Ex Head of the Labour party’s domestic policy unit: "Demedicalisation” of the gender recognition makes a mockery of the reserved equality laws that facilitate an accessible public realm for women and girls

Four letters published, all by men.

Dr Jane Hamlin, of the Beaumont Society and former headteacher, claims not just to be a woman but to be actually female. Been living as a woman full time since 2011.

The trans peer claims to be a woman but also claimed the title over their elder, and actually female, sister.

Tiny looking man does stuff with strings

Lachlan Stuart has been gender-critical for a while - glad to see him writing this.

It's a decent letter, and surprising to see it in the Guardian, but it still perpetuates the belief that we can somehow distinguish between the True Trans and the rest.

Never mind women having to weigh up if that male-looking person in the loos is True Trans or a vile criminal.

I mean the whole psychology of the condition, with its ever-shifting diagnostic criteria, its self-reporting; the unwillingness of the therapeutic profession to do anything but affirm by taking confused kids or adults at their absolute word; the whole nonsense of passing v non-passing. Also the shape-shifting nature of the trans community itself which tells us that trans is either a life-threatening condition requiring expensive medicine or just a part of identity that people can play around with.

'While our society has for decades [by society I think he means MPs and lawmakers circa 2002/3] agreed to require women and girls to make limited accommodations* in the public sphere for all those who are experiencing gender dysphoria, in order to facilitate an accessible public realm...'

I'm so glad someone has finally admitted that it's women and girls doing all the accommodating. Now, if only ordinary people could understand what that actually means e.g., the convicted double rapist pictured being remanded to a women's prison...

*GRA parliamentary debate https://mobile.twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1177699186361458688?cxt=HHwWgIC79fLKg9ggAAAA

The bluntness and anger in that is heartening: there is some waking up going on. However the baked in misogyny is.... a reminder of why men like this have enabled it all to get this far.

When he says 'society' he means men.

Men decided to require women to submit to exclusion and harassment and loss of privacy and dignity for other men's better happiness. They did not consult or ask. They felt entitled to 'require'. Their view of 'accessible realm' was only for men, they've never cared about the impact or exclusion effects on women. Just another little downside of being born outside the master race. But now possibly, the 'requirements' on the service humans might be getting a little bit OTT, and the master race might need to get a little firmer about how they treat the servants.

Fuck the fuck off to the far side of fuck and then fuck off some more.

There are very low levels of awareness about what’s actually going on. I have a conversation with a clued-up friend a few days ago and she didn’t know the GRC results in a new birth certificate with your new (legal) sex. She was gobsmacked that an official record of fact could be amended in this way.

I am hoping someone will write an article soon examining the areas in which men are now in female spaces and how we reached a point where this is unquestioningly accepted by those in authority.

I really dislike the idea that "society" can somehow collectively "agree" something that is binding on the rest of us.

According to the Beaumont society person:

All a gender recognition certificate (GRC) entitles anyone to is birth, marriage (if relevant) and, eventually, death certificates in their acquired gender. Nothing else.

And apparently being able to falsify these documents has no effect on their life or anyone else's. Seems like a good argument for repealing the GRA.

Did you check out the other letters, the Beaumont Society and the first trans peer.

There's also some bloke who looks suspiciously wee in twitter pictures but could just be far away.

Well it seems that at least one person might have half a clue but I have to say I don't much like this bit ... " While our society has for decades agreed to require women and girls to make limited accommodations in the public sphere for all those who are experiencing gender dysphoria, "., you see, I don't ever remember being asked, let alone being allowed to answer as to whether I agreed and if so to what extent.
Whatever accommodations were made, were made without comprehensive, wide ranging discussion with society at large, in much the same way as the current and proposed future liberties with womens spaces/needs are concerned have been made with no reference to the wishes of those who will mostly have those situations to contend with.
Still, on the whole, at least whoever wrote that comment has a more stunning and brave attitude than starmer! Not that that takes a lot of effort to achieve, to be fair!