Legal self-id - what are the problems?

[SarahAr]

Legal self-id - what are the problems?

Assuming that the government goes ahead with legal self-id in-line with its announcement that it only intends to change the Gender Recognition Act to simplify the process and demedicalise it, but it does not intend to change the Equality Act.

And also assuming the legislation is no more permissive than the legislation in Ireland, which requires a statutory declaration stating that the individual intends to live as a women for the rest of her life. This is a safe assumption given the far right government in power today.

What are the problems with legal self-id? More specifically how does it help predators to prey on women and how does it impact women's rights?

This is not intended as a goady post - I genuinely cannot see the problems.

And indeed not just cancer but other diseases too - was typing before formulating my thoughts entirely. Totally exhausting day with the kids...

Fairenuff

In the context of a predator, someone who makes a declaration that they intend to live as a woman until they die, when they actually intend to live as "blatantly male" makes a false declaration.

In the context of a predator, someone who makes a declaration that they intend to live as a woman until they die, when they actually intend to live as "blatantly male" makes a false declaration.

How do you 'live as a woman'? As far as I know, there is no legal definition for this.

Self ID has become a bit of a sign post for the whole push for gender identity replacing biological sex.

By eliminating sex, gender makes the word female meaningless as it applies to males and females. That is a big fundamental.

This is the chasm. Trying to pick off all the concerns one by one is missing this underlying fundamental.

The drive to do this is from cross dressing men and this has been going on for decades.

If they can get rid of any need for a dysphoria diagnosis, AGP is legally female, they can go anywhere, do anything, and it's all fine.

They are not interested in you SarahAR.

It is happening already, MPs are being softened up by cross dressers - see Phil Bunce, a heterosexual man who is now the 2018 LGBT person of the year for his fetish, chatting away in Parliament in a wig and with fake breasts down his dress, and with Stonewall telling everyone he really is a woman, once or twice a week.

It is deliberate - see this paper written by Whittle, it's a massive sleight of hand, a confidence trick, a wool over the eyes job.

We have been lied to and manipulated. It stinks. We are not happy.

socresonline.org.uk/12/1/whittle.html

SarahAr you do realise that men with "blatantly male" bodies will be able to self id as women and use women's facilities don't you?

You really, really dont get it.
The GRA has gatekeeping and self ID doesnt.

You think that you can phone the police, say a man who identifies as a woman is causing a problem, and they'll attend.
They wont touch that call with a ten foot bargepole for fear of being sued.
They'll say the same thing they have said to women living with DV for decades; until he harms you, we cant do anything.

Who do they make the declaration to, and how do you know if they made it? Will your changing room attendant at Next be able to phone up a register to check Whether Alex Smith has declared him/herself to be a woman. Will all women have to declare their status as well, and also men?

@SarahAr

Today if someone who is "blatantly male" is in a female space (e.g. a changing room) you call the police. The offender is arrested for voyeurism and/or exposure.In a world of legal self-id the same happens. The only difference is they are also arrested for making a false statutory declaration - and could have a further 2 years added to their existing sentence. (The maximum sentences for voyeurism and exposure is 2 years for each offence)

You missed the bit where the woman making the complaint is accused of a 'hate crime' by being 'transphobic' and is hauled in for questioning by the police. Have you seen what happened to @therealposieparker and Linda Bellos?

Picassospaintbrush
Absolutely spot on. I wish everyone would understand this. This is the problem. It has very little to do with transsexual people, as many of them are beginning to realise.

If your 11 year old daughter sees and adult penis in the changing room how does she know whether the person is a) a self id transwomen or b) a flasher?

@sarahar I'm a big fan of crime being recorded by biological sex and reported as such after conviction. Trans women are overrepresented amongst imprisoned sex offenders and this is partly because trans offenders of both sexes continue to display the violence patterns of their birth sex even after transition. In order to understand why males are sexually violent, we have to be able to name and identify male violence, and we can't do that when some of the violent males are being logged as violent females (which they aren't, trans women are biologically male). It's also of vital importance that female prisoners, many of whom are already sexual violence victims, are kept safe from sexual victimisation by trans-identifying male sex offenders who could request transfer to the female prison estate. Safe prison accommodation for trans women should be within the male prison estate or in separate units and should not be created by putting female prisoners at risk.

Picasso this is why I asked about what they teach for GCSE human biology.

Today if someone who is "blatantly male" is in a female space (e.g. a changing room) you call the police. The offender is arrested for voyeurism and/or exposure.

Not true.
There's no law stopping any bloke using a women's changing room or loo.

There are laws preventing voyeurism or whatever but obviously they need access to commit those crimes in the first place.
We stop these crimes being comitted by saying "excuse moi this is pour les femmes only" and we expect them to leave.

If you can't say this then you just have to
risk it, then call the police after something has happened, by which time you have no evidence anyway, you get laughed at by the police they say you shouldn't have worn such a short skirt and it's all a joke and it's all too late.

The problem is that in the limited number of cases where women and men need separate services/protections/rights/opportunities, they are needed because of unavoidable physical differences, not an abstract, subjective concept of identity.

Why provide any service for any group that can’t be clearly defined? Why recognise the consequences of having female biology if anyone can be female?

This isn’t just a legal change, it’s an endorsement of the idea that you can divide the world into feminine and masculine people, with no regard for real, tangible differences like the penalties that women pay for having periods or pregnancy.

The GRA doesn’t apply to sports, but schools and amateur groups are already under pressure to ignore sex and group according to gender.

We need to have an open discussion about why it is sometimes necessary to group people by sex, and how the needs of all parties can be met. That isn’t happening and instead there is a pretence that there are no competing needs because nothing needs to change as ‘trans women are women’.

In the context of a predator, someone who makes a declaration that they intend to live as a woman until they die, when they actually intend to live as "blatantly male" makes a false declaration.

How do you live in a ‘blatantly male’ way?

poster Opheliah

The owner of a female changing room or loo can eject a bloke using it.

Also you don't actually need to commit an offence of voyeurism - "[doing] an act which is more than preparatory to the commission of the offence with the intention of committing an offence" is itself a crime.

Also a man who goes into a women's public toilet could also be committing a public order offence.

Report the guy to the management and police and let them deal with him.

And you might as well stop there, not a single shiny shit is given.

Transgender advocates have been trying for years to take over Feminism the same way they took over the LGBT spaces and places.

Right now there is an obvious effort to make FWR all transgender issues all the time with these JAQing off threads. It is an opportune time since the data breach by a transgender advocate drove so many women out of FWR and off MN out of fear of what the transgender advocates would do to them.
I may be telling you what you already know. If so, I beg your pardon.

No one is going to eject 'men' from anywhere for fear of being accused of being transphobic.

Erasing sex classes in favour of 'gender identity' is misogynistic.

Petalflowers

Your legal gender has minimal bearing on whether you have a right to use a female changing room.

The starting point is that the owner of the changing room decides who can use it.

However, under the Equality Act, someone who intends to, is undergoing, or has undergone gender reassignment can bring a claim for discrimination on the grounds of gender reassignment. Although some people claim this only applies to individuals with GRCs, this seems to be a view that is not shared by EHRC or supported by case law. The claim is subject to exemptions and judicial interpretation.

So the owner of the changing room has to decide if the individual comes under the protected category of gender reassignment - and if there are ground to exclude them (e.g. a shared changing room and the individual would expose male genitals).

The Equality Act has been law for 8 years.

There is little point in the owner asking for a birth certificate, a GRC or a copy of the statutory declaration.

Sex not gender.
A penis is a male organ. Someone who has a penis has no business in a woman's space.

You have made yourself clear SarahAr.

SarahAr

You are not listening. You are not interested in our responses. Goodnight.

poster VaggieMight

As previous posters have stated, what if the bloke says to the police that he identifies as a woman?

Why would that make any difference? How the bloke identifies has not bearing on whether or not an offence has been committed. I would expect the police to laugh their heads off.

It is possible for a man to commit an offence of voyeurism in a male changing room. See the case of Basset www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2008/1174.html. He was convicted at first instance, but got off on appeal on the grounds that viewing a male chest was not covered by the offence.