Sunak would amend the Equality Act

People can read the posts. it's all pretty black and white.

They can't read one of the ones that kicked this all off at 13:34. That one from you got deleted at the speed of sound.

I didn't report it, mind. I think it's best if grandstanding comments speculating on mumsnetters' racial origins are left to stand so everyone can see them.

So ask MN to reinstate it, would you?

*than you think, sorry

@thedancingbear that's not what my position is:

'She has adopted the position that my suggesting that racism is a problem amongst a particular group is itself racist.'

You're very much missing an argument because you think issues are 'black and white'. Very few things in the world are.

I suggested that when people talk about 'woke nonsense' they may not necessarily be racist homophobic bigots you implied they were.

In fact, they may also not want women replaced as a legally protected class with those who 'identify as' us. The voters may be better informed then you think.

Can you see the difference?

She has adopted the position that my suggesting that racism is a problem amongst a particular group is itself racist. It's a mechanism to shut down discussion, and I will have no truck with it. it stinks of shit.

We call that the 'Mr Menno defence' around these parts.
😆

I posted at 15.11

^...Others feel this discussion is derailing so I am happy to leave it if you are^

In response to that, at 15.23, LK1972 posted

^You came here accusing large parts of population of racism in their voting intentions, seemingly based on your personal experience. You were told that's kind of racist and got on your high horse about that...

Now you can't offer any stats or further argument.

Please feel free to stop derailing this, and hopefully other, threads with baseless accusations of racism towards people who are sick of 'woke nonsense'.^

Clear as a bell, isn't it?

I don't feel I've misrepresented her. She has adopted the position that my suggesting that racism is a problem amongst a particular group is itself racist. It's a mechanism to shut down discussion, and I will have no truck with it. it stinks of shit.

I acknowledged upthread that my reference to race was intended as a passing comment, not a derail, and I suggested we leave it to one side, as it was peripheral to main point. But LK1972 wanted to carry on the discussion. Whilst accusing me of derailing.

People can read the posts. it's all pretty black and white.

So I guess my point is that yes, documents are compromised and we may have to address that separately. But as long as people's eyes and ability to demand (proper, legal) proof is not, I'm ok with GRA.

Hmm, good point. There may need to be an additional document issued to those that may potentially be mis-sexed, to avoid embarrassment and harassment?

My daughter is continually mis-sexed, but that has never been an issue for access to service, as when they challenge, and really look and talk, it's obvious.

But it may be helpful for all those butch lesbians who apparently face 'continuous harassment' in the ladies.

I would like to see the GRA grandfathered. No more GRCs to be issued. We no longer need the act to allow for trans people to marry a person of the same sex, so it’s pointless. And also sexist when you look at the section on inheriting titles etc.

The Equality Act also needs reviewing to strengthen the definitions of male, female and homosexual, and to ensure wording around single sex spaces is strengthened.

Is told he has misrepresented someone.

Refuses to apologise, making the claim that actually he understands LK1972 well.

Clearly some people don't grow out of contradicting other people for the sake of it, then. Depressing.

@thedancingbear I still do not understand why you brought Sunak's race into the discussion about potential strengthening of women's rights through legislation.

Why would you do that?

I think it's because the tories favour lack of state intervention - they were originally elected on a platform of "cutting red tape", including for schools.
Who could have envisaged that we'd have groups busily removing child safeguarding and the rights of girls and women to single sex sports, spaces etc in plain sight.
There's a balance between the rights of schools etc to be governed as those responsible see fit and where the state has to intervene and say must - hence schools get guidance (advice with best practice examples) and statutory legislation (they must comply).

A school that defied new guidance and offered the children age inappropriate porn soaked materials (like so many of the offers we've seen from lobby groups) would be in for a very hard time and would likely have to defend their decisions to Ofsted (who hopefully will be released from the talons of the trans extremists very shortly in the light of Cass).

But how does a receptionist at a leisure centre tell the male person with female id - birth certificate or passport that the changing rooms are female only and that he isn't allowed in there?

The GRA was, in part, to allow same sex people to marry, but it also gave a holder or GRC privacy. And that privacy is what's stopping SSE being workable in practice. Given that the EqA was written after the GRA, I cant help but think that SSE was never a serious, workable part of the EqA.

@BellaAmorosa totally agree with above, but it would be good to have it restated in clear language, for avoidance of any further doubt, whilst making single-sex provision mandatory (with opt-outs for small businesses etc.)

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo
The EA is clear - even with a GRC, a person can be excluded from opposite sex facilities. It's Stonewall who have claimed that a GRC and by extension the PC of gender reassignment = changing sex for all purposes with no exceptions. That is not the law, so making single sex provision mandatory would not include TW in women's spaces or TM in men's.

No apology from me. As I say, I think we understand each other well at this point.

@thedancingbear 'I’m sorry you feel you’ve encountered racism, but if you can’t produce peer-reviewed papers demonstrating this, it didn’t happen' is a gross misrepresentation of my position.

Would you like to apologize? Don't normally ask this, but as you're into that sort of stuff

All true, but politically a mine-field. I'd say easier to leave in place but tighten/clarify interplay, practically.

‘I’m sorry you feel you’ve encountered racism, but if you can’t produce peer-reviewed papers demonstrating this, it didn’t happen’

i think each of us understands where the other is coming from at this point. I’ll leave you to it.

I am not sure we would either but since the overarching purpose of the GRA was to allow two people of the same biological sex to marry as long as one of them had a GRC and same sex marriage is now on the Statute Books then I see no reason to continue with this legal fiction that people can change sex.

@VestofAbsurdity I'm not sure we would be successful in a campaign to repeal the GRA.

Legal recognition for transsexuals is quite possibly not a cause that I disagree with, but GRA needs to be tightened, and interplay with EA clarified, with good examples in 'explanatory notes' provided with secondary legislation.

People need to be careful who they jump into bed with, because they risk their own rights being chucked under the bus.

I have zero say in the Conservative party leadership election, so not "jumping into bed" with anyone.

"Sunak plans to stop organisations such as Stonewall from delivering sex and relationship education, after concern that inappropriate topics have been taught to young children. Schools would be given guidance about what was acceptable, while parents would be able to request to see teaching materials, including from external groups, through an amendment to the Schools Bill. However, schools would have the final say on what to release."

But the last sentence is not, and shows he's got a way to go. Someone please tell me why I can't see those materials? What's the reason?

Agree, remove that line and I'm fully on board with that proposal.

I agree with Rishi Sunak 100-percent there is to much woke nonsense that has ruined too much of this country the Equality Act should be amended to only protect men and women With strict biological definitions