Stella Don't assume people who disagree with self-ID and other proposed changes aren't dysphoric. Personally, I find the idea that anyone is born feeling this way shows a lack of understanding of how gender dysphoria works. Even as someone diagnosed as a child, I can assure you I was not born feeling distressed by my body. That is just how my brain reacted to how gender was imposed on me. Some may be more predisposed to it, but all the information of dysphoria does not give much evidence we're born with it any more than people predisposed to PTSD are born with it.
Also, not everyone is a criminal, but the UK still has laws, the UK still requires checks for many jobs, the UK requires non-EU immigrants to have biometric ID to work in the UK. We do many things for the sake of potential criminals. Dysphoria does not mean that the risks to us or by us should not be considered, that's patronizing and puts many of us at risk.
Dalek In Ireland, which has self-ID, prisoners are still placed by their birth sex. The dangers to a dysphoric person does not outweigh the risks to the rest of the population. Having space for dysphoric prisoners would make far more sense and safeguards than just putting them in with the other sex, particularly seeing as the vast majority of dysphoric people do not get genital surgery. In fact, according to GIRES - a pro-self ID group - the vast majority (4/5ths) of dysphoric people never go through any form of medical treatment for it.
While I understand the concern for some trans women, I would like you to consider this - do you think trans men will be safer in a men's prisons? We all know they won't be but if we push people to be placed by a paperwork exercise (I've gotten a statutory declaration - I was in and out with someone I'd never seen before and never seen since for less than 10 minutes, dysphoric people deserve better than that) and have that alter where prisoners end up, that is what is being suggested should happen. Female dysphoric people in men's prisons. Neither identity or dysphoria is going to protect anyone and neither should it allow male dysphoric people to put female prisoners at greater risk. There are other solutions as have been made by other countries.
Leotine This isn't progressive, it's a mockery. This is all a red herring under the guise of really fake caring. Progressive would be putting more funding into therapies, into research, into supporting people being sex role non-conforming, to have better education on the human body so people know the benefits, risks and limitations of these treatments and better protections to prevent the abuse of the medications involved, so many things other than ignoring dysphoria is a serious medical condition that in no way is treated by altering paperwork.
We already have people buying hormones and blockers online with no medical oversight because people are pushing that it's progressive to just do it yourself, that dysphoria is just a matter of hormones even when every single paper on it shows that cross-sex hormones without therapy raises the risks of further mental health problems and suicide. That attitude is putting dysphoric lives at risk and I think anyone who thinks this proposal is based in a progressive attitude, that it's going to help any actual dysphoric people rather than people who already muscle in, that this in anyway is going to help us live fuller lives or prevent violence against us, that thinks those potential criminals are worth the risks, needs to remember that gender dysphoria is not treated by what a piece of paper says and for the vast majority of dysphoric people this will give no additional benefits over previous legislation.
It's not progressive, it's a smokescreen, and the conversation of enforcing the exceptions in the equality act and how the protection of sex - a protected class - works alongside GRC will still need to be worked out as there is nothing in the proposals that really touch any of it. That clarity is sorely needed.