Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Labour 'gender identity' & equality law

68 replies

Sittinonthefloor · 11/05/2017 11:24

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-trans-transgender-policy-equality-act-aggravated-offence-outdated-langauge-a7729666.html

OP posts:
WhereYouLeftIt · 11/05/2017 18:29

Of course we do Sonofabitch. But transmen cannot be used as a human shield for predatory males in the same way that a transwoman can. A transman will not take the gold in a men's sporting event, cheating a natal man out of the deserved rewards of years of training.

But since you raise the matter, I am very concerned that the media-saturated pornified environment that teenaged girls have to navigate these days means that referrals to the Tavistock Clinic for girls is about twice that of boys, whilst an Australian psychiatrist has treated girls who thought they wouldn't have been sexually abused if they had been male Sad. I'd far rather we fixed society to be fit to live in, than 'fix' children to survive the fuck-up our generation has created.

morningrunner · 11/05/2017 18:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

morningrunner · 11/05/2017 18:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Lancelottie · 11/05/2017 18:47

hate crimes against LGBT people

For something to be a hate crime, it first has to be a crime.

Simply whispering about a transboy in the girls' loos is not a crime.

Lancelottie · 11/05/2017 18:48

Transgirl, sorry. God this stuff confuses me. I prefer language to mean something, personally.

PencilsInSpace · 11/05/2017 20:52

morningrunner, it's incredibly difficult for services to prove they are excluding transwomen as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Toilets, changing rooms, even prisons apparently don't meet that test. DV and rape crisis orgs currently can meet the test but even women's aid are reviewing their policies in the wake of Miller's report. Women's orgs have to make a really good case to exclude transwomen from services and if they do, they have to try their hardest to make alternative provision (so diverting increasingly scarce resources from their core aim of helping women).

By changing the wording of the EA from 'gender reassignment' to 'gender identity', it's not only transwomen who 'live full time as women' (whatever TF that means) who need to be accommodated in women's spaces and services if at all possible, it's non-binary Steve who is Stephanie on Thursday afternoons. No thanks.

We don't know exactly what Labour's manifesto will say yet. This idea as far as I can tell is lifted straight from Miller's report. The other thing Miller recommends wrt the EA is to remove the single sex exemption where a transwoman has a GRC. I would not be at all surprised if Labour go for that too.

The current govt. has pledged to review the GRA to 'de-medicalise' the process of getting a GRC and I cannot imagine any party that is likely to get elected ditching that pledge. This is the self-declaration thing.

Changing one word of the EA might seem minor and not worth fighting but it is. It's one of three legal jigsaw pieces that, put together, spell the end of sex-based protections for women altogether.

With an election looming, it's the best time to write to your MP, and your candidates from other parties. Now is the time they are least complacent because they all want your vote. If you have written before and got a boilerplate response, now is the best time to write again.

PencilsInSpace · 11/05/2017 20:57

Everybody knows why hate crimes against women are not a thing.

It's because male violence against women is just normal and the system would be completely swamped if all incidents had to be recorded as hate crimes and treated seriously.

morningrunner · 11/05/2017 21:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

morningrunner · 11/05/2017 21:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PencilsInSpace · 11/05/2017 21:32

I don't believe I was 'piling in' or 'wailing' Hmm I was just pointing out what this proposed change would mean in practice and what it would do in combination with the other proposed changes - which will be pushed for in the near future.

None of the three changes to the law that are on the cards seem particularly huge in themselves, it's the way they combine. I am picking my battles wisely, I have picked three battles, as above.

If we decide to ignore this one to appear reasonable, it will bite us in the arse when we lose the single sex exemptions. If we ignore the single sex exemptions proposal, it will bite us in the arse when self identification is pushed through. We need to pay attention to the way various bits of legislation interact.

Having said that, this policy on its own is not good. It means a far wider pool of male people will be placed in women's prisons, female hospital wards etc. - anywhere that doesn't currently meet the test of 'proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim' which is most women's services and spaces, and it seems to be getting harder to meet that test all the time.

I find it increasingly difficult to give a shit about being labelled a transphobe. It has become a meaningless insult.

PencilsInSpace · 11/05/2017 22:09

We certainly won't win any culture wars by capitulating to what is now expected of us. Politeness and reasonableness will be our downfall. We have pretty much all been polite and reasonable for decades. Most of us started out with liberal pro-trans-rights views, but the goalposts have moved massively over the last 5-10 years.

If stating that a male person is not a woman is now a hate crime then fuck this shit because it has actual real life implications for lots of vulnerable women and girls, who are not themselves protected by hate crime legislation.

We will (eventually) win the 'culture war' by continuing to state facts in clear, simple language. This is not incompatible with having empathy for our fellow human beings, and the various struggles we all have to muddle through life.

GoatsFeet · 12/05/2017 08:45

It's because male violence against women is just normal and the system would be completely swamped if all incidents had to be recorded as hate crimes and treated seriously

Yup. It's astonishing how much most women accept as "normal" - I find I can't afford to think about it too much, day to day, because it just fills me with impotent rage. Dangerous knowledge.

flownthecoopkiwi · 12/05/2017 09:24

New Zealand had a trans MP years ago, the world didn't end.

SirVixofVixHall · 12/05/2017 09:31

Yes, I agree Goat. [rage]

SirVixofVixHall · 12/05/2017 09:33

That should have been Angry !!! Clearly we need a [rage] emoticon, sort of like the angry one , but maybe with flames emerging from the top of its head? Or a re mist surrounding it?

C13055 · 15/01/2018 10:04

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

MaidOfStars · 15/01/2018 10:58

Starting a survey with ‘What gender are you?’ in interesting....

makeourfuture · 15/01/2018 11:26

I'd far rather we fixed society to be fit to live in, than 'fix' children to survive the fuck-up our generation has created.

We have damnsure done this. If there is confusion in today's youth, who can blame them? We have made for them a world crammed full of hatred.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page