Government response to the petition...

[LazyTuesdayAfternoon]

I don't know if there's a thread about this already, sorry if I've missed it.

What do people make of the response?

It seems quite proportionate to me but, as always, I guess the devil will be in the detail...

The next area of social enlightenment bubbling through is trans rights. Why should the outcome be any different?

Because "trans rights" is the socially conservative movement, repressing women's rights, which is a progressive movement. It reifies the regressive socially imposed concept of gender to the detriment of women and the abolition of safeguarding of children. HTH.

James Kirkup response:
twitter.com/jameskirkup/status/1004280661513994240

(extract)
"Why the shift? a) Women's groups like fairplaywomen WomansPlaceUK raising awareness b) MumsnetTowers users c) Tory backbench unease (see Jacob Rees-Mogg) + reality of hung parliament d) private worries among several serving ministers e) good staff work by GEO

Still a long way to go before gender debate is normal, civil and appropriately boring. But this is possibly the most significant + positive political statement I've seen on this topic this year"

People who were live and let live, laughing at the whole thing and dismissing me, are taking it more seriously, apologising, commenting, telling me about others they know and what they think on the subject.

TRAs have shot themselves in the foot big time. Nobody really cared or gave them a second thought, now everyone I have discussed this with is against TIM's being in our spaces and using our services. Nobody cares what trans men get up to and are still welcoming of them, they aren't causing problems, so it's not transphobia, it is all about male behaviour.

Yep. Transsexuals had gained organic acceptance. Transactivism, with its vicious misogyny and homophobia and callous disregard for the safeguarding of children is currently busy undoing all that.

And once it's seen, it's never unseen.

Interesting stats on support for the Iraq war:

2003: 54% for; 38% against, 8% don't know

When you ask the same people in 2015 what they said in 2003, this is how they remember it:

37% for; 43% against; 20% don't know

This will happen with trans issues. Extremist transactivism is so unreasonable it can't hide itself and in a decade's time, people will not only no longer support it, they will deny that they ever did.

Would it be unkind and small-minded to keep the screenshots?

R0wantrees - I think Kirkup is right to be positive but also I think he is overegging the pudding. What he fails to account for is that all the LGBT orgs and most of the main/biggest women's orgs have been taken over at the top by the social constructionists. We cannot trust them to speak for us - see, for example, the Guides and Stonewall. It really does hinge on which orgs are relied upon by government.

Yep. Transsexuals had gained organic acceptance. Transactivism, with its vicious misogyny and homophobia and callous disregard for the safeguarding of children is currently busy undoing all that.

British Social attitudes survey (earlier in year cited by many TRAs) may have demonstrated 'organic acceptance'.

Now TRAs and allies are focussed on Stonewall study re high levels of hate crime reported against people who are transgender:
www.stonewall.org.uk/comeoutforLGBT/lgbt-in-britain/hate-crime

flibbertigibbet. Yes, the next bubble was trans rights and they (rightly) got them. Like ethnic minorities, LGB etc they can't be discriminated against for employment, housing etc and there are laws against people harrassing them.

The new demands are like nothing any other group has every demanded before. How on earth is letting a man pretend he's a woman in any way whatsoever analagous to giving people the same rights regardless of how much melanin is in their skin?

More people are becoming aware of the insanity of it now and the unbelievable demands like having to state a man is a woman will never come through in the UK.

The petition gives these references:

• The Sex and Gender Ethics Society
• A Woman's Place UK
• Fair Play for Women
• #ManFriday

I would expect Mumsnet posters via ManFriday and the above to be involved from this point onwards.

LangCleg

rest of James Kirkup's twitter thread.
See comment by Jen Harvey whose recent experience at Goldsmith's book fair is described and discussed:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3269765-Radical-Feminism-Banned-From-Radical-Bookfair

Thanks, Rowan! And hi James - we know you are reading.

@GibbertyFlibbert

We are reaching a point at which perhaps most of that generation will have known someone trans-identifying. They will be used to people being male without having a penis, or female with one because most trans-people of that age haven't medically transitioned.

I'm glad that you're engaging in this discussion, because I always feel that people who insist that feminists are anti-trans are somehow missing what our argument is.

In the bit of your post I have quoted, it all seems to come down to whether you call someone who presents in a feminine way, but has a male body, a man or a woman.

I am happy to accept anyone as they are, no matter how they dress, and call them by whatever name they choose. But someone with a male body is male. If they have not medically transitioned, how are they anything else? If they do not intend to medically transition (and who could blame them for not wanting major surgery), how can they claim to be anything but male?

Being a man or a woman is not an identity, it is a biological fact. The biological distinction is important, because male and female bodies are different. If you socially 'transition' but make no changes to your body, you cannot argue that you should be accepted in the spaces designated for members of the opposite sex.

In the 80s it seemed to be becoming more acceptable for men to present in a feminine way, and I thought we were becoming more open-minded as a society. Now we seem to have gone backwards, and a feminine-presenting men or masculine-presenting women now claim to be actual members of the opposite sex.

James and your name check for Janice

The list of what we should do re lawsuits etc can i suggest it would be an advantage to try at least one of those in Scotland? The SNP are way ahead unfortunately & if we could nip it in the bud here then i think Westminster would back right off.

The petition has been going crazy for about 36 hours now

@Waddlelikeapenguin
A legal challenge from a Scottish girls school sounds like an excellent idea.

We need three brave and able people to lead the legal challenges and a team to support them.

Yes!
Although i finally have a reason to be sad we home educate

Womans Place UK statement
Government response to petition on ‘gender identity’

"We welcome the government’s commitment to respectful and evidence-based discussion and to retaining Equality Act 2010 exemptions.

For these exemptions to offer women the rights and protections we deserve, they need to be applicable in practice.

We hope and expect that any consultation addresses concerns that exemptions are difficult to utilise.

We are pleased women’s organisations will be part of the consultation process and that the stated objective of the consultation will be to consider legal changes without compromising the rights of women and girls.

We will continue to campaign to make sure this happens."

womansplaceuk.org/government-response-to-petition-on-gender-identity/

The more I learn, the more pissed off I am. Who thought it was a good idea to rewrite history on people's birth certificates?
Why the fuck wouldn't you create a second document for gender reassignment? That was a truly shit idea. I'm pretty sure I can't time travel and change my name on my birth certificate, or my skin colour, even if I bleach/dye my skin, even if I'd like my name to be something else at birth, it can't be, because it wasn't. When they were born, they were classified as one sex or the other. If that turned out not to be the whole story, fine, create a document to say so, but you can't wipe out what happened on an official record, it's bollocks. It's Orwellian. It's all such a fucking lie and nonsense.

Shortened version of Nick Robinson's interview with Paris Lees (from earlier in the year) has just been on Radio 4:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3270344-Paris-Lees-interviewed-by-Nick-Robinson-on-Radio-4-now-on?watched=1&msgid=78446230#78446230

Interesting timing...

SwearyG comment:

twitter.com/SwearyGodmother/status/1004323865408032768

the government does not intend to change the safeguarding processes that are currently used in refuges and healthcare services. Providers of women-only services can continue to provide services in a different way, or even not provide services to trans individuals, provided it is objectively justified on a case-by-case basis

Would just like to point out that this is verging on deceit

the government has said

'The bar will be set high'

An example: if a woman is in a refuge and her abusive partner is trans they will not be allowed in.

That is how high the bar is set.

'Case by case basis' IS a change to the interpretation of the Equality Act. It does not allow an organisation to retain a sex-specific changing room for general use.

These assurances in this statement about the Equality Act are wholly untrustworthy.

I would absolutely recommend people to not believe that the Equality Act is ANY protection against reform of the GRA. This is the transactivist line right now, and it's being parroted by the government.

These assurances in this statement about the Equality Act are wholly untrustworthy

Agreed.

Sweary godmother is completely right. The Equality Act is dust.

We need to make this really clear when we write to MPs. If they talk about the Equality Act we need to say: you are quoting transactivists, and transactivists have shown they are not to be trusted.

Spot on, SwearyG!

Jenni Harvey comment concludes,
Women's rights are under attack. Please do not look away.

twitter.com/GappyTales/status/1004281008777293824