Jess Phillips says a woman can't have a penis and that sex and gender are two different things

I'm all for golden bridges.

Once JP has both feet on one, not a couple of delicately quivering toes, I might start to take her seriously.

Meanwhile...nope. Not to be trusted.

‘What would be the point of a GRC then? The whole point of the GRA as originally passed was to falsify the legal documentation (birth certificate etc) of a GRC holder so that they could be legally recognised as the opposite sex in almost all circumstances.’

Not really for me to say. It might be a personal matter (as I think identity should be).

My sex is hardly ever relevant in officialdom. It’s only relevant where I need a guarantee that I will have equal treatment (EA covers that), or where I need slightly different treatment, and the sex exceptions in the EA should cover that.

But if someone wants legal recognition of their ‘gender identity’, in principle, it doesn’t bother me. I just don’t think it gives them (or should give them) the right to conceal or force others to disregard natal sex.

But I suspect it would be possible for a GRC and associated documentation to declare both legal sex and natal sex.

What would be the point of a GRC then? The whole point of the GRA as originally passed was to falsify the legal documentation (birth certificate etc) of a GRC holder so that they could be legally recognised as the opposite sex in almost all circumstances.

@fojn my sentiments exactly! 😁

Summed up beautifully by the way.

A fairly basic requirement of our elected representatives is that they don't say the earth is flat. It's taken Jess how many years to declare, with caveats, that the earth isn't flat?

Meh.

‘Under self-ID it would be impossible to protect single sex spaces and record crime by biological sex. If any man can become legally female just by making a declaration, there is no way to legally make a distinction between a woman and a man who says he is a woman. Or are you just referring to informal self-ID which is what we have already?’

I’m just saying those are my red lines. If they make self-ID unworkable then they do. That’s for someone else to figure out.

But I suspect it would be possible for a GRC and associated documentation to declare both legal sex and natal sex.

Or are you just referring to informal self-ID which is what we have already?

But I completely reject it is a simple decision - because that implies I care less about women than you do because I will not vote Tory just because they are making populist noises on this issue whilst selling women out with every actual policy.

Don't they 'deflesh' them and get them turned inside out? So, technically they don't get their penis cut off, they get an inverted penis (with a patchwork of other body parts sewn on sometimes, I think)

Only a tiny percentage of transwomen have had any surgery. Most have normally functioning male genitalia.

I find it insulting that we’re even asked to support it while police forces threaten us with being cavity searched by male people.

It’s not even-handed. If people just said “People should be able to self-ID but it shouldn’t affect others who perceive men and women by sex”, I’d be okay with it.

My concern about Johnson is he is saying what he thinks will help him electorally now, but he will happily sell women down the river when he wants to

Our choice is between a party that might sell women's rights down the river in the future, versus one that is definitely doing so now. Doesn't seem that hard a choice. And I say that as someone who has never voted Tory, and despises Johnson.

Yes, it’s probably fair to say I won’t support self-ID while businesses, public services and politicians are still steeped in gender woo.

I wouldn’t care about self-ID if:

• it only applied to people over 18
• there was a clear presumption in law against harassment over gender critical belief (no compelled speech, including at work, in court, online etc)
• single sex spaces were properly protected
• crime was recorded by sex, not gender ID
• schools and universities were teaching fact, not ideology

Self-ID itself isn’t my issue.

I've seen women on Twitter pretty much begging Jess Phillips to stand up for their rights and she totally ignored them. The fact that she has been heavily involved in moving the ground against women over trans rights says she's not to be trusted an inch, she'd sell us all down the river in a heartbeat. Her new 'shift', such as it is, makes me very angry actually. When Labour drops the gender self ID policy they'll have my attention.

That is a tough call, more women will be harmed by voting for the Tories. I would not be able to do it myself. I do not think the Tories are amenable to pressure, I think they are using you.

All women will be harmed by self ID. Please vote for whoever has policies you most agree with. I judge our politicians not the electorate. The Tories have backtracked, they didn't decide to do that on their own so I disagree they are not amenable to pressure. Labour have attempted to exploit "be kind" and it's backfired.

Imho, Jess has played to the gallery and will continue to play to the gallery! She promotes herself as caring about female rights, reads out the names of murdered women and then proceeds to fence sit, getting skelfs in her behind, as Women take misogynistic abuse, rape threats & death threats for saying No to the appropriation of female identity & space! Women have no need of the Jess Phillips of this world while they do & say nothing about the vile treatment of Rosie Duffield & Joanna Cherry! And it irks me that she has been given the role of reading out Murdered Women’s names while telling women to be “kind” to Transwomen who transgress female boundaries! Get tae!

'Glib bitch' is my response to that video. She's too far down the rabbit hole for me to value a word she says.

Not the 80-90% Callie.
By intact we mean the way they were born, balls, shaft and all.