Should the GRA be repealed?

MN went down last night around 11pm and was still down when I went to bed over an hour or so later.

The TRAs will never shut women up talking about this. Getting Posie banned on social media platforms meant she had to take billboard ads out instead and the conversation spilled over in to the real world. It’s a dick move and entirely counterproductive, but they don’t seem able to help themselves.

Whoops. Searching not earthing!

It's quite easy to find links to the website on twitter just by earthing the hashtag.

The Twitter profile is still standing but the FB page, which I followed yesterday, seems to have been taken down

I was quite concerned when the website went down - a bit of a coincidence, apparently that hasn’t happened since 2018.

The actual website that shall not be named went down? If it did it was rteporary as it's back up again in full glory.

There was a celebratory tweet when the website went down saying ‘oops’ 🥂

So was there a DDos attack last night then?

The Mumsnet notification said it was nothing sinister, but it was an error 522 which can be caused by DDos attacks.

I was quite concerned when the website went down - a bit of a coincidence, apparently that hasn’t happened since 2018.

What does TAAT mean when referring to a thread?

People do change their minds about things over a lifetime and it seems crazy that this law allows people to make this change in one direction only. Keira is now caught in a situation where she has no way of reversing her decision.

Of course, if you were to update the law to allow for a change back it would demonstrate that it is not innate as claimed and raise questions to why creating a legal fiction is being allowed in the first place.

In trying to give freedom of expression it actually removes future freedom of expression.

It's very odd that we're not allowed to post a link to a campaigning website. Links are posted on here all the time, and before last night I'd only seen them removed if they were for crowdfunders or petitions or if they looked like advertising. I think MN may also remove links to rival discussion sites. That website doesn't fit in any of those categories.

Yes it should be repealed, I never agreed with it in the first place, even before the massive pressure over the past few years.

Interesting that every time we try to discuss it, the thread gets pulled. Never see that happening when people discuss any other law

So was there a DDos attack last night then?

However, the forbidden website is still standing. I just logged into it.

're deletion - a 2nd thread posted to discuss the group/movement, not to promote it, was also deleted. As was a third, about the previous 2 threads. Then the whole site went down.

Some people seem very very keen to stop women discussing it at all.

Agree, Diane. But I think discussion of the GRA should include whether it is useful or harmful in itself as a law.

Malalhaha in that case it might be better to pick up the discussion in an earlier thread on the exact same topic that has been resurrected.

Yes, we should move there.

Malalhaha in that case it might be better to pick up the discussion in an earlier thread on the exact same topic that has been resurrected:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3941154-should-the-gra-be-repealed?

If you think that this new thread has been started in bad faith for screenshots then it might be better to report the OP post and include in your report the link that you mentioned.

How do I report a post on Talk?

Reporting a post is easy. Click on 'report post' to the right of each post and it will bring up a new box for you to let MNHQ know why you want to report it.

www.mumsnet.com/info/faqs

(Those are the Desktop instructions. On mobile, see the three dots next to “Bookmark”. No idea about the App, I’ve never used it.)

My views on this have definitely shifted over the last 5-10yrs. From "it's a harmless legal fiction to help seriously unhappy, but not dangerous, men" to "its a dangerous legal fiction that puts women and children at risk of serious harm and might only help a tiny minority by doing so" . Two main issues for me

The importance of knowing birth sex for medical purposes should take priority. Sex matters when it comes to blood donations, transplants, medication....

The fact that we know sexual predators will exploit any opportunity to abuse - this hands them a free pass to previously safe spaces for women and children.

People should be able to dress how they choose, call themselves any name they want, but I now have serious questions about the value for society of this legal fiction.

Not sure if I've reached the "repeal" point though.

I look forward to materially supporting the campaign launched yesterday to repeal the GRA. In a civilised country citizens should be able to lobby for law changes, and good heavens @MNHQ, they should be allowed to discuss it shouldn't they?

this is bad law for a number of key reasons

• it mandates belief, attempting to force people into colluding with the pretence that a holder of a GRC has changed sex

• it has it's basis in homophobia - in 2004 our lawmakers preferred to pass a law allowing people to pretend to change sex rather than introduce same sex marriage

• it is inherently sexist, codifying as it does the sexist concept of 'gender identity' in our laws

• it is clearly confusing, having led many, many organisation to breach the equality act, thinking they were complying with the GRA

It effectively brings back punishment for heresy, and such homophobia and sexism has no place in our laws.

It absolutely should be repealed, and citizens who want to discuss that should be able to do so without being censored.

Yes, I’d support repeal.

The law is a relic from a more homophobic time. The point about ‘it’s not just their history’ is also good one. A birth certificate is a historical record of the relationship between several people, not modifiable personal property of one person.

I’m reminded of the recent case of the father who wanted to change his child’s time of birth so he wouldn’t be born in 2020, citing his ‘authority’. This was denied as he doesn’t have authority over objective facts - neither do those seeking to change the fact of their sex observed at birth.

Oh, my post was hidden presumably because it contained the link.

I also said that I had a deletion message. The reason given was that the OP came here specifically to post about the site, and that's a nono.
I take it that any post containing the link will be hidden.

Apparently it was reported numerous times? Surprising to think that threads discussing British laws are reportable but as they say - every day's a school day on Mumsnet. Anyway - best not mention it so this thread doesn't become a TAAT.