Will Labour introduce Self ID & curb free speech?

"But the Tories"

Is the limit and depth of discussion we can have on Labour and Free Speech.

Which in itself is an attempt to shame and close down speech. And very ironic given this thread's subject. I think it highlights a lot of the very fears women on FWR have.

I don't know if I can bring myself to vote for any of the main parties this time round. This isn't a situation I've felt to this extent before. I've been dissatisfied but not felt tried with such utter contempt by all.

"We need to recognise that sex and gender are different – as the Equality Act does. We will make sure that nothing in our modernised gender recognition process would override the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. Put simply, this means that there will always be places where it is reasonable for biological women only to have access.Labour will defend those spaces, providing legal clarity for the providers ofsingle-sex services."

But this isn't how the law currently stands is it? The law as it currently stands says that men with a GRC should be treated for all purposes as if they are women. And although there are exceptions where men with a GRC can be excluded from services (if there is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim), we know from the analysis of academic lawyers such as Michael Foran (see link below) that associations currently have no way of excluding men. So an association set up for lesbians has to include men with a GRC.

Labour make statements about "safe spaces" but they are always completely vague on the detail. They never say HOW they will defend those spaces. That is because defending the spaces relies on the definition of sex in the EA meaning birth sex and they won't want to take on that particular battle because they know that the trans world will melt down and scream about genocide from the rooftops.

https://deliverypdf.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=983074096009080098016078015110007073019078004010056064085119115127006100102096070031052054028009107063023083094103013081014085119006064001081073064100024107094011068066000066013028121025126108020005098069116075067003002101006107125000088097004009122123&EXT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE

See my comment upthread about complexity!

I don't think that they will attempt to introduce self-ID. But they will make it so easy to get a GRC it will be one baby step away from self-ID. They have said they will still require a diagnosis but presumably this will be as simple as going to a doctor and announcing you are dysphoric and believe you are trans. There is no test for trans it comes down 100% to patient self-reporting. As things currently stand we know that having a GRC confers extra rights on men to be treated as women. Until they sort that out either via the SC FWS appeal or via legislation confirming that sex in the EA = birth sex then any change to the GRA is bad for women.

ArabellaScott · Today 13:17

It's local councils who control and therefore have closed the loos. Nothing to do with the Tories, at least not where I am.

It is, in a roundabout way, as the Government has cut council spending severely and told them to get rid of unnecessary services. As it's mostly Labour councils suffering, the Tories say, "See! They can't even manage a council budget, how can you trust them as a government?"

People might be encouraged to trust Annaliese Dodds more if she was less Jesuitical in tone.

A pp claimed that posting on here requires that "regular posters recognise you as "one of them" and 2) you're not saying anything controversial".

Women on here have had many years of identifying posters spouting nonsense. When posters claim to work with children in schools, state they're education consultants, experts in midwifery or safeguarding, share the mad Sisters Uncut mantra about abolishing the prisons & the police, reframe criticism of some schools failing to adhere to their legal requirement to be politically neutral as an aspect of "fascist thinking" and more, posters on here who are "experts" and qualified or have thought about these issues in detail will engage in critical thinking & respond. As has happened on this thread.

As Mumsnet repeatedly warn us, it is not possible to know that people on here are who they say they are on here. All we can do is evaluate the ideas expressed & respond. Posting countless posts on a thread that then fall apart when exposed to critical analysis is not being "excluded" by those pointing out flaws.

You know what they've said, we've discussed it before. But for the lurkers:

"We need to recognise that sex and gender are different – as the Equality Act does. We will make sure that nothing in our modernised gender recognition process would override the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. Put simply, this means that there will always be places where it is reasonable for biological women only to have access. Labour will defend those spaces, providing legal clarity for the providers of single-sex services."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/24/labour-will-lead-on-reform-of-transgender-rights-and-we-wont-take-lectures-from-the-divisive-tories

That is the official Labour policy. You can choose not to believe them. Equally I can choose to vote based on what parties say, rather than speculation about what I think they mean.

I'm not responding on this again because we've been round the loop too many times so neither of us will get anything new from the conversation.

life Yes. I don't agree on that point. That is an opinion of a person though, not the government.
I'm more concerned about people like Sir Paul Marshal spunking vast amounts of money on loss making media to spread far right stories into the mainstream. And, as I've said repeatedly, the increasingly fascist approach of the Conservative government. I mean fascist in an academic sense, not as a solution.

Both those things are far more interesting than picking holes in a difference of opinion with a poster who's posting their thoughts in good faith. They are entitled to their view and entitled to vote wherever they want to express that view.

'Not going along with this pronoun bollocks' is what people have been doing for millennia, up until a decade or so ago. And we've managed fine.

So how does that help single sex spaces like women's refuges, when they can include women and males who identify as woman gender?

Has Labour said it will exclude women gender people? Is it really going to exclude those who have the legal sex of woman whilst being born male through the GRC?

How is that any different from self ID in practice?

And I don't need you to come back with 'but the Tories', I'm not a Tory voter. I want to know how Labour intends to stop places like women's refuges from being mixed sex in practice? Because at the moment I don't believe they can or have any intention to.

"Moderate, nuanced views" are not what is being expressed by GC Ultras (by which I mean people who refuse to use pronouns in any circumstances and insist on referring to trans people as their birth sex at all times). "Absolutist views" are what GC Ultras are insisting on, and at the root of the "I'm voting Conservative, at least they know what a woman is" nonsense.

I couldn't give two hoots what a person chooses to call themselves. The reason I now have a problem with preferred pronouns is because I can see the harm done to women by going along with lies about a persons sex. It all leads to the same ends, the destruction of women's right to single sex spaces and harm to children who are led to believe that they can be the opposite sex. It all starts with pronouns.

We've got a poster upthread who thinks women should be 'educated' 'punished' if they refuse to use a person's preferred pronouns.

Do you not see how Orwellian that is?

Labour have specifically said they are not introducing self ID, as you know. There is not much more to be said that do you believe them or not? If you don't believe them, there is nothing they could do or say to make you believe them.

In fact the goalposts will just move again, like the toilet debate as shown upthread.

Same with single sex wards, who is going to provide the staff for these? the land? the buildings? the additional med equipment? planning constraints.. even parking!
What?
Wards are already single sex; they've just started allowing men to identify into the women's. No need to build anything, they already exist.

I’m not sure you have grasped the concept of whataboutery. GC women are not adverse to discussing the issues that you raise in your post. I imagine most will have lots of points of agreement with what you have said about funding and DV and rape stats and public toilets. But why not start a thread to discuss it rather than derailing one that is about an entirely different topic? If you aren’t dismissing concerns about free speech and self ID why not join in that discussion? Do you think that a Labour Government will push to restrict the speech of women who want to discuss their disadvantages in terms of their sex? Do you think Labour will move towards a self ID model of gender recognition? Can you think of a way in which DV provision might be affected by restrictions on freedom of speech? Did you follow the recent case in Edinburgh RCC where there are clear issues arising from the suppression of women being able to use clear sex based language?

Good lord RTB you are really on the party line aren't you.

All parties have had an issue with not being inclusive of ordinary people with moderate, nuanced views. Instead we are stuck with a party who have a problem acknowledging racism, a party who have a problem with anti semitism and parties with a problem identified how we reproduce as humans cos not one of them can tell the fucking truth

The Conservatives have a problem with racism, not a problem with acknowledging racism. What Anderson/Braverman/Truss etc have said this week is a lot more blatantly racist than the antisemitic racism that gets people kicked out of Labour.

"Moderate, nuanced views" are not what is being expressed by GC Ultras (by which I mean people who refuse to use pronouns in any circumstances and insist on referring to trans people as their birth sex at all times). "Absolutist views" are what GC Ultras are insisting on, and at the root of the "I'm voting Conservative, at least they know what a woman is" nonsense.

No they haven't.
They are going to make it less bureaucratic, not a lower bar to being granted. The Conservatives are also doing that.

They don't want to see the EA undermined but that isn't to do with trans rights and really all feminists should be worried about the EA being undermined as it protects us legally.

That's a whole other quite complex argument tbh

Not all GC posters feel like that Alexandra I'm glad you are posting on here.

It can be reasoned as long as 1) regular posters recognise you as "one of them" and 2) you're not saying anything controversial

Otherwise its not reasoned at all, just variations on a theme of "you aren't welcome here"

Apologies - assumed "at least not where I am" meant you didn't have a Tory council. It's probably still the case that Central Govt funding cuts have affected the amounts available in Scotland too though?

I'm in Scotland. It's an SNP/Green coalition that has most of the control over LA funding, including Humza's attempted freeze on council tax.

It has everything to do with the Tories because it's the Govt that have slashed funding to councils leaving the councils with barely enough cash to do the absolute minimum (schools etc) meaning there's none left for leisure centres, libraries, public loos etc.
Edit to add: That's why it's a bit rich when the self same Govt criticise the councils for not doing stuff.

@Ofcourseshecan · Today 13:29

So sorry, I did mean to quote another post. I tried to correct it here.

ScrollingLeaves · Today 10:13

That was in reply to this post:

PP82 · Yesterday 14:28

Hilary Cass has been 'captured' by you lot.

Children should be free to socially transition at school without their parents knowledge. It should be a place where they can explore their identities without parental interference

My response is:

Do you really think children grow up in a vacuum that means that, so long as their parents do not interfere with them, they will remain uninterfered with?

I don’t know who said what to you.

For my part, I have not ‘had a go’ at you, in the sense that might imply a personal attack, for your saying that people arguing on the subject of sex based rights and gender are only worried about toilets. I know you are wrong and pointed it out.

There are thousands of posts on this board going back several years, with painstaking, backed-up responses by many thoughtful people, about women’s great concerns related to the effects of transactivism and gender legislation or interpretations of it, in schools, the NHS, in the police, in the judiciary, in the news media including the BBC, in language, in sports - and ultimately in women’s and children’s lives.

And in addition, and not least by any means, a grave concern about the authoritarian almost fascistic control over public organisations and public discourse that has crept in supposedly in the name of diversity and equality as it is related to gender.

So if you do think the only point of concern about gender is related to toilets then perhaps you have not been reading the gender related threads about other aspects, regardless of whether or not you have personally been posting on them.

As for the abysmal state we are left with after the conservative government and all that they have done wrong - just because some women here do not believe that a future PM who is so clueless and insensitive to the implications as to bring in self-ID, a future PM who wants to plough on with the present tra trajectory, a future PM whose party shuts up its very own women over their ‘gender ideology’ concerns as though they were guilty of a heinous crime is going to bring about magical transformations in all other aspects where people are being failed - it does not mean these women are not also worried about those other aspects where people are being failed.

We are between the devil and the deep blue sea probably.