What will labour do re: trans

[Singersong]

I've seen some really scary stuff with Keir starmer not knowing what a woman is and an article saying they class not "affirming" someone's gender identity as conversation therapy.

This topic is extremely important (if not the most) to me right now and I'm wondering if anyone knows what they plan to do? I also saw something about them disregarding much of what was in the Cass report.

Ha! Very true! I think Labour are trying to be extra slippery over this though. If their plan is to allow GPs to certify someone as trans then this will probably be self ID in all but name. Busy, overworked GPs will not have the time to really consider it in depth with patients. Nor will they want the inevitable tantrum if they say no. So they'll just sign the form. You might as well require people to fill in a form at the post office.

The manifesto says:

We will remove indignities for trans people who deserve recognition and acceptance, whilst retaining the need for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria from a specialist doctor.

By 'specialist Dr's they don't mean GP.

Who do they mean?

Someone who specialises in gender dysphoria.

Who is it though? Ie training and type of medical expertise?

Why don’t they just say specifically who they mean rather than the vague term

Ok, so in what way will their plan be different to the status quo? What are these "indignities" they're planning to remove?

Actually I've just realised that it doesn't really matter to me what the process for getting a GRC is. It's what that GRC gives a person access to that matters. That's what Labour need to clarify.

At the moment, you see a GP. They refer you to a Gender Dysphoria Clinic, where you are assessed. I believe the process takes a very long time. The clinic has a team of specialists trained in gender dysphoria.

What changes Labour will make to the current system, I don't know.

It’s bizarre we do all this. What a failing the GRA is to start with

We don’t issue certificates for other dysphoria type states

But for some reason men are legally female

It probably won't change from what it is now. The manifesto says that Labour will protect single sex exemptions.

You leaped to that from the OP that doesn't mention transwomen?

Labour are sitting too much on the fence on this issue for me. JKRs feedback in The Times has sealed it for me and I won't vote for Starmer.

What I would like to know (amongst other things!) is why, when we DON'T have self-ID, and when very few people have a GRC, so many organisations welcome transwomen in women's spaces, sports, etc. and dismiss women's concerns as bigotry, sometimes even leading to sacking or arrest.

Actually, would self-ID make things any worse?

The phrases "policy capture" and "institutional capture" answer your questions.

Do you think the OP meant something else?

It's trans ideology that bothers me. And transing the kids.

Yes but Labour see single sex exemptions as only applying in a limited set of circumstances like refuges and rape crisis centres.

If Jack the Ripper could convince a doctor he had gender dysphoria, which would be easy for anyone motivated to do so, Labour would say he has the right to use women's toilets and changing rooms.

The manifesto says:

Labour is proud of our equality act and the rights and protections it afford women, we will continue to support the implementation of its single sex exceptions.

Yes @Underthinker has it

Do you disagree? Where do you think will be single sex with Labour?

Point out to me where it says in the manifesto that exceptions only apply in limited cases, and I'll l have a discussion about it.

Labour have not provided this clarity that’s the issue, and has been since Dodds made a statement over year ago.

What are your expectations?

Which spaces do you think Labour will ensure are single sex

@cupcaske123
Yes and the exception cited in the EA as an example is a rape crisis centre if I remember correctly. And in interviews Starmer has only mentioned these less common (but very important) settings in relation to female only spaces.

So for more "everyday" settings like a communal gym changing rooms, the law isn't clear if being single sex here is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, the ambiguity means providers don't want to risk being sued so avoid single sex policies, and if push came to shove the incoming govt don't think such a situation should be female only.

Same here. They'd get both DH (Tory) and me (Green).

Labour is proud of our equality act and the rights and protections it afford women, we will continue to support the implementation of its single sex exceptions.

Labour said similar years ago, then soon after clarified that they were including some men when they talked about women.

There is no reason to trust their woolly, obfuscating words until/unless they can absolutely explain what they mean.

As it is I’m reading those words and assuming (probably correctly) that within their single sex exceptions they are meaning men with a GRC, with a plan to make it easier for men to get a GRC, and I’m assuming this purely on their past actions.

@WormBum
As it is I’m reading those words and assuming (probably correctly) that within their single sex exceptions they are meaning men with a GRC
I do think they are saying that men with a GRC can be excluded - theoretically, but that exclusion can only happen in limited situations.
It's a position that allows them to say they are protecting biological single sex spaces, while practically making most female facilities available to both sexes.