Please do Scottish self-id consultation (even if not Scottish)

[okMaybeIAmATERF]

Here's the URL: please do the consultation. (I think this has been posted before, but it bears repeating.)
consult.gov.scot/family-law/review-of-the-gender-recognition-act-2004/
To note:

1. At the end, you will be asked whether you are resident in Scotland, the rest of the UK, or elsewhere - i.e. you don't have to be in Scotland, though obviously it's more important to be heard if you are.
2. You will also be asked whether you want your response published with your name, without your name, or not at all - if that makes a difference to how you write your answers, it might be helpful to know this up front. Closes on March 1st, but don't wait till then!

Done. it's helpful for getting thoughts in order.

But I have to say the consultation is one whole cool-aid soaked nightmare. Did Stonewall write it for them?

A particular highlight of that consultation nfor me was the impact assessment of the impact on women

The one year/two year thing is only if parties agree on the financial and children issues after the required separation. If you don’t agree on these, then you cannot divorce without going through a lengthy court process.

Is this the same for GRC as a cause for divorce? I think it must be - if dad gets a GRC and wants to be ‘mum’ and the child wants to stay with actual mum, then the couple would have to sort that out before divorce would be granted, for example.

Bump

YY ItsAll, the equality impact assessment was shockingly bad! There's guidance here on what they're supposed to be doing.

Done.

Reluctant to start posting on this issue but The Christian Institute are campaigning against this as well and will be producing guidance on some ways of respoding to the consultation for those on their mailing list. Now, you may disagree with many things they say about some things, I am not entering into a discussion about that. However, they are very much for free speech and the ability to say things which others disagree with, and have actually campaigned alongside some groups such as athiests and I think stonewall to keep free speech as a country where you are not allowed to disagree with people, including on the trasgender issue, is a scary one indeed, for Christians, athiests, and everyone except the prevailing ruling opinion. I am surprised to have found some people I totally agree with on this section as I would not count myself as a feminist (I didn't think!)

Done it. I also got a bit carried away with the caps about their INABILITY TO TELL SEX FROM GENDER!!! Agh!

horseymum Now, you may disagree with many things they say about some things, I am not entering into a discussion about that.

Nor me, let's be strategic

This consultation has been sent to loads of religious orgs and churches. I counted them up a while back and out of all the orgs specifically asked for a response around half are religious (mostly Christian).

Both Scottish and UK governments care far more about the views of the church than they do the views of women. There are religious exceptions in the GRA (CofE don't have to marry trans couples, ok to discriminate against transmen for priesthood, rabbis, imams etc). There are no proposals to mess with these at all.

There are no exceptions in the GRA that protect women's safety or wellbeing.

We do have exceptions that protect women but they are in the Equality Act. They are already weak and rarely used and it's getting harder to use them all the time because the onus is on the service provider to show that use of an exception is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim and increasingly, any legitimate concerns raised by women are immediately framed as transphobia.

There is no analysis in this consultation of how these proposals will interact with the equality act with regards to women. This is a shocking failure of their equality impact assessment.

So if you disagree with these proposals, please make your voice heard loudly through your church. They'll listen to you more than they will to us.

I'm sure we disagree profoundly on some aspects of trans if you're coming from a religious rather than a feminist viewpoint. We can debate that (or not) until the cows come home once this emergency is dealt with.

I think there is work being done on some GC guidance for this so if you are struggling there will be better options than using a religious template.

Sorry didn't mean that to be dismissive. I meant better options for those who are not religious obviously.

I'm a parish minister in one of the denominations which was sent the consultation document. I've been speaking about this in church over the past two Sundays - the first Sunday preaching in my own two churches, then last Sunday I happened to be leading in worship in two other churches. I've also shared the link to the Consultation along with the Sages factsheet and the Transgender Trend website to about 100 members of my own churches. Most people were unaware of this, and certainly of the extent of it, and the impact it's having on women's rights and the welfare of children.

My denomination are preparing guidance for congregations on welcoming transgender and gender non-conforming people in our churches. This came about as a motion at a national level, and I opposed it at the time, saying among other things that although we should always be welcoming, that this was a hugely complex issue - about which the majority of those voting knew very little - and that we should take time to learn more, particularly about the harms which might arise. The motion carried. The young woman who proposed it later said to me that I was wrong about biology being a material reality and gender a social construct and that it was actually the other way about.

I'm interested to know how my denomination at national level respond to the Consultation, and intend to try to find out who is preparing the response.

Meantime, I have people at a local level concerned and engaged.

The young woman who proposed it later said to me that I was wrong about biology being a material reality and gender a social construct and that it was actually the other way about.

How do you reason with people like this? Biological sex is an observable fact and every culture in the world observes it and creates social categories based on it. The fact that what the social categories require of the people in them varies is what tells us that that part is the social construct.

I'm trying to fill it out but have a question which doesn't stop me but is now bugging me. Where do non-binaries go to the toilet?

Wherever they like, I assume. Which of course is totes reasonable and not at all taking the piss.

(Sorry, had to do it.)

Done

IMO, to the toilet of their sex, or if they are uncomfortable with this then a gender neutral one (eg disabled)

Vegecook, Topshop Travis is a man some days and a 15 year old girl other days. On the days he's a girl he goes to the women's, obviously.

I presume on the days he's a man he goes to the men's, but who knows [baffled]

I've still not managed to finish it. It's making me so angry.

Bump for anyone who's not yet done this.

Attempt at extra content: I suggest it's a good idea to offer positive alternatives to the government's suggestions wherever possible. How do you think it can improve life for those who identify as trans, without harming women?

Bump. 26 days left to do this

@MarSeeAh I meant to come back to your post. I don't know how church organisation works but please do all you can to pass upwards the views of your church members and to make sure it's all documented.

this was a hugely complex issue - about which the majority of those voting knew very little

My main response to the consultation was that this is a hugely complex issue and I don't believe anybody has a handle on what's going on, not even those proposing legal changes. We're going through a period of extremely rapid, extreme change and it's therefore a very bad time to be making laws around it.

It might be good for someone to start a thread in philosophy/religion about this consultation for those who want to respond from a faith based position or through their place of worship.

Also, is there anything on the Scotsnet topic?

Not sure if this is better here or if it should be a new thread but anyway...

Help! I am at the non binary bit & utterly confused? Is this intersex or just random I dont feel like a man or a woman? Humans are binary I dont understand how we can suddenly have a whole new sex?

I mean i dont understand the questions i suppose

It's referring to gender identity, not sex. Non-binary means you don't identify as either/just a man/woman. So something in between, something different, a mixture of both, nothing at all etc etc. Does that make sense in the context you're looking at it?

Thank you AssassinatedBeauty that does help.

Although also more confused (generally by this whole parellel universe) as i dont "identify as a woman" i am just a human female

It helps if you think of gender identity as a belief system, similar to religion. It's based on feelings and belief, not biology. It's also not compulsory to believe in gender identity yourself, and to be gender critical instead. I don't identify with anything either. I am a woman, because I'm an adult human female, that's all. Nothing else.

I'm going through the consultation. What I have difficulty with is the lack of clarity how self id will effect the right to privacy of ones gender history in certain circumstances. Someone with a GRC under the current system can more reasonably expect their trans status kept private where there is an occupational requirement eg. women carers for women. Similarly if working in a church with extreme views on gender reassignment. Some will disagree with those as well, but they are disagreeing with the current law as set in 2004, not self id itself. How such exemptions would work under self id remains open to much more debate.

My other difficulty is with non binary people. Assuming an NB person retains the physical and hormonal characteristics of the gender assigned at birth, what use will hiding any sort of gender from their records do. It seems purely a matter of feelings and not fitting fully either gender role, which is fine but hardly worth legislating for imo.