Response from MP about GRA and Self-ID...

[HomeTerf]

...Except she entirely fails to mention Self-ID (which was emphatically the primary concern I raised in my letter to her)

My first reaction was that it was a thorough and diplomatic response, though disappointing in that she clearly doesn't see the problem. On going back to read it again (because I felt pretty irked by it) I feel like it's just bland Stepford-speak delivered with a patronising smile, with BIGOT write large between every line. Am I being overly sensitive??
Here it is... (sorry for length)

Thank you for taking the time to contact me recently regarding the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act.

As you are probably aware the Government are due to launch a consultation on the Gender Recognition Act looking at how to improve the recognition process and reduce the stigma faced by the trans community. This was expected in autumn 2017 however is still yet to happen.

I think it is important that women do speak out on this issue whether in support or objection. Although our gender is the same, we are diverse in our thoughts and opinions. I do understand the very valid concerns you raise and note that there are many women who share these concerns.

We live in a democratic society and women should feel able to voice their opinion without fear of bullied by those with opposing views.

The UK has made extraordinary progress on improving the rights of lesbian, gay and bisexual people in recent years. However, there are still gaps in trans people's legal rights and protections and it is my firm belief that no-one should be discriminated against because of their gender identity.

In January 2016, a report by the Women and Equalities Select Committee made several recommendations on transgender equality, including that the protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010 regarding trans people should be changed to 'gender identity'.

I am fully committed to equality for all and to protecting transgender people from discrimination. For the trans community in particular, I believe more needs to be done to ensure people feel as though the UK is a country in which identity is respected and supported.

I therefore believe that the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and Equality Act 2010 should be reformed to ensure that they protect trans people by changing the protected characteristic of 'gender assignment' to 'gender identity'. I would also like to see other outdated language such as 'transsexual' removed.

The Government have said that it will encourage women's refuges, women's rights charities and trans rights charities to respond to the consultation when it is launched. It is right that representations and evidence from all interested parties is taken into account and I hope that all views will be carefully considered as part of the consultation process.

Thank you once again for contacting me and for sharing your views. I can assure you I will continue to follow developments on these matters and bear in mind the points you raise, as previously stated they are valid. While I do not share the same view, I respect those that do and feel it is important that all our views are taken into account before any changes are implemented.

I am grateful to you for writing to me on this issue.

Any objective thoughts, and suggestions on whether (and how) to respond would be really appreciated.

Should perhaps have mentioned that she's Labour. Newly elected (with the narrowest of margins - fewer than 50 votes) in a traditionally Tory seat.

However, there are still gaps in trans people's legal rights and protections

Can you write back and ask specifically what these are?

Yes, good point Ova That was one of the things I was ranting about to OH when I read it. I'd like an answer to that.

Also I thought the point about the word 'transsexual' was interesting. I know from one of the trans posters here (apologies - can't remember who said it) that they actually prefer that term. It seemed a strange thing for this MP to be specifically keen to target.

Yes, that is what struck me too. What are the gaps in legal rights and protections for transpeople?

Also bring up the fact that she didn't address self ID.

How does she envisage trans rights aligning with women's rights? Esp when there is a clear confict (e.g. sex segregated space based on risk; health; medical needs)

That's a copy and paste form letter.

I'd write back and say 'Thank you for your letter but you haven't actually addressed any of my concerns. How precisely do you propose to deal with issues where the wishes of a male bodied person (who may or may not be a genuine transwoman) clash with the rights and needs of women? How precisely are you going to act to prevent predators from using these new regulations to access vulnerable people?'

The closest she gets to addressing self-ID is in this bit -
"I therefore believe that the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and Equality Act 2010 should be reformed to ensure that they protect trans people by changing the protected characteristic of 'gender assignment' to 'gender identity'."
Which I guess is basically saying that men can access women's spaces on impulse, using the 'gender identity' Get Out of Jail Free card. And obviously needs challenging. (Why does she believe that?)

Ereshkigal - is it? That makes me feel a lot more positive. I thought she might be a committed kool aid drinker, but if it's a cut and paste job I'm definitely going to keep on her case about it.

The point about transexual worries me a lot. To mention this specifically in a letter without addressing the implications and how they propose women will be protected from biological men misusing this id either from an MP who has:

• completely missed the implications for women
• doesn't care about the implications for women
• is too scared to speak up
• is going to benefit from those implications

The current GRA is based on a gentleman's agreement of allowing a few people who are either no longer penis owners or have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria - i.e. they really wish to change sex. It was allowed at the time for some specific reasons that no longer apply - a transexual MtoF at the time could not have married a woman once transitioned as same sex marriage was illegal. There is also a high bar there already in that you have to be pretty committed to legally changing your sex to either cut off your bits or convince someone of a medical diagnosis.

What is wrong with transexual? Surely the whole point of legal sex change is the desire to transform your body into a female one because you feel you were born the wrong sex? Who is the law change proposed for? How would self-ID protect women from men abusing it?

Essentially, what is the difference between self-Id and a law saying any man can simply declare himself female if he fancies it? How are they defining trans if not as transexual?

IWanna - yes - that's a great way into it. Thank you. I felt too ranty to know where to start.

Right. That's told me ALL I wanted to know.

It's a copy and paste form letter from a Labour MP confirming that they intend to amend EA2010 in addition to amending the GRA.

This has been my worry. This is what the Tories are now specifically saying they will not do.

Last straw for me. I think I will have to turn in Labour membership.

That's how I read it too, LangCleg. Policy has been decided internally and they just haven't publicly rolled it out yet.

And then after IWanna's intro give examples?

How precisely are you going to act to prevent predators from using these new regulations to access vulnerable people?...for example, Marie Dean has a doctor's diagnosis of gender dysphoria but is currently held in the male estate.

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/27/marie-dean-trans-prisoner-male-prison-hunger-strike

Dean was imprisoned after breaking into multiple houses (as Greg Dean Marie), setting up a camera, and masturbating into the underwear of the teenage girls who lived there. ("I'd like to borrow your underwear. They smell nice.")

www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/4390490.Cross_dressing_Burnley_and_Padiham_burglar_jailed_indefinitely/

How do you propose to deal with the conflicts of rights that will inevitably occur if self-identification has the force of law? How will you protect female prisoners from a dangerous biologically male sexual predator who wishes to access their spaces?

There are currently more than 100 self-identified transwomen in male prisons, almost half of whom have been convicted of sexual offences. If self-identification becomes law, how can we possibly safeguard the female prisoners who would be expected to sleep and shower and live with them in female prisons?

Policy has been decided internally and they just haven't publicly rolled it out yet.

Yep. Painful as it is, I think handing in membership won't be enough. I'm going to have to actively campaign against Labour. I can't quite believe it has come to this.

Wasn't you, or any of the rest of us, who forced that situation to happen.

To add: amending EA2010 is what will get Labour out of the AWS hole, in addition to making it actually illegal to run any services, including DV refuges, as single sex. This letter is a disaster.

Do you know something?

When I first talked to my 19 year old son about this, he was all "you're a terf, mum" about it and his reasoning was that the Conservative Party, the one reducing benefits for people with disabilities, the one demonising the poor, the one decimating public services would not give a shiny shit about the rights of such a small minority group.

Since then, Labour have jumped on this with fervour. There's almost a sense of "But we're the 'right on' party. We're the defenders of civil liberties!" And have jumped on to it full force.

Since then, the Tories have withdrawn from it and said, "hang on, we need to think about this and listen to women's concerns" where as Labour are full steam ahead, fingers in the ears and "la la la I can't hear you, meanie!" to anyone who questions it.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if this were just a tactic by the Tories to remove Labour from the running and destroying their credibility entirely.

Good Tory trap and Labour ran straight into it.

Labour without going to membership decided to remove the human rights of women is the biggest own goal ever! The Tory 2017 election campaign pales next to removing human rights for half the nation.

I'd write back and say 'Thank you for your letter but you haven't actually addressed any of my concerns. How precisely do you propose to deal with issues where the wishes of a male bodied person (who may or may not be a genuine transwoman) clash with the rights and needs of women? How precisely are you going to act to prevent predators from using these new regulations to access vulnerable people?'

I wanna has it absolutely. This is the line to take with MPs and anyone new to the debate.

There is nothing transphobic about I wanna's line of questioning. Or most 'TERF' concerns.

We are asking why politicians are proposing a law that means any man can say he's a woman. And without even being interested in or prepared to ask or answer when raised basic safeguarding questions. Let alone equality based. Let alone also remove sex based rights on the back of it.

I just got my response from a Labour MP and yes, they've definitely used the same template as yours, OP, but there are certain differences. A certain phrase that my MP has used makes me think he does realise the implications but isn't prepared to outright say it.

Although our gender is the same, we are diverse in our thoughts and opinions. I do understand the very valid concerns you raise and note that there are many women who share these concerns.

You why is she assuming you share a gender? You share a sex.

Is there a gender that means you ID as a woman because of biology only but none of the social expectations that goes with it?

Is there a gender that means you ID as a woman because of biology only but none of the social expectations that goes with it?

Yeah, feminist.

Thanks for your thoughts everyone, and the excellent advice on how to respond. I was really in two minds about going back to her again but I definitely will now, using all this as a guide (with the evidence Atilla suggests.)

Whenever accusations of transphobia are thrown about on these boards I always assume ignorance on behalf of the thrower, and I think this is actually no different, though the patronising tone initially had me fooled.

Yeah, feminist.

PostPreview

This may also interest you

Pregnancy: the things no-one tells you
Forget the...

11 best things about newborn babies all parents...
Yes, being at home with...

10 parenting tricks you'll wish you'd known...
Parenting is largely a...

When family don't like your baby name choice
"Choosing a name...

Hospital bag checklist: what to pack for...
Getting your labour bag...

Best short-haul holidays for babies and toddlers
Travelling with even the...Recommendations powered by plista
Back to top

That's interesting collidascope - are you going to respond again?