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.

Rat, the person who was gay would have suffered discrimination because people thought a Sky fairy cared about sexual preferences. Things have moved on, because openly gay people have shown that they are just as boring as anybody else and honestly who wants to know what anybody else does in bed.

That has absolutely nothing to do with gender dysphoria, and in turn believing you are a man in a woman’s body has nothing to do with actually being a man. You can be really unhappy with your reproductive system, but you can’t become the opposite sex.

There is no overlap between that feeling of unhappiness and the experience of actually being the opposite sex. You can make changes that may make you happier, but you still can’t change sex.

Of course there should be laws to prevent discrimination, but any law needs to stop short at the point where it ceases to recognise reality, because it will be a bad law.

In this case a law cannot protect people who it can’t define.

I work in a hospital in a predominantly Muslim area.

Muslim women have to be examined by a woman HCP for religious reasons.

Under self ID, A male HCP, dressed in male clothes with his male penis tucked inside his male pants, can use his male hands to examine these women, and there’s not a thing they can do about it legally, because this male HCP says that he is a woman. (Obviously they can refuse and go home but they will have no recourse with the hospital)

It’s infringing women’s rights and I disagree with it wholeheartedly.

Many trans people face a difficult journey, why pretend that didn’t happen?

Because some of them want you to? And it makes no difference to you, so...

And it makes no difference to you, so...

You keep saying this and you keep missing the point that a group that can’t be defined can’t be given particular services or protections.

You can’t recognise why a particular group is suffering discrimination if you can’t explain who they are.

It is very easy to define women and but there is no overlap between women and transwomen that isn’t also a common quality shared by any other human.

There is no clear reason why a service offered to e.g. Philip Bunce shouldn’t be offered to any other man.

Re statistics. When transwomen without a GRC give their gender to people e.g. at work - they don't say hey my gender is male and I am transgender person - they say their gender is female. So for instance the gender pay gap statistics already include transwomen as female. Therefore, the GRA reforms won't change that.

So because people lie we shouldn't have any gatekeeping? Your moral compass is seriously out of whack.

In any other situation where a person thinks they are something which contradicts their material reality psychiatric assessment/intervention would, rightly, be expected.

This ^^

If it’s mostly irrelevant, then the big push for it seems odd.

Doesn't it just? Don't believe the gaslighting.

As Ally confirmed on another thread, a male with a GRC has the protected sex characteristic of being female, unlike a trans identified male without a GRC who has the protected sex characteristic of being male. The more males that have the protected sex characteristic of being "female" the more that will undermine the concept of women as a sex class facing sex based oppression and needing SEX based protections. Don't be fooled. This is exactly what transactivists want.

Rat you are sometimes one of the most sensible non-gender-critical people around here but

Because some of them want you to? And it makes no difference to you, so

Yes, no difference at all. Nothing to see here move along...

Bollocks. You can do better than that. ..

@ratrolypoly: until such time as it becomes an actual cringe [I'm guessing you meant "crime"] to tell someone to stop staring

It doesn't have to be a crime for me not to want to do it. The fear of male retaliatory violence will deter me from telling him to stop staring. The fear of voyeurism.and rape will deter me from using the facility.

I shouldn't have to tell a voyeur to stop staring in a changing room because he should not be there in the first place.

I shouldn't have to tell a voyeur to stop staring in a changing room because he should not be there in the first place.

This. With bells on and a fucking cherry on top.

the acceptance of being GNC will not stop transpeople being trans, and it will not help them be accepted as such. What would help? Actually accepting them as such.

I am all for accepting trans people as being trans.

I am opposed to the principle that changing pieces of paper means that someone can change sex.

I am happy to "treat someone as a woman/man", whatever that means, but not to believe that that person has changed sex.

I am happy to believe that they think they are "the wrong sex".

I just don't want laws made on the basis of feelz.

This characterisation of male behaviour into "completely fine" or "criminal" without any shades of grey between is not exactly honest is it?

"...there is no overlap between women and transwomen that isn’t also a common quality shared by any other human."

This! ^^

Nothing about this is honest.

You still have no answer for the case of the girl in the changing room who sees the naked body of a man beside her

This is possible today - a transwomen does not need a GRC to use a female changing room. I know of once instance of it happening in the US (where they have different laws). I don't know of any incidents in the UK in the 8 years since the Equality Act was enacted.

I am not saying this could never happen, but this seems an incredibly low risk versus straight up sexual assault (which is endemic).

Anyway in this scenario, the girl should call management.

If a man he can definitely be arrested and excluded from the changing room.

If a transwomen and she intended to cause distress and alarm, and it would be hard for her to argue that she didn't (unless a towel slipped or something), she could be arrested for the offence of exposure (up to 2 years in prison). She can also be excluded from the changing room using the sex based exceptions of the Equality Act.

ifuckinghatethedog: Obviously they can refuse and go home but they will have no recourse with the hospital

YY and will be deterred from making further appointments, might have to go to back of waiting list, treatment will be delayed. I can see women dying preventable deaths à la Jade Goody because they don't want to get a smear from a male.

*When people argue that a predatory man wouldn't want to live as a woman just to gain access to women's spaces - wouldn't self id mean he wouldn't have to genuinely live as a woman? He could gain access without having to tell his mates down the pub he's changing sex, he could just stroll in one day if he felt like it?

And how do women get him thrown out if he's not being violent or threatening. Its not a crime to stare at someone. So, even if a woman managed to get the police down how could they remove him if he has a right to be there because he has self identified as a woman that morning*

1. The predator does not need a GRC to access women's spaces. So changes to the GRA will have no bearing on this.

2. If he is not covered by the protected characteristic of gender reassignment he cannot bring a discrimination claim if he is excluded. If he is, he can still be excluded using the sex based exemptions in the EA.

3. It can be a crime to stare at someone in a changing room. I shared a case earlier where a man was convicted at first instance of voyeurism in the men's changing room although this was quashed on appeal on a technicality.

Why would a man be evicted from the changing rooms if he says he is a woman? Why would a trans woman be evicted from a changing room for changing? Wouldn't they be allowed to be there, penis out?

Under self ID, A male HCP, dressed in male clothes with his male penis tucked inside his male pants, can use his male hands to examine these women, and there’s not a thing they can do about it legally, because this male HCP says that he is a woman.

This is the case today under the current GRA and has been the case since 2004.

Also, I am not aware that you can choose the gender/sex of your surgeon. So the right to have a health care practitioner of the same gender/sex is already limited.

Sarah, do point me to the legal guidelines which say that TIMs need to cover their penises in female changing rooms?

This is the case today under the current GRA and has been the case since 2004.

What you are doing is making a case why we should tighten it up, not loosen it. carry on!

"you simply go about your changing room business as you usually would"

In an ideal world of course but it's not that simple. I have ptsd, officially diagnosed by more than one psychiatrist and am receiving treatment on the NHS for it. Male elements of anatomy especially when I'm taken by surprise cause me all sorts of issues. The owner of them doesn't have to be doing anything dubious so not being able to access safe spaces where there are no adam's apples, no penises, no clearly masculine hands or bodies limits my ability to live my life and I know I'm not alone. I cope day to day by not looking at the neck areas and hands of people who are obviously coded male but in a woman's changing room...woman's toilets...women's wards...I've always felt I could let my guard down. Not any more.

Why would a man be evicted from the changing rooms if he says he is a woman? Why would a trans woman be evicted from a changing room for changing? Wouldn't they be allowed to be there, penis out?

Firstly, they are likely to be committing the offence of exposure if they deliberately expose their genitals knowing that it is likely to cause other people distress or alarm.

Secondly, due to the impact on the other users they can be excluded from changing room under the exemptions of the Equality Act.

What management would continue to allow a man or transwomen to commit a crime or cause distress to a large number of other users of the facility.

Firstly, they are likely to be committing the offence of exposure if they deliberately expose their genitals knowing that it is likely to cause other people distress or alarm.

Erm, that's not what the Stonewall penned Swim England guidelines said. Women distressed or alarmed needed to be "educated".