AIBU to think you should sign this petition to ask the government to consult with women about Self ID?

[MIngerDynasty]

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/214118

Your details remain private, I don't want to start yet another trans thread but I thnk we can all agree that there needs to be more discussion with the people affected by the changes in law!

Signed and shared. It's creeping up slowly...

"But we don't segregate on the basis of peoples thoughts."

Yy datun. My DH is a nice man - perhaps we can segregate into "nice men" and "not nice men" as to who is allowed where. I'm sure "nice men" aren't represented anyway near as prominently in crime figures. What could go wrong?

Great post @Datun.

This is the crux of it all for me:
If you make a law that allows this to happen, it will happen.

So any arguments around how there are already exceptions in the GRA, and trans women can already access 'safe' spaces

No one approves of negative discrimination. Of course it would be awful to deny a transwoman a job on the basis of their biological sex IF IT HAD NO RELEVANCE TO THE JOB. But if that transwoman wants to work in support services, or a caring role, then there are lots and lots and lots of jobs that would be available to them that are not in a rape refuge, or a girls' school, or a female-only ward in a hospital etc etc.

We all have limitations in life, and barriers to the things that in an ideal world we'd achieve. Choosing to live as the opposite gender to your biological sex is fine - I am all for choice and respect - but I just can't see any valid arguments for self-ID. For being able to say "I think I am a woman therefore I am." It flies in the face of logic and is an open door to eroding women's hard-fought rights.

signed

Bum. It shot passed 3333 whilst I was reading Twitter. I will have to wait for 4444 now 😁

Mum, my sister is driving home atm but I just sent her a message :)
(Outed to her if she read this!)

Ego sum femina qui sum ?

@NijagoNinja I think all the things you say are extremely valid concerns

I also suspect the media wouldn't get behind it. They don't want to be accused of being bigoted and most, apart from The Times possibly, don't care a jot about women.
So far, this is undeniably the situation. But I think the more awareness is raised, with sensible debate, the easier it gets for articles to be published.

It's the sort of issue that, sadly, most people don't feel brave enough to challenge publicly.
I'm not brave enough, yet. As I've said - I can talk on here, I will talk in person to people when I can clearly communicate my position, but on social media I cannot share as it would undoubtedly cause me employment issues.

There will be a "correct" position on this. Like with Brexit, people want to be on the acceptable side of the debate. I fear a lot of people would rather throw women under the bus than be accused of being bigoted.
This is the current situation - because not enough people have clearly heard the arguments that need to be made. Sensible arguments. The nodebate thing is silencing people. But as soon as those arguments can be raised in a rational way, and people can hear that it's NOT from a place of transphobia, but a place of protecting women's rights, then I hope the tide will turn.

Hi SuitedandBooted, let me start by saying I have absolutely no problem with this petition - debate is good! And if people have fears it is absolutely right that someone in an official capacity should address those.

I wanted to put my understanding across on some points you raised earlier though, just in case it clarifies anything:

Those of you who are "Meh" about this issue, I presume you are OK with;

Men on All Women's Short Lists
Let's take the example of the Labour Party; they have decide to allow transwomen on their all women short lists regardless of whether or not they have a Gender Recognition Certificate. So being able to get a GRC through self-ID won't make any difference.

Men accessing positive discrimination schemes aimed at women
If those schemes accept transwomen regardless of whether or not they have a GNC this situation will stay the same, as above. If they only accept women with a GNC, self-ID won't change that.

Men in women's prisons
Transwomen are already held in women's prisons by default, however all prisoners are assessed on the individual risk they pose to other prisoners. Any prisoner held in the women's estate - born male or female - can be held in the male estate if they are deemed to present sufficient risk. This wouldn't change if a prisoner held a GNC and had obtained it easily (or dishonestly) through self-ID. They would still be assessed on their risk.

Boys at girls schools
I'm pretty sure children aren't and won't be eligible to apply for a GNC, so self-ID wouldn't make a difference here.

Men on all-female hospital wards
There is already a policy to eliminate mixed sex accommodation in hospitals, except in exceptional circumstances. I assume they'd go by the sex on your medical records. Assuming that gets changed when you get a GRC (I don't actually know), I suppose people could self-ID fraudulently in order to be able to access women on hospital wards in the event that they find themselves ill enough to be admitted...

Men competing in women's sports
Transwomen already compete in women's sports. There is a clause that means even with a GRC the sports governing bodies can impose restrictions. Easily obtaining a GRC won't change those restrictions, or that one would have to satisfy them.

Its not just about changing rooms and bloody toilets.
Neither of which would be impacted by self-ID as neither require a birth certificate to enter.

Women deserve a say on any change to the law that is going to have far reaching consequences for all women and girls
Absolutely no problem with that - entirely reasonable. I'm glad carryondoctor asked if anyone has an ideas who would or should be consulted though, as I'm interested too.

Sorry for the long post, hope that helps!

@RatRolyPoly you see, I think that list (very clearly articulated, thank you) is not an argument in favour of Self ID, but rather an illustration of how far the tide has ALREADY turned against women's rights, and if the "general public" could see that, they would be outraged, and we'd have a chance to openly discuss these things and whether they are in fact "fair".

The Labour Party and sporting associations would be first on the list...

So being able to get a GRC through self-ID won't make any difference.

At the moment there is still room for a debate though around your points. I think most people don't actually understand that you don't need a GRC to apply for those positions and when the wider public understands they willl speak up. This is a very strange situation where the government seems to have got ahead of the general population on a social issue.

Also Jennifer James still has 25,000 pounds of crowdfunding money to challenge labour on women's shortlists.

This is pushing the window of acceptablility and additionally just redefining woman as just about anyone who fancies it. I prefer to know someone made some effort before they're given the legal definition of woman. So yes, I'm happy with the hoops being jumped.

you see, I think that list (very clearly articulated, thank you) is not an argument in favour of Self ID, but rather an illustration of how far the tide has ALREADY turned against women's rights, and if the "general public" could see that, they would be outraged, and we'd have a chance to openly discuss these things and whether they are in fact "fair"

Yes and once we've given this up there's no going back. Because legally, YOU ARE that new gender.

I am hoping there will be some legal cases happening to take some of this on, but there will be no point if all you need for GRC is to sign a form.

I'm pretty sure children aren't and won't be eligible to apply for a GNC, so self-ID wouldn't make a difference here

Not yet, but this is on the TRA to do list.

Part of the self ID aims is to lower the age to 16, so you could be at school and legally change

Rat, that doesn't reassure me (I wish it did!) It makes me want to tighten up current protections TBH. Cultural shift to self ID will make it even more difficult to challenge males with insincere motivations in female spaces, regardless of what the current situation is.

I'm glad to see you posting on these topics, though. This is exactly the kind of dispassionate discussion that needs to take place. Openly and thoroughly, since it affects over half the population.

Re child self ID, I believe that this is a proposal in Scotland.

Well, that worked! Crawley now has a signatory!

@NoSquirrels yes, I cross-posted with your post, I see what you mean. I don't know though if hitching that concern about the societal changes to the issue of self-ID is the most effective way of addressing that though. Perhaps it is - I mean it's certainly getting the message out there, but I wonder if conflating the two is perhaps casting a shadow over the cause?

I wonder if a fair bit of the visceral reaction this sometimes elicits is one of "why wouldn't you want things to be easier for transpeople when it doesn't affect you at all?"

The response is usually, "you don't understand, it does affect women", but sometimes I think actually those people do understand self-ID, they just don't realise you're talking about the societal shift to accepting self-declaration of gender completely aside from getting a GRC!

For example the first thing I did when someone told me I didn't understand self-ID was to Google it. I got all the info about the GNC process and it seemed pretty patent to me it didn't affect an awful lot. It took me a while to untangle what it was that people were actually worried about.

Oh Scotland, hmm. Have you read the Scottish consultaion Roly?

It very well explains why I am not prepared to give up any ground.

I want actual transexuals to be allowed a GRC. Though I'd prefer they have to have surgery before being issued one and I I also wish they wouldn't alter birth certificates as you can't change history and it should be necessary for statistical reasons to understand health /crime statistics for trans people. In order to give it to the people who actually need one you have to jump the hoops I'm afraid. If in 10 years time every transvestite now has a GRC it's going to make life significantly worse for women and transexuals.

Don't think it's my sister, she hasn't read the message yet

Wrong thread

I prefer to know someone made some effort before they're given the legal definition of woman. So yes, I'm happy with the hoops being jumped.

I agree with this, as do most GRC holders I think! It means something to be a woman, either by birth or through what transwomen have been through to get there. I don't know if the hoops to get a GRC are reasonable or the "right" hoops, but I'm all up for there being some.

Oh Scotland, hmm. Have you read the Scottish consultaion Roly?
Yes, I filled it in! Bloody awful wording so I can understand why it might not fill anyone with confidence...

I also wish they wouldn't alter birth certificates

I think this is only done so they don't have to "out" themselves to people (e.g. employers) who ask to see their birth certificate. I don't think the birth record is gone back through and changed; it isn't about erasing history. Simply allowing that person to move forward completely in their new gender.

Let's take the example of the Labour Party; they have decide to allow transwomen on their all women short lists regardless of whether or not they have a Gender Recognition Certificate. So being able to get a GRC through self-ID won't make any difference.

Right. So a major political party acting illegally is just a-ok.

Sigh.