Sunak would amend the Equality Act

I am delighted that both candidates are addressing these issues so openly and really relieved that Mordaunt didn't get through. I hope Liz wins as I think she will be the safer pair of hands for women and children on this.
Sunak never once raised his head above the parapet until this campaign; Liz did and it seems she was the person who stopped self-id. Boris Johnson was also belatedly trying to roll this back.
I also think Sunak can easily be criticised as too wealthy to understand ordinary people's lives in terms of the next Election.

Has any one heard any reaction from Labour/LibDems on the Tavistock/Cass Review? I think my ex-party will double-down (no idea why except maybe 'follow the money').
This issue has changed my political allegiance from left to right forever. I always valued free speech but now think it crucial. I do not trust Labour with it anymore.

to blame the ERA 2010 shows a very limited understanding of the problem space which risks doing more harm than good.

The irony is that many of the people he’s wooing by calling out ‘woke nonsense’ are unlikely ever to vote for a dark-skinned PM

That racism you are seeing in everyone else is a mirror.

It is not something that was put together on the hoof.

That's not what Trevor Phillips said. He said it was rushed and it was known unresolvable conflicts would arise.

The irony is that many of the people he’s wooing by calling out ‘woke nonsense’ are unlikely ever to vote for a dark-skinned PM

I agree that sunak doesn't know his arse from his elbow on anything other than global economics. Even then, I don't know if he has the British public's best interests at heart.

The best we can expect from him is that he has the sense to put best people into key roles and give them the support to do the right thing.

I haven't been very impressed with the speeches he's made, though. It's as if he's just saying words to keep the plebs happy so he can achieve his aims.

That he says he would review the EA2010 concerns me and is unnecessary. All that is needed in relation to the EA2010 is clarity on what the protected characteristics of sex and gender reassignment are and that, in particular, the latter does not include gender identity.

The EA2010 is the primary piece of equalities legislation in this country. It brought together all of the previous anti-discrimination legislation developed over the preceding decades in relation to race, sex, disability etc into a single, relatively uniform piece of legislation. It is not something that was put together on the hoof. It enshrines equality of treatment in employment and the provision of goods and services in relation to:
Age
Disability
Marital status
Pregnancy and maternity
Race
Religion of belief
Sexual orientation
Sex
Gender reassignment

I think we need to be really careful not to view the Act as the problem here.

It's amazing how many people were complicit in allowing the idea of 'misgendering to be literal murder' under the guise of being civil.

One of the cleverest aspects of TRAism has been convincing the world that misgendering is comparable to murder. That being misgendered leads to transpeople across the world killing themselves every ten seconds.

The truth is, pronouns are in the eye of the beholder, and anyone who is pronouned in a way they don't like basically needs to come to terms with that, like how people did before about five years ago.
It's not a big deal.

Kemi showing that she gets it way better than Sunak.

GB News

@GBNEWS
'I don't call it "war on woke", because I think it's far far more serious than that'

Former Tory leadership candidate Kemi Badenoch MP tells GB News using the word 'woke' can trivialise very serious issues.

@Helleofabore It's fair to say "no debate" is now off the table 😀

^
"PC"
not POC ......

The other problem with the protected characteristic of gender assignment, apart from not explaining what's involved, is that, along with what you would call old school transsexuals being able to present as women at work, it also allows a cross dresser to practice his fetish in public, and be legally protected for doing so.

I know several women who have to put up with this kind of subtle harassment at work.

And I'm not sure how you could ever eliminate it. Other than saying that under no circumstances are you obliged to use preferred pronouns, thereby making it not so much fun.

Personally I'm starting to think the "POC gorn maad" complainers had a fucking point

I think it very heartening that these two politicians have continued to bring the rights of women and children to the front of the campaigns.

What it actually means is that other politicians have to take notice now where as before they either lied and said no one in their constituency had raised it as an issue, or kept pushing it to the back burner as not being a ‘priority’ high enough to pay more than lip service to when enough pressure was applied.

It also removes the stigma from wanting/initiating/and having the discussion using plain language and acknowledging the issues.

Yes, I cringe at the use of the term ‘woke’ but you can be assured that plenty of research has been done and the usage is deliberate. It may not (quite likely not) be feminists who his team are targeting with that language.

Either way, the floodgates have been opened. Labour continue to look like they are beholden to lobby groups in their lack of engagement with the issues. And their strictly controlled language around the issues. The more these two candidates discuss the issues, the more other politicians will feel free or be forced to join the discussion.

Compared to where we were in the ‘nodebate’ climate in 2019, or even last year, we at least have the opportunity to debate as much as we want.

And frankly, if extreme trans rights activists want to protest the discussions, let them fill their boots because it only shows them up for what they are. Extremists who will allow no thinking outside of the allowed lines.

Wouldn't trust him a quarter of an inch to actually carry out a meaningful review of this legislation rather than just make announcements to that effect.

Also wouldn't trust any changes to the EA initiated by the tories to be helpful and practical,rather than simply throwing red meat to people who claim to be disgusted by 'woke' (and then define woke as whatever it is they happen to be disgusted by).

But it does seem that the languge in the EA is incredibly lax, in ways that undermine womens' rights by creating confusion ( and scope for manipulation) regarding the duties that employers, service providers and public bodies have under the act.

If case law isn't enough to iron out those confusions, there does need to be some parliamentary clarification of the act. But in the current toxic and polarised context, and with the tories seemingly concerned only to exploit these issues rather than solve them, I think there is fuck all chance of any legislative improvment.

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

Jumping in bed with buses, or indeed any motor vehicle, is probably not legal.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/man-sex-with-van_n_57b4ebd0e4b095b2f54277de

And I’d fundamentally disagree with you, but that’s another discussion

This. The whole 'Gender' Recognition Certificate which allows people to change the SEX on their Birth Certificate is the problem, it has led directly to this mess we are now in. That and the ridiculous veil of secrecy over a GRC.

No-one should be able to change an absolute fact on an official document, no-one.

If there has to be a GRC it should be an additional document, the Birth Certificate should not change and neither should the sex information on any other document. Add a separate field to be completed by those it applies to.

I'd like to change the Equalities Act in some respects, particularly as mentioned with watertight definitions. I'd like laws on the workplace to not be dependent on the whims of managers, for example some precision on who should be able to have flexible working and working from home part of the week. I'd like a law that is about what you do more than having a written policy which is only there to meet the statute.

None of which I expect is what either Tory leader proposes.

It's obvious to lots of us that the Govt should repeal the GRA and remove the woolly 'gender reassignment' from the Equality Act. Those two are what have enabled women's rights to be trampled on.
People that undergo (or are 'intending to' ) 'gender reassignment' are protected anyway, by sex or sexual orientation, or by workplace laws.