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!

Theshitty broadly we don't disagree, although I would argue that this:

We need specific legislation to protect against harm which directly results from our biological differences.

...we already have this, don't we? The sex based exemptions in the Equalities Act, no? Those aren't being taken away. Those will still be there even if people can self-ID. Even a self-identified GRC-holding transperson will still be subject to those exemptions and exclusions as deemed necessary.

FYI I'm not hugely keen on self-ID, mostly because transpeople don't seem all that keen; although I don't claim to have any sort of contact with transpeople on any relevant scale.

DH had to jump through many hoops to have a vasectomy. Something that only affected him and me.

Signed. Thanks, OP.

I didn't deem it to be demeaning Elendon I'm not trans, I don't have a GRC, I haven't been demeaned by the process.

If self-ID wouldn't impact on any of the instances given where biological women might be at risk, why does it matter to you what the process is? Your post reads like you actively want the process to be arduous without any explanation as to why you might want that, except that you've had to go through a different arduous process yourself? It makes no sense to me.

I believe self-ID was proposed as the current system of obtaining a GRC is considered to be overly medicalised, demeaning and off-puttingly long, forcing transpeople to jump through degrading and ultimately meaningless hoops to simply achieve a GRC.

Yes, Rat - agreed that this is the ostensible reasoning. It's basically a slippery slope though.

The thing is, surely being asked to "prove" that you are making a considered and informed choice, over such a fundamental aspect of life, should be a rigorous process? If you want to live as a member of the opposite biological sex, then how else could it be other than medicalised - it's a medical issue. Dysphoria.

@RatRolyPoly why does self-ID help, is the opposite angle to your question, in that case? Why is there such a push for self-ID, if none of it affects anything anyway?

I've been thinking this. I know you've gone some way to answering Rat:

I believe self-ID was proposed as the current system of obtaining a GRC is considered to be overly medicalised, demeaning and off-puttingly long, forcing transpeople to jump through degrading and ultimately meaningless hoops to simply achieve a GRC. And that making that process less arduous should have no impact on anyone else because of the exemptions already provided for in the Equalities Act.

But (validation aside) how does even a GRC help? A certificate cannot stop discrimination. You can get a passport in whatever sex you wish with a letter from the doctor. No one is asking for GRCs at toilet doors.

RE. the EA exemptions, we have seen that they are not being upheld as organisations are deciding to 'get ahead' of the law.

So do you think that exemptions and exclusions which are often applied by groups of men - see sports committees, for example - are sufficient protection for women that we can allow the procedure that gives men access to women's spaces and sports to be watered down?

Signed (and bumpity bump).

In order for women to have an abortion - to have autonomy over what's happening to their own bodies and lives - we need 2 doctors to certify that "the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman."

The current GRC asks that:

you’re 18 or over
you’ve been diagnosed with gender dysphoria (discomfort with your birth gender) - this is also called gender identity disorder or transsexualism
you’ve lived in your acquired gender for at least 2 years
you intend to live in your acquired gender for the rest of your life

and you need to get 2 doctors to agree (as with abortion).

Why does it need to change? If women can't "self-certify" that they need an abortion, why can men "self-certify" that they're a woman?

The thing is, surely being asked to "prove" that you are making a considered and informed choice, over such a fundamental aspect of life, should be a rigorous process?

Yeah, on principal I totally agree. Not my place to police the trans community is it though, that's for them to decide what gatekeeping they think is reasonable. Saying that I would think it was reasonable for women to police if it affected us, but I just can't see that it does!

But (validation aside) how does even a GRC help? A certificate cannot stop discrimination. You can get a passport in whatever sex you wish with a letter from the doctor. No one is asking for GRCs at toilet doors.

The idea is that you don't have to "out" yourself in any circumstance when it would be nobody's business to know, I think. So you need a birth certificate to start a job; it's not a job where it matter if you're trans, why should you have to tell them? Why should they have a right to know and you have to give up your privacy and open yourself up to discrimination? No reason at all, that's why.

RE. the EA exemptions, we have seen that they are not being upheld as organisations are deciding to 'get ahead' of the law.

It's a problem that the exemptions aren't being used, and I think that people should be campaigning at those responsible for using them to protect women if they believe they're doing a bad job of it! The power is in their hands after all. I don't think it's a burden that should be placed on the transcommunity to protect women when our prisons, sports, refuges, hospitals etc. already all have the power to do so.

Another excellent post Truscum

Rat I dear, however, that the sex based elements of the equalities act will be watered down by self ID.If we are, for example, collecting data on the basis of self identified sex, how can we ensure that services are working properly for people, crimes are recorded accurately, employment is fairly accessed etc. In the case of employment, would it be possible to have a boardroom full of men, but recorded as 50/50 men and women because some people had self ID'd.
This is why I've signed the petition. I'd like to know that all of these issues had been properly looked at before any changes are made in an open, frank debate.
Unfortunately, the actions of trans activists seem to have made this extremely difficult so far.

Why does it need to change? If women can't "self-certify" that they need an abortion, why can men "self-certify" that they're a woman?

I don't know, it's a horrible double-standard. But I know that two wrong don't make a right. Again, not saying I think self-ID's a great idea.

Signed and shared on everything I’m a member of!

I don't know, it's a horrible double-standard. But I know that two wrong don't make a right. Again, not saying I think self-ID's a great idea

Which is exactly why it should be properly and openly debated.

This is why I've signed the petition. I'd like to know that all of these issues had been properly looked at before any changes are made in an open, frank debate.

Yeah, actually I have no problem with the petition or with debate. I am concerned though that most people signing it are doing so because they think they're one step closer to kicking transwomen out of sport of preventing them from raping women in prisons though... because sport won't change at all if self-ID comes in, and prisons will only change in-so-much as they will have to do more individual risk assessments.

Theshitty the data collection thing is interesting. The thing is we will always, always know how many GRCs have been issued. For the few stats that are recorded from a record of someone's sex (rather than someone filling in a form on which they could tick any box they wanted) we will always know - based on the number of GRCs - the potential margin for error. Given how few transpeople there are right now in 99.9999999% of current uses that difference they made would be negligable. If that ever stopped being the case and we were turning out a million GRCs a year, you know what? New legislation.

Also I am genuinely inviting suggestions from people as to what impact self-ID would potentially have. I really do want to hear what those are in case there really are any things that would change for women as a direct result of any changes to the GRC process.

@RatRolyPoly all good points. You're right in some respects. But it IS an erosion of women's rights that anyone can call themselves a woman without a medical opinion. I don't think that is debatable, to be honest.

And yet you can be called a transphobic, pearl-clutching, ignorant and dishonest person who wants to oppress others by just even attempting to debate the inconsistencies in the arguments.

This shouldn't be a case of whoever shouts the loudest. Language matters. You can't just say you're something you're not and that be enshrined in law.

that's for them to decide what gatekeeping they think is reasonable

I completely disagree for the very simple reason that they are not the only people affected by this process. It impacts widely on other members of society too through the redefinition of sex, impact on sex segregated spaces etc.

Signed

It's a problem that the exemptions aren't being used This is the direction we are travelling in.

The Women & Equalities Committee :

^We recommend that the Equality Act be amended so that the occupational requirements provision and / or the single-sex / separate services provision shall not apply in relation to discrimination against a person whose acquired gender has been recognised under the Gender Recognition Act 2004.
(Paragraph 132)^

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmwomeq/390/39002.htm

One of Stonewall's recommendations to the WESC:

A review of the Equality Act 2010 to include ‘gender identity’ rather than ‘gender reassignment’ as a protected characteristic and to remove exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces

www.stonewall.org.uk/women-and-equalities-select-committee-inquiry-transgender-equality

But it IS an erosion of women's rights that anyone can call themselves a woman without a medical opinion. I don't think that is debatable, to be honest.

I get the impression current GRC holders also agree with you, and actually yes, I do value being a woman. I do think it's something that shouldn't be handed out like sweeties to anyone who fancies it, but that - for me - is secondary to dignity for transpeople in obtaining their GRC. Absolutely repect anyone for whom it's a bigger deal though, I think that's totally valid.

And yet you can be called a transphobic, pearl-clutching, ignorant and dishonest person who wants to oppress others by just even attempting to debate the inconsistencies in the arguments.

Well I think the pearl-clutching refers to the usual catastophising on trans threads as to what will happen if self-ID comes in. People get shirty about it, probably, because actually those things aren't usually linked to self-ID, but simply to the existence of transpeople. Which I kind of get. But you're right, it's not helpful, because with a bit of debate we could all see where we're right or wrong and it wouldn't have to get to the point of accusations of pearl-clutching!

This shouldn't be a case of whoever shouts the loudest. Language matters. You can't just say you're something you're not and that be enshrined in law.

Well on that point I have to say it already is enshrined in law that you can be a legally recognised woman having been born a man. Personally I'm okay with that, but I don't think most people expect that to be repealed do they?

I completely disagree for the very simple reason that they are not the only people affected by this process. It impacts widely on other members of society too through the redefinition of sex, impact on sex segregated spaces etc.

But it doesn't stitch, does it? Sex segregated spaces are protected under the Equalities Act where there is a proportionate means to a legitimate aim. And also under the GRA where there are specific exemptions for things like sport, prisons and residential care settings.

I have to go and work now but, even though I do have concerns that you clearly don't share Rat, I've appreciated your engagement with the debate. Much better than most online convos I've had where I get called a 'transphobe' at the first hurdle.
Open debate - it's the way to go folks 👍

jellyfizz - We recommend that the Equality Act be amended so that the occupational requirements provision and / or the single-sex / separate services provision shall not apply in relation to discrimination against a person whose acquired gender has been recognised under the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

Yes, that's a terrible idea isn't it. From what I understand it's been rejected by the government though and they're only proposing moving forwards with seld-ID. I don't think we should get too ahead of ourselves with worry on that account.