Yvette cooper - bio sex & gender v separate

I wonder why WH interviewed Yvette Cooper rather than a current cabinet minister? Did they say? Maybe no Conservative MP would go on to discuss it.

A typically uninformed comment from this poster. Yvette Cooper was on Woman's Hour to talk about Labour's planned 'Raneem's law' to put domestic abuse specialists in 999 control rooms to make sure victims are responded to urgently.

I believe its against the law to "out" someone with a GRC.

This is incorrect, but is quite a common misconception.

It is only illegal to disclose that someone has a GRC if you have acquired that knowledge in a professional capacity.

There are exceptions when such disclosure is lawful, which includes disclosure which is "for the purpose of preventing or investigating crime".

It's in this section of the GRA.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/22

If it's mentioned in court, then unless the court specifically forbids disclosure, then the papers can report it.

As usual I don't see any issue with what she said - it seems sensible.

I'm not sure if it's possible to find out whether Blake has a GRC but if they do, then news papers would have a different legal consideration around reporting which fits with how its been reported. I believe its against the law to "out" someone with a GRC.

Good case study as to why 1) we need medical gatekeeping in the GRC process and 2) it needs updating so people have to declare if they have a GRC in circumstances where its relevant, like this media reporting.

I wonder why WH interviewed Yvette Cooper rather than a current cabinet minister? Did they say? Maybe no Conservative MP would go on to discuss it.

And still a problem to use it to speculate on her position w.r.t. trans issues.
Give her some credit for being a professional woman please, this is a feminist board. I'm sure she's more than capable of separating her home life from her work life.

i think almost everybody except India recognises that sex and gender are different. The crux is that defining ‘woman’ as gender leads to TWAW, and everything that we believe society provides for the female sex is labelled as being for women…. So there would be no problem with transwomen having full access.

I agree with pp’s that women’s rights and child safeguarding are about to go very badly under a Labour gov

Mea culpa, trans activist

Still a problem for YC in maintaining her family relationships.

I'm interested in what YC says and does - her children are none of my business.

Anneliese Dodds wrote in the Guardian last year that Labour recognised that sex and gender are different. (Sorry can't access the link right now but it was in the Graun last summer.) What she didn't make clear - and I haven't seen anyone else do so - was whether Labour intend that a GRC should entitle them holder to access spaces and services for the opposite sex. Given that they plan to make it easier to obtain a GRC that's a pretty big deal and their silence on the matter is not reassuring.

This.

She risks her relationship with her child if she has a trans identifying child but is gender critical.

I have no idea what the situation is, but I don't think you can assume shes definitely on board.

Talking to a friend whose son has come out recently, she's outwardly very supportive but she's definitely questioning and more worried than she lets on even to us in her safe circle. The point is this guilt and pressure to be accepting even though your gut says it's a car crash waiting to happen.

Transactivist rather than trans-identifying?

https://www.lbc.co.uk/watch-videos/nadhim-zahawi-protest-warwick-tories/

It's relevant though. How easy would it be for an MP with a trans-identifying child to speak out against the ideology?

But like you, I haven't seen anything which confirms that her child is trans-identifying.

Is that true? I can't find any reference to it. I can see they are a trans rights activist but that's not the same thing. And something sits wrong with me about bringing people's children into a debate

I think because of the distributed way statistics are collected (i.e. police forces initially classify and then those details get added to the CPS and court files and sent on to the Home Office) it isn’t necessarily that simple to work out what is actually recorded for an individual crime because different state bodies might have different policies (esp police who are supposed to operate at some distance from the government). And while good data collection ought to have consistent guidelines on how to record, until trans activists tried to fudge things and override sex with self-ID gender, it was plain as day what to record so no one bothered before it was too late.

To put this on her specifically seems unreasonable because the system has been compromised and it’s likely hard for any MP or even the Home Office to know without some irregular enquiries.

It would be great to record crime under the two headings (sex and gender). We would then have clear visibility of just how many men who claim to be women are commiting different sorts of crimes.

Politicians are going to have to start getting to grips with the 'gender reassignment' process. Its of no use to allow any man to transition and become female/woman, and only look at the safeguarding and statistical implications once hes convicted of serious crime that recieves publicly.

Reading what she said, its as if she sees sex as female/male, and gender identity as woman/man.

Maybe thats Labours vision?

But interesting to see her say that there's biological and legal sex, and not that transwomen are biologically women like a lot of activists too.

I'd say she only said it because the man in question was a sadistic killer. She knew she was on the hook and that this man needed to be cast out out the gender inclusive grouping of women/"women", and not to do so would have possibly attracted press coverage and could have landed her in the shit.

@BonfireLady i too think it is about asserting that inner gender essence is the most important thing and ensuring that people’s self-identification is all important.

That argument requires a distinction between gender and sex - so they can denounce anyone talking about sex as bigoted dinosaurs obsessed with genitals

It’s pretty clear that even if she’s distinguishing between sex and gender, she thinks gender (identity) is the more important thing.

Unfortunately even Peter Tatchell seems to say that there is biological sex and there is gender identity. And then he talks about there being two different ways to be a woman.

My hunch on this is that she's lining up the Labour approach for self-ID by the back door: yes, a GRC is needed but getting one will be made easier (while also making it more difficult for wives of trans identified men to divorce them as men). If Labour brings in all the things it's talking about - including the conversion therapy Bill - we're on a pathway to a) men who identify as women being allowed access to women's spaces and b) parents and therapists being criminalised for supporting distressed children who need a differential diagnosis and mental health support.

I wouldn’t trust Labour as far as I could throw them. They will fudge this issue throughout the election campaign and when they’re in power they’ll revert to type.
Too many with skin in the game and too many holding seats in university towns.
We’re doomed.

She has skin in the game. Yes.

But interesting to see her say that there's biological and legal sex, and not that transwomen are biologically women like a lot of activists too.

It's easy to assume she's ok with all of the ideology and doesn't see a problem.

She might not, but she's also walking a fine line between the politics and the personal here. She may well harbour some pesky thoughts still...

Even admitting that there is a difference between biological and legal sex is relevant and interesting. Especially pending a ruling over whether the Equality And refers to biological sex in certain contexts.

Another fudge. And surely she absolutely have known how these crimes by males are classified. The fact that she didn’t know says a lot about her interest in her brief.

If yvette cooper is keen to distinguish sex from gender, surely the easiest way to achieve that is to stop reissuing birth certificates to people with a GRC. And stop allowing people to change sex on id.

Thats where the switch is made.

People can still be protected for having a gender, or changing their gender. Just remove the confusion around sex and gender.

Very non committal and avoiding answering Emma Barnett's direct questioning.
Typical politician reply. Lots of words and no further forward. I used to have some time for Yvette Cooper but she's pretty unconvincing on this topic.