Sarah Phillimore and Robin Moira White interviewed by Andrew Doyle

Just checking in to see if I have got this clear...

There are men that say they are men. And men that say they are women. But some of the men that say they are women say that some of the men that say they are women are not really men that say they are women but actually men that should say they are men.

Yes??

It doesn't really matter what age, though. As it is all anti reality and anti science as no one ever changes sex. You may be being deleted for correctly sexing a person; or letting your post stand only if you lie and go along with a person's pretend (falsified).

So, if you don't go along with a fabrication and tell the truth, you get complained about. If you collude in what is an anti reality lie, your lie is allowed to remain. Funny, isn't it? 'Pravda' being an old joke on thought control to peddle in lies.

Robin suggests the views of Bryson/Graham's wife might hold the key to whether or not B/G's trans status is genuine.

Do other wives/ex wives get to decide re their husbands/ex husbands too? Could Robin's?

I wonder what the process can be for deciding who is faking a trans identity and who is misgendering?

I think one of mine was about the age from which some tw claim to have known they wanted to be women and how the recollections can vary. With, admittedly, a bit of drive by misgendering.

Sorry MN.

I checked other poster's as well, From memory, It was interesting.

I'm sorry to see your posts have been deleted Boiledbeetle but they will have been widely read and I'm quite sure everyone who saw them will draw their own conclusions.

I noticed i and others had had some posts deleted so had to go back to the start and read through everything again to see who and which posts got deleted and likely which posts from memory they were likely to be.

It was illuminating.

Incidentally,@Spero I Iove your user name. Great mix of initials and appropriate Latin!

I agree nils, I remember the discussions well.

I remember the eventual flounces here when we all just continued to say no, too.

I think MNetters saw this a long time ago in conversations with MNetter TW such as Debbie Hayton.

That male people who have undergone extensive surgery, some of whom still prefer to name themselves as Transsexual despite the harassment from the TQ+ political lobby not to, would quite like to help women draw a line that includes them, but excludes other male people.

Which still continues to regard female people's needs and spaces, and rights, and voices and inclusion and access needs as something secondary and subordinate to the primary right of male people to make use of them as male people feel necessary. It's a politer kind of sexism, but as Datun has so wisely said before now, it is merely males talking amongst themselves about where exactly to place the boot on women's necks.

Definitely Helle I think they are pissed that the new pretenders are all fucking things up, but because of the say your trans you are shit they now have nowhere to go. And saying oh no but he's not one of us just shows it just a gentleman's club after all and if your face didn't fit you didn't get in.

I wonder if White and Tatchell realise that they, as people regularly associated with Stonewall, have really fucked up that 'accept trans people who say they are trans' mantra that Stonewall pushed.

Or is this the new mantra? And that White and others were early adopters. They were the front guard setting the scene.

'Only trans people approved by the trans community are trans people'.

That seems more the truth I feel.

I wonder how one male feels knowing that they have verbally supported other males having access to vulnerable women.

It really is abhorrent when you strip all this fuckwittery bare and look at the facts.

The comparator should have always been male compared to males.

The fact now that it seems transitioned males are gatekeeping 'trans' status is a sure sign the definition was flawed and fucked up to begin with.

Sorry, to back track now from 'if you say you are trans you are trans' to 'not that person, they are not' is surely just pointing out the lie in the first place.

There is no going back.

Also wanted to say thank you @spero

The Lady Haldane ruling is atrocious. How could she do that?

@turbonerd She's a judge and the legal wording needs to be tightened up til its bullet proof and leakproof. It was allowed to be ambguous. In a way it's a good thing her ruling happened when it did and that's why FWS brought the case - made it clear that a GRC does affect who's a woman under the Equalities Act although GRR supporters claim it doesn't so what are women making a fuss about? Must be nasty irrational transphobia. Now we know it does, which should be another reason for the UK govt to intervene though I'm not sure they all got the memo yet. The Haldane judgment is very recent and was in a Scottish court though it will affect the whole UK.

And now there's a petition to clarify the Equalities Act. Though the UK govt's recent response to the petition seems not to have got the message!

Just wanted to pipe up with THANK YOU Spero!

I am not in the UK, but the news here usually follow International news about country-leaders in a spot of bother.
Would you believe it: on this case not a peep. Not a hint at Nic’s debacle.
Zilch, zero, nothing.

But some is filtering through, and the few people I have spoken to are very happy for this to blow up.

The Lady Haldane ruling is atrocious. How could she do that?

People's kinks or clothes and hair expression isn't really important in the greater scheme of things. So no need for any gender tick box on any documentation.

It's all nonsense.

I just really, really object to the falsification of legal documents and there must surely be a workable way around it, so trans people can live their life as the rest of us can.

How about they just change their name, we could add an extra gender identity marker on documents for those who want one. Sex doesn't change.

Men need to accept that some men dress "as women" and might have breasts or no penis but should still be safe in men's areas.

Problem solved.

I did change my name by deed poll, @OttersMayHaveShiftedInTransit, so I have that document but it says nothing about my sex, of course. I'm just musing from a lay person's perspective on what system we could create that would satisfy whatever requirements there may be.

We often hear from the trans brigade about the importance of birth certificates but, as I say above, mine is useless now really, and many are in the same position. Once you've got your passport in whatever name, which should need proof of course, then you just renew it without needing the proof again. For trans there's the change of sex marker to factor in.

I just really, really object to the falsification of legal documents and there must surely be a workable way around it, so trans people can live their life as the rest of us can.

Thank you for taking the time to answer, what an uphill battle this will be.

It makes me so angry that the Equality Act has been able to be interpreted in this way.

It is clear, at least to me, that those who drafted this legislation would not have intended Sex as a protected characteristic to include both biological sexes on the basis of a self identification process! It seems that those who identify as the opposite sex have 2 potential protected characteristics under the act, that of sex and that of gender reassignment (which we know is broadly interpreted.)

How can normal women help other than writing to our MPs?

Thank you again. The work you do is so important.

I've nothing to add to the conversation except to say that this thread has been a thing of beauty.

I feel like I've just watched a cage being opened.

Robin, thank you.

If you can do it, so can we. I'm deeply grateful. Go well.

DH has a deed poll document that enables him to get documents in his current name which is different to the name on his Birth Certificate (change of surname). Changing name is a fairly straightforward process that doesn't require a GRC - in fact it seems that you need to get your new name on documentation as part of the qualifying process for a GRC.

I definitely agree about repealing the GRA but haven't ever thought much beyond that. I have got lost in the maze of GRCs - what, if anything, they are actually needed for. Are the needed to get a passport in the new name? I'm unclear about all this.

For various reasons, I have trouble with my name. My birth certificate is no use to me as it's in a different name and I'm sure many married women here will now have a different surname from their birth name. They will, I imagine, have a marriage certificate in that case, which would support and prove the name change.

In the past, I have had to have documents notarised, apostilled (I think that's right) and another thing done to them (what was that called???), then sworn an oath to a Notary Public. It's made me wonder why trans people can't do something like that instead of creating this appalling system of falsifying a legal document.

How much faith am I supposed to have in an authority which falsifies legal documents?

It is going to be very difficult to restore 'sex' to its proper place and meaning and I think now cannot be achieved without new legislation. The Lady Haldane judgment confirmed what I had always thought - that the GRA changes your legal sex, unless the exceptions apply. Those exceptions have now been muddled and obfuscated over decades leaving everyone very confused about when they are allowed to insist on single biological sex spaces or providers.

I suggest repeal the GRA and modify the Equality Act to make 'gender identity' no more than a protected belief. I.e. you are protected against harassment and discrimination but 'gender identity' cannot be an organising category in the way that sex is.

We will have to have some way of providing recognition of a 'legal sex' unless we leave the Council of Europe and the ECHR - the Goodwin judgment of 2002 was a recognition that the UK had failed to protect the rights of transexuals to be able to hide their birth sex on official documents etc.

So I would suggest a procedure to obtain a 'Certificate Changing Legal Sex' (remove all mentions to gender, its hopelessly poisoned now) which would enable a person to change a driving licence and passport. Birth certificates must remain unchanged but we could issue 'short form' birth certificates which didn't mention sex at all if people were upset by that.

Keep the gender dysporia diagnosis and 2 year reflection period - junk 'living as a woman' as no one knows what that means. That should hopefully weed out at least some of the malicious and the sexual predators.

Make sure that the EA sets out very clearly when biological sex trumps legal sex.

I have no idea if these proposals would work or be accepted by many/any. We should have been having these conversations since 2018 at the least. Hopefully we will start now.