Spousal veto - labour proposal , is it really a problem now?

Ahhh the old “it’ll never happen”

Or how about a woman who is willing to live with her husbands cross dressing but thinks an actual documented change of legal sex is a step too far for her, doesn’t realise this he has started the GRC process, and having her documents amended to show she’s in a same sex marriage is sprung upon her because she was never given notice?

And here we go, the illogical extremes are going to be trotted out that can only apply to that rare breed of married couples that live thousands of miles apart and never see each other.

“If a couple separate but do not divorce because the wife is Catholic and would rather live separately and remain married than divorce, she needs to be informed that she now has grounds for an annulment” - hogwash she would have grounds for annulment through the church for abandonment already.

She would know for at least two years that that is where her relationship is going because, again to be eligible to apply the applicant must have lived a minimum of 2yrs openly and socially as the opposite sex. That’s not something you can hide from a spouse.

“There literally is no way a spouse could secretly start living openly and socially as the opposite sex without their wife noticing.”

There absolutely are situations where this could occur, some examples off the top of my head… if a couple separate but do not divorce because the wife is Catholic and would rather live separately and remain married than divorce, she needs to be informed that she now has grounds for an annulment, where one partner works away a lot of the time (at sea for example) and is able to hide their transition, where a person may be an unpleasant person and deceives their spouse by hiding things from them.

Yes, yes and yes.
I don’t think two years is rushing a divorce. The average timescale for a divorce in the U.K. from submitting papers to decree absolute is 7 months.

Going by the other threads it's a train spotting, barrack room lawyer, TW collective. Which describes a few of the little trans groups that "campaign" for "human rights".

Sympathy to any transwidows and families involved.

Please RTFT

Oh bless. Too many nap times to juggle?

Seriously.

You are lecturing abused women about how they want it to stay 'out of fear', after all they went through in reality trying to make this work?

What you mean is that no one has yet given you a reason that you personally agree with, and for some reason you feel qualified to dictate your superior view to these women of what they may have, should want, may feel, and are now shaming them in an attempt to get them to do what you say.

It is exceptionally symptomatic of the tone deaf/compassion and empathy free/ lady bountiful/master of the workhouse ethos we've all come to expect of this political lobby when talking to women and reframing their reality and trampling them down to benefit men's sexual freedoms. But it's still bloody revolting to witness in real time. Shameful.

No, I never said what is on paper isn’t important. That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying if you don’t want to have a same sex marriage on paper, then don’t live for two years in what is essentially a same sex marriage. Divorce your spouse at any time during the 2 yrs of living openly and socially as the opposite sex required before they can even apply for that piece of paper. You have time to divorce them four times over. I don’t think anyone needs more time than that.

No logic from a genderist is a contradiction in terms.

You are still looking like that flapping fish.

Ooh, does anyone remember the collective from a few months ago who managed to fuck up and added the link they were all working from?

I disagree and no one has given any factual current reason for it to stay. It’s been reasons regarding timing which I have illustrated are bollocks, it’s been reasons regarding it might be in secret, which is also bollocks. It’s been but women in the past needed it, nice but not relevant to the current state of the law. It’s been but Catholic/Muslim women need annulments have to have it, which I have shown to be based on ignorance of the fact their own religious authorities issue annulments, not the U.K. Gov and they disregard any civil divorce as not a divorce.

That sums it up. Basically you want it to stay out of fear. Theres no logic to it.

So all of a sudden, what's on paper ISN'T IMPORTANT.

Yup, MRA.

She still has over two years to get a six month process done. So the argument that it is needed so a woman can avoid being in a same sex marriage rings hollow.

Does the wife have to give permission to open the GRA process, @Coriolise? Or can the man do it without her involvement or knowledge up to the point of having to deal with the spousal exit clause?

Are you some sort of collective and one of you can't recall what the other one said at 00.37 in the morning? Denial does not equal explanation.

Until you actually address this everyone on this thread is watching you flail around like a sort of angry dying fish.

That’s not saying that you are homophobic if you don’t want to be in a same sex marriage. You are deliberately conflating an issue of what it says in documents (on paper) versus de facto reality.

Red tape isn't an additional option, red tape is superfluous steps.

It has not been replaced by a better process as many people here have explained.

Nil points

I did already.

A positive decision should be made to either remain or exit the marriage before the documents are changed to reflect the new sex marker.

Yes absolutely. But when a spouse has had over two years to make this decision, why should she or he have the power to halt a GRC for their soon to be ex get yet more time? This is open to abuse. If you don’t want to be married to a transgender person you’re not going to need more than two years to make that decision.

I'm confused? Your post bears no relation whatsoever to mine.

I'm struggling to understand the motivation behind your position, then?

No it doesn’t. The two are not mutually inclusive.