Annaliese Dodds: "sex and gender are different"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/25/labour-gender-recognition-anneliese-dodds

Surprisingly measured article for the guardian.

The mess is becoming more and more troubling. I haven't RTFT but ideas like 'case by case' 'making things easier' are all ways of making it impossible for women to push back in any meaningful way. Does Labour's, lets try and appease both sides mean that women will constantly be in the law courts, trying to establish boundaries. The muddled thinking means not just one case but then having to appeal, like now but much worse. I keep thinking the war is, in small steps, being won, but given KS's love of the mess, the GRA is a gift to him.

I did read it but it’s been a while. I agree on rankings etc it’s one of the most effective ways to control outcomes

Every business now talks about inclusivity, what does that mean for women? And single sex spaces

But also countries. Do you move up the chart if you shut down women speaking and use politics, media and violence to prioritise men - see NZ

Those rankings make us less able to change things

On a separate note the Dr signing off on supposedly changing sex rather than the panel or self ID what is that like?

Do you just book a GP, what do they ask? How do they determine the outcome

Apart from men feeling a slight discomfort I can’t see it limiting ability to just change legal sex.

Which women’s spaces are accessible after that?

Labour shadow equality minister didn’t speak this morning but they need to stump up with the detail

One of the reasons for a lack of single-sex services is probably the difficulty in enforcing them, and neither Labour nor the Conservatives are proposing measures to help this situation.

Since any male can obtain standard identity documents containing the falsehood that he is a female without requiring a GRC, how does an organisation exclude him if he insists on being included? A letter from a doctor is required but considering there are TRA and other sympathetic doctors who will happily provide documents for a fee, this doesn’t seem a difficult barrier. I also think many GPs will, in the current climate, go along with a patient’s request unless they have serious reservations about that particular case.

So how can a single-sex service be gate-kept? You can’t ask to see a GRC and any identity document must be requested from all clients across the board. I genuinely don’t know how easy it is for most people to produce their birth certificate if asked. Would that change in an emergency situation, such as a woman fleeing an abusive situation at night with children?

I effectively don’t have a birth certificate as it was in my father’s care and he doesn’t know where it is anymore. I was born in a country with poor record-keeping so I’m not sure whether it is possible to obtain a replacement. Until I investigate that I have no birth certificate.

Requesting birth certificates from all patients/clients seems the only way to keep a service single sex but it seems overkill for many services. But rights, once acquired, are difficult to remove, so I don’t realistically see any government stopping this situation where males can apply for passports and driving licences showing their sex as female.

It’s also why I am extremely wary of any measure to make it easier to obtain a GRC. I think we could be stuck with a lot of negative unintended consequences further down the line. One negative consequence I can already see is that sexual and violent offences committed by ‘females’ would start increasing rapidly and that would be used as ‘evidence’ to further resist our demands for single-sex spaces. If the gap between male and female offending narrows due to the inclusion of males in the female figures, that takes away one argument for single-sex spaces.

Rankings and measurements are a political technique, and those who have read their Foucault will know what I mean.

ILGA is just another lobbying organisation, focused on pushing for what they see as the rights of those they represent. They are pro self-ID and women and children are not their priority.

Perhaps worth mentioning here that ILGA lost its consultative status with the UN in the 1990s over links to pro-pedophilia groups and was refused several times before being able to regain it in the 2000s. Consultative status is of course very important for their lobbying and their credibility, and highlighted on their website: https://ilga.org/united-nations

I am glad Labour is finally engaging with this issue and though it really isn’t hitting the mark on first attempt, it’s opening the door, finally, to a long overdue conversation that Labour (and every major political party) needs to have with voters in a healthy democracy.

Thanks for the unwanted teaching moment.

I see no need for all the belly-aching about screenshotting and posting Tweets as images

As said earlier, which others have understood, it is discriminatory method of posting information because it can lead to excluding people with visual impairments, eg those who use a talkign browse, or for those who need to enlarge text.

None of this can be done if the text is captured as a graphic.

If you weren't aware of this, which many aren't, surely the more rational response would be to say thanks for letting me know that, I wil bear it mind in future.

It is not different than if you are speaking in public and think you will look into getting someone who can sign or have an over hear projector of what is being said.

Baffled as to why anyone would want to say what is personally convenient is more important than attempting some sort of inclusivity!

Removal of the spousal exit clause.

So what Labour is truly committed to is making sure that women do as they are dot dot dot told by men.

They know they have to do it in stages because it fucked up so badly in Scotland. Women are losing their rights incrementally, small step by small step. This has always been the plan and we are mugs if we go along with it.

This is a good point. Look at the KPSS description of the years it took for the behind the scenes campaigners to slowly and stealthily get more and more men into female prisons.

Loving Kemi's cold contempt for Labour's, um, policy here.

Let’s start with where we are. The UK has fallen off track as an international leader on LGBTQ+ rights. Just 8 years ago we had the best LGBTQ+ rights in Europe, in 2023 we stand in 17th place. We have fallen back by staying still, as other countries have progressed and modernised their legislation, particularly on trans and intersex people’s rights.

Stonewall is confused. The U.K. is not falling behind. In this the U.K. is becoming a world leader in trying to protect women and children while also respecting and caring for transpeople.

@ScrollingLeaves this bit got me

It is also important to note that the Bill was backed by every established women’s organisation in Scotland, including Women’s Aid, Amnesty International, Engender and Rape Crisis Scotland. The vast majority of women MSPs voted in favour of the Bill. The majority of Scotland’s women MSPs, feminist advocates and policy experts are satisfied that the provisions in the Bill do not have negative impacts on women and girls in Scotland.

no mention that the organisations that backed it receive funding from the Scottish government! And that the MSPs were whipped to vote!

BoiledBeetle Today 21:25
Thank you for posting Stonewall’s wall of words.

Safeguarding was extensively considered by Scottish parliamentarians over the course of the Bill, including several amendments that were tabled and included to explicitly bolster protections

I watched Scottish Parliament as one safeguarding amendment after another was rejected.

Stonewall are spin doctor liars.

As for this,

Speak to Ireland, speak to Belgium, speak to New Zealand, Switzerland, Denmark, large parts of Canada, US and Australia. Review the evidence – which finds no known cases of fraudulent or criminal intent

that Is nonsense.

At this point I honestly don't bloody care if they hand out GRAs via chocolate bars like Willy Wonka golden tickets, or do a bloody ticker tape parade with them. Pour them out. Let anyone who wants one have one.

But they are not bloody giving men rights over women and children, that door closed some years ago.

The wilful delusionality is one of the most grotty parts of this ideological political movement, and Labour are trying it on too.

Looking straight at facts and just identifying as not having seen or heard inconvenient facts, evidence, realities.

I'm all for freedom of belief. But choices come with consequences. If you are going to engage in a belief system in which your reality is entirely selective and personal and you just refuse to acknowledge the bits you don't like or which don't prop up your LARPing, then you cannot be considered fit for a position of responsibility. Such as running a country.

Labour have chopped and changed so much that it is hard to take this seriously, especially as it is only an outline. Only last December they were whipping their MSPs into supporting one of the most contentious bills ever put to the Scottish Parliament. Now Dodds is saying that was a mistake.

Transwidows:

"So the GRA compromise for the Labour Party and its supporters is trading #transwidows “outdated” rights for self ID? Are people on this side of the debate OK with that?"

twitter.com/transwidows/status/1683579267723018242?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

They've linked to this underneath. From July 2020:

uncommongroundmedia.com/spousal-exit-clause/
"The Spousal Exit Clause: Trans Widows’s Rights Are Not Yours to Give Away"

Back to the topic in hand - never mind the US, they extol Canada ffs.

Mark Jenkinson MP:

"Labour robbing women of rights again - removal of spousal consent means married women doing the bidding of autogynephilic men."

twitter.com/markjenkinsonmp/status/1683568293548793856?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

He's quote tweeting this:

"To modernise, simplify and reform the gender recognition law, we will:

Replace the panel of anonymous doctors who oversee decisions with a registrar model.

Replace the 'acquired gender' period with a reflection period.

Scrap the outdated spousal consent mechanism."

twitter.com/anneliesedodds/status/1683434056225112065?s=46&t=WHoOZ_3Kv5G6-FyQuvE0LQ

Seems like there's a bit of a ratio on that tweet of Dodds'?

5 retweets
65 quotes
42 likes
183k views

I signed up to twitter not so that I could tweet ( I never have and never will) but so that I could view. I've had no issue looking at twitter feeds - although it is helpful, and far easier, when people transcribe tweets for us all to see, and archive, on here.

I have no intention of signing up to Twitter. The reason you can see Twitter feeds is because you are signed up.

There is nothing wrong with people screenshotting Tweets and including them in their posts, it is far easier and less time consuming than transcribing them and I find it useful. Adding the Twitter link as well is no hardship and many posters do for those on Twitter but to say people should either transcribe the entire Tweet thread or just put the Twitter link in and not screenshot and post as an image is the issue. Posters who post on here can post however is easier for them and it didn't take IwantToRetire long to find the Twitter feed that the screenshots were from, I see no need for all the belly-aching about screenshotting and posting Tweets as images.

" No evidence of fraudulent ( adverse) intent" Stonewall says , in any of the countries which have passed Sef ID. Quoting the U.S as a shining example.

Yeh, right!

Stonewall are obsessed with tables. trying to motivate people and organisations by how high ranking they are, on some arbitrary table they have created.

As I recall, it was the Blair administration who brought in this particular fetish for measurement.

They're desperate to lead a national trans strategy, aren't they? It's all they bang on about (when having a break from telling wimmin to STFU, that is).

Exactly!