31 Jan 15:15 Women & Equalities Committee - Scottish GRR Bill

Watched without making notes, so the following is from memory and I don't remember who said what:

Any halfway decent chair would have stamped on the TRAHR nonsense.

Very much enjoyed the calling out of whataboutery, and the repeated references to 'living in the acquired gender - whatever that means'.

Didn't dear old Isla-of-the-Leggings come along at exactly the perfect moment? Lots of mentions of 'as recent events have shown...'.

And I thought the point about single sex exemptions being permitted rather than mandated and maybe that should be reconsidered was very well made. Something I'd been pondering myself only yesterday.

Thanks but I can't watch at the moment!

If you click on the link again, the recording of the meeting is now playing. So you'll be able to watch it, if you fancy it.

I think we need to be really careful when campaigning that we dont get carried away in create good sound bites, that actual harm others.

The SSE still exist, and have been acknowledged as such by both UK and Scottish Parliament.

And in fact, maybe even because at the time FWR highlighted Edinburgh RCC improperly advertising under the SSE, that some Scottish Women's Groups no longer invoke this.

Have posted an example of this here www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4730468-worker-resigns-from-scottish-womens-aid-over-concerns-about-safeguarding-and-introducing-self-id

Are we talking about Naomi Cunningham from Sex Matters? I'm not watching so I can't comment on how she's doing but she normally knows her stuff and I'm surprised to hear she's not performing well.

I've just spotted an excellent Twitter hashtag called #TerfGogglebox.

I was typing something when a fire alarm went off and I thought I had posted it but now cant see it.

So sorry if this is here and somehow not appearing but an intersting point made by Michael who I was originally so rude about.

SSE apply to "servcies" but not to "associations". He was talking about a group of women meeting informally to meet up and even act as a support group, could be challenged under gender recognition discrimination, but a service could not because they could apply the SSE.

Mentioning this as it has come up as a point of discussion.

Thus the founding principle is a broad one, that the acquired gender becomes the person’s sex “for all purposes” subject to any other enactments, or the statutory exceptions listed.

www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2022csoh90.pdf?sfvrsn=8eee302c_1

Lady Haldane made it quite clear that the existing exemptions still apply.

Did it just disconnect for anyone else?

Link

www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/51327088-eab0-4bf7-ad5e-35e472b969f8

From the Haldane Judgement

[53] For all of the foregoing reasons, I conclude that in this context, which is the meaning
of sex for the purposes of the 2010 Act, “sex” is not limited to biological or birth sex, but
includes those in possession of a GRC obtained in accordance with the 2004 Act stating their
acquired gender, and thus their sex. Such a conclusion does not offend against, or give rise
to any conflict with, legislation where it is clear that “sex”means biological sex. Mr O’Neill
referred to the example of the Forensic Medical Services (Victims of Sexual Offences)
32
(Scotland) Act 2021 where references to the sex of the forensic medical examiner can only
mean, read fairly, that a victim should have access to an examiner of the same biological sex
as themselves. I agree. There are no doubt many other such examples. That does not give
rise to the inevitable conclusion, as was urged upon me, that “sex” in the present context
must mean the same thing as it does in others. A rigid approach in this context is neither
mandated by the language of either statute nor consistent with their respective aims and
purposes.

ah, yeah. I missed that. Cunningham's point is very narrow on this then

The SSE aren't about risk. They are about preserving the right of women not to be traumatised by the presence of men.

The arguement for SS Services were not conceived because violent men might infiltrate but about accepting that in some circumstances one's biological sex means whatever it is, health threatment, consuling, etc., are better for women provided in single sex services.

And I repeat most women's groups eg WA and RCC operate single sex services.

It is only in Scotland that some groups no longer do that.

No idea, but I got to it via the link in the OP

I am just a bog standard person on the street, but I thought Lady Haldane said that sex wasn't just legal sex because there were some circumstances where it was obvious that biological sex was meant.

Can I get this on Freeview?

Am watching on bbc parliament and,its about non dom tax status.

Yes he was. I was thinking of Lord Faulkner, hope I haven't muddled my initials.

Cunningham makes a really interesting point there: The GRC says nothing about the person's risk (eg to women) and so in theory SHOULDNT influence decisions about access to single sex spaces. But she also explains that in practice, organisations are scared of legal come back, so they act as if a GRC somehow indicates safety (or some other relevant factor to proportionate single sex spaces) when in fact it does not. The problem is that we have had almost a decade of the organisations charged with setting out guidance on the equality act going far, far beyond what the law actually says. So it kind of doesnt matter if NC is right on the point of law - we dont seem to have the civil servants to make that the practice.

They are very short of time, but RMW and LF speak v e r y s l o w l y compared to Michael Foran

That Robin lying about most Rape Crisis Centres are trans inclusive. Most RCC operate the SSE. Some Rape Crisis Centre additionally offer services to men and trans people.

Just changed my minds about Michael!

Oh dear Naomi betraying women again. I wish these campagners who have only recently realised there is an issue actually talked to women who operate women's services.

Has she ever been in touch with Rape Crisis Centres.

Same here. I could watch but it wouldn’t do my blood pressure much good. How the amazing Maya, Helen and all the other wonderful women fighting on our behalf handle the stress I do not know but I’m so grateful to them.

Isn't it 'illegal' to ask to see someone's GRC?

So, what's to stop any old fella saying he fucking has one??

Surely any seahorses having babies have completely flouted their GRC 'oath'??

Are they going to see 10 years jail time??

I thought Foran was very good on that. THe supposed risk of breaching the statutory declaration is zero as it is close to impossible to prove

I thought that service providers aren't allowed to ask for sight of a GRC so it would be impossible to know whether it was issued in Scotland or elsewhere? Lord Faulker seems to think people would be able to see the certificate.