in writing the legislation, the situation has to be turned on its head. So we go from 'How can we draft a law which will allow transsexuals to marry after they have undergone surgical transition?' which was the original intent, to 'Who should be allowed to use this legislation which allows transsexuals to 'change sex' in a legal sense?'

Obviously people who had undergone surgery (the people for whom the legislation was intended) would be eligible to apply. But the problem was where the line should be drawn between those who could and couldn't use it.

It would be unethical to say 'you must have surgery', so other requirements were put in to the legislation in an attempt to separate genuine transsexuals from people such as crossdressers.

You don’t need a GRC to do ANY of those things. Typically, someone would have done all that BEFORE applying for a GRC and would cite those things as evidence supporting the application for a GRC.

I know. Some are using the 'living as a woman' to change id but not actual ever applying for a GRA.

So in effect, some need the gra to exist to legitimize their desire to change the sex on some id, but will never have to prove a medical need for it. Without the GRA, would it be possible for so many men to change some of their sex markers and proudly state that they have no intention obtaining a GRC?

DeaconBoo I would say that it is very commonly misunderstood that only people who have undergone full genital surgery are eligible. This is still the case in some countries.

There were cases in France taken under Human Rights legislation that I think resulted in changes to the law in EU member countries. (Vague memory of that so I might be wrong.)

When people are surveyed about “trans rights” they are obviously very supportive. However, when asked specific questions about access to eg. Women’s Changing Rooms by someone who has not had any surgery then the number drops like a stone, to under 20%

Is a self-identifying transwoman with a penis a woman?

Q2. We would now like you to think about a person who was born male and has male genitalia but who identifies as a woman. In your own personal view would you consider this person to be a woman or a man?

Only 19% of the UK agrees with the concept that transwomen are women.

fairplayforwomen.com/poll/#a2

The author, Audrey Ludwig, admits that there has been very little litigation on this, but given that women might end up having to prove sex discrimination against a transwoman with a GRC, it's well worth having a public discussion about what a GRC is and what it can do.

Indeed. It's also worth noting the constant minimisation by certain TRAs of the importance of a GRC, whilst simultaneously relentlessly campaigning to reduce the criteria to get one.

Zutt - ”So use the policy to help change official records and gain access to surgery or cross sex hormones, but don't actual ever recieved a diagnosis or have no intention of changing their birth certificate because it would be a disadvantage to them in some way?”

You don’t need a GRC to do ANY of those things. Typically, someone would have done all that BEFORE applying for a GRC and would cite those things as evidence supporting the application for a GRC.

The GRC has nothing to do with accessing medical treatment or changing ID of any sort other than Birth Certificate and then any ID requiring a Birth Certificate. You can change your NHS ID and number just by telling your GP that you are now the opposite gender or sex.

Most things can be changed because Policies have been changed without any public consultation or because they were always that way, eg. I might be wrong but I don’t think it has ever been necessary to provide a Birth Certificate to obtain a Driving Licence.
It
MedusasBrandyButter that’s interesting!

legalfeminist.org.uk/2020/07/02/legally-this-is-not-a-trans-rights-issue-its-a-sex-rights-issue-a-blog-about-boxes/

...comparators. For some types of discrimination, you must show evidence of what the act or decision caused to happen to you by reference to the comparative treatment of another very similar person who doesn’t share your PC [protected characteristic].

You must provide evidence regarding that other person; they will often be a real person who is in same situation but not sharing your PC (ie your box or sub-box). If there is no one to compare yourself to, you can ask the court to use a hypothetical comparator. So, a woman who claims direct sex discrimination will have to show evidence she was treated less favourably than a man – either by comparison to a real man or by comparison to how a man would have been treated in the same situation.

Importantly you cannot use someone of your own box or sub box as a comparator. So, if a woman is discriminated against compared to another woman that is not unlawful direct sex discrimination. The comparator needs to be a legal man. [...]

If someone gets a Gender Recognition Certificate it does now and will impact on whether you can use that person as a comparator. So, changes to the GRA affect sex discrimination laws profoundly. The fact that the “gatekeeping” has kept the numbers low means it has not been an issue to date. There are not huge numbers of sex discrimination claims anyway, so the issue is largely unlitigated, as yet. In addition, the breadth of the definition of gender reassignment in the Equality Act (which does not require surgery or any treatment) means trans people have significant protection against unlawful discrimination just for being them in key areas such as work, education and access to services.

However, if the estimates of numbers of trans people are correct, then thousands or hundreds of thousands may be eligible to apply for a GRC. If the law is changed to allow for self-identification, this would increase the risk of adverse impact on sex based rights in some cases by, in practical terms changing who can and cannot be used as a legal comparator.

The author, Audrey Ludwig, admits that there has been very little litigation on this, but given that women might end up having to prove sex discrimination against a transwoman with a GRC, it's well worth having a public discussion about what a GRC is and what it can do.

I wonder how many begin the process of gaining a grc, but don't actually take the final step of changing their birth certificate?

So use the policy to help change official records and gain access to surgery or cross sex hormones, but don't actual ever recieved a diagnosis or have no intention of changing their birth certificate because it would be a disadvantage to them in some way?

There seems to be an awful lots of people invested in maintaining the gra, even when few actually use it themselves.

Why bother these days - the general impression is that you don’t need one to do want you want anyway.

There are no interviews for a GRC, it is all done on paperwork. There should however be a clinical assessment for the diagnosis of gender dysphoria in order to complete the paperwork.

I wondered if the decision by the Sec of State was in order to allow Freddie’s case to go ahead so that the law could be tested and clarified. There was no reason cited in the judgement but maybe there was correspondence in which it was explained? Not that an explanation would be required.

Now that the law has been clarified that a legal man can be a Mother then maybe it could be argued that a legal woman can be convicted of rape under English law?

Scottish law has already been changed to allow a female with a phalloplasty to be convicted of rape and all gendered pronouns have been removed so “she” can definitely be convicted of rape:

www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2009/9/section/1

What an unholy mess the law is when changing the name on your gas bill can constitute “living as a woman” while giving birth is apparently compatible with “living as a man”.

When I spoke to a transsexual with a GRC she told me that one of the reasons for the interview to gain a GRC was to check that the motivation for transition was not primarily for sexual gratification.

That question would disqualify a number of the activists active on Twitter, whose posts and particularly their pictures make their motivation clear.

A GRC can be revoked by the Sec of State if it is obtained fraudulently. The Sec of State notified the court in Freddie’s case that he chose not to exercise that option.

That’s interesting, MoleSmokes. I didn’t know that. Hard to think of anything more female than getting pregnant. So, if that could be cited as a precedent, it would be very difficult to get, say, a rapist’s GRC revoked.

We would even be able to change the date of our marriage

Really??? I'd not heard that nugget.

I guess this sort of makes sense if you're convinced trans people are so incredibly endangered they need to be treated like secret agents or people in witness protection programs.

Entire false histories created so as not to "reveal" their true sex. Takes a certain fantastical mindset to think that the effort can be justified. And taking yourself a bit too seriously.

Does seem rather American - doing the Mission Impossible thing with lots of face masks and self-destructing briefings, rather than just doing what James Bond does - wandering in under his real name and saying he works for "Universal Exports".

Seriously, a rubber mask isn't going to stop you being dunked in a shark tank. And no-one's installing proper shark tanks these days anyway. No respect for tradition.

@Molesmokes: there is nothing to stop Intersex people using the GRA on the same terms as everyone else, if that is what they want to do.

But the GRA and GRC doesn't really change your sex. The House of Lords was keen to avoid peerages being affected. And, while everyone used to think that a GRC would grant an access all areas pass to transwomen, the campaigning by Nicola Williams and others has challenged that notion.

Thanks Debbie! I am out of date :-)

There are separate processes for Intersex people whose sex was incorrectly recorded at birth. See for example chapter 6 of "Variations in Sex. Characteristics*. Technical Paper." January 2019, published by the Government Equalities Office.

I hope this link works.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/771468/VSC_Technical_Paper_Web_Accessible.pdf