What would it look like?

[Bewilderednow]

First in the hope of clear answers, and so I'm not viewed with suspicion, I am transgender. My question is what would legislation look like if you could pass every law regarding transgender issues tomorrow? Thank you for reading and for any response.

An honest question

I would be very clear about gender and sex.

Sex is biology, and is important for things where sex is important. Toiletting, pregnancy, places where people are naked, places where anyone is touching anyone's intimate areas. Rape crisis. Prisons. These should all have a sex-separated option.

Gender is expression. I would like a world where no one is discriminated against or harmed or scared because they wear clothes, express themselves or do things that are traditionally associated with one sex or the other.

In the middle is the mess. Are women paid less because of their gender or sex? Are men committing the vast majority of violent offences because of their sex or gender? If we can't do studies or even talk about it, the world is fucked. We need to openly and honestly talk about the mess. And stop pretending nodebate is any way to navigate difficult issues.

Wow. Good question and great answer.

MrsTerryPratchett

Sums it up well for me.

Ditto, Mrs T sums up nearly and coherently what I would like to see.

"I would be very clear about gender and sex.*

I want the law to clearly acknowledge that sex is not gender. Any gender protection should not come at the expense of sex protection.

I'd add that legislation is broad, and law evolves so a package dealing fairly for all possible situations is impossible. There need to be guiding principles with the option of nuance for individual circumstances. Unfortunately the media works in macro so we get the idea that a one size fits all solution is the only way when in practice it doesn't pan out that way.

bewildered

Yes i would agree with mrstp

So really the status quo for me

Can i ask what you think is wrong with the previous system...if anything? You might think it was all fine and dandy or i might be missing something

@MrsTerryPratchett

I agree with you.

@Bewilderednow

If I had my way I would repeal the laws which allow people to legally change their sex. Since it is impossible to physically change your sex, and it is important for several reasons to accurately record sex, I think this was a mistake.

However, in recognition that people sometimes change their external sexual characteristics, I think that should probably be noted. For example, a male who identifies as transgender and has undergone irreversible physical transition to resemble female physiology could have their sex recorded a M(t) to denote 'Male - Trans'. Again, this is important due to the need to accurately record statistics. For example, if we find out the M(t) people are being the victims of crimes at a hugely disproportionate rate, or being paid less overall, that is important information to have so that we can act and change the situation for them. Changing their sex to F obscures that and also obscures the same necessary information for women.

No one should have the option of inaccurately reporting this information and doing so (e.g. applying for a job or gym membership at a single-sex facility while claiming to be the opposite sex) should be a (minor) offense.

That being said, there should still be a protection in the law for gender in acknowledgement that people are still treated unfairly based on behaviors and appearances which are not typically expected of their sex. This should be a protected characteristic for both Trans and Gender Non Conforming people equally. We can't protect gender identity (because it is invisible and internal) but we CAN protect gender expression. We can make it a legal offense to discriminate against someone based on their appearance, behavior, or expression being associated with the opposite sex (partly or fully). E.g. if a man is a receptionist and chooses to wear skirts and make up to work, he can not be denied that or fired based on that because women are allowed to.
Gendered behavior can be a protected characteristic. It can still be a hate crime to beat someone up for appearing to be transgender and it should be.

In this law i would define the terms:

• Male/man/boy and pronouns associated with them legally refer to those with an SRY gene and without ovaries
• Female/woman/girl and the pronouns associated with them legally refer to those without an SRY gene and without testes.
• Gendered expression refers to behaviors or appearances which have historically been typically expected or one sex or the other. These laws will recognize that situation without in any way supporting it or encouraging the continuation of that.
• Gender identity refers to a belief that a person's personality in some way does or does not 'match' their sex. As this position is not provable or disprovable the presence or absence of a particular 'gender identity' can't be a protected characteristic, however the belief in it should be held as a protected characteristic akin to a religious belief. It does not override sex definitions or sex segregation.
• Gender is poorly defined as a term and is generally used as a substitute for sex, gendered behavior, or gender identity. For that reason it can have no legal meaning unless clearly defined in the context its being used.

So sex goes back to being a distinct, protected characteristic which is recorded at birth and accurately recorded on relevant information (e.g. medical, criminal). It should not be recorded at all when it is not required to be recorded accurately.
Permanent alteration of sexual characteristic can also be recorded as a distinct characteristic (I'm open to suggestions on the best way to do that).
Gender identity is removed as a protected characteristic (you can't protect an invisible internal belief) and replaced with a protection for gendered behavior and appearance.

While I'm at it, I'm passing a law requiring any new public facilities which have single sex spaces (bathrooms, change rooms) to provide at least one self contained 'neutral' stall for those who are not comfortable using the facilities of their sex. Bigger facilities may require more than one. That should cover any intersex or physically transitioned people.

In practice, things like sporting groups and social clubs choose who they are open to. If, for example, a roller derby league wants to be open to women and transwomen then they simply have to say that. However transwomen can't expect to be allowed entry into a team which is open only to women.

Anything I haven't covered?

Interestingly, I just realized that by defining the sexes and pronouns in law, AND protecting gendered behavior of the opposite sex, I have both made it legally protected for transwomen to refer to themselves as she/her casually (but NOT on official document) AND at the same time protected the right of women to not use those pronouns. Legally those pronouns refer to women (females) BUT men are legally adopt any 'feminine' behaviors, including referring to themselves as 'she'.

Crystal clear objective definitions of
sex
male
female
boy
girl
man
woman

And definitions (although they must by necessity be subjective) also of
gender
masculine
feminine

Absolute clarity on the above. The only characteristics which are subjective are gender, masculine and feminine.

The others are OBJECTIVE and a human either possesses those characteristics and is therefore categorised by them, or does not and can NOT 'identify as' them. Recognition of the fundamental and critical importance of those characteristics. We all have a sex and it is immutable, and the law should disallow the lie that sex can be changed.

And importantly - an acceptance that gender, like religion, is not mandatory, rather many people reject its existence as anything more than a religious faith that a minority hold. In which case, the minority that believe in gender are free to associate and identify with one another, but it should never be a characteristic applied to the general population.

So, our sex is immutable, we are born and die the same.
The law ceases to pretend that there can be a transition from one sex to another
The subsection of the population may choose to believe in gender and will be protected from discrimination for holding such belief. But our laws are free to reject that belief, and will not impose it upon other citizens in any way.

I agree with the previous posters who want a clear, workable legal definition of both gender and sex. I would like maleness and femaleness to be protected in their own right, and it to be explicitly clear that sex cannot be changed.

I feel it should only be asked for where relevant, however. Passports and driving licenses should have clear photo ID, full name and DOB. They don’t need to record sex. It’s relevant on a birth certificate and medical record, but a lot of times it’s recorded when it doesn’t need to be.

I would like to protect gender identity as well as gender expression. It is an ‘invisible belief’, but so is my sexual orientation and political views, unless i’m noisily bisexually making out with both sexes or shouting about the free market. These are both currently protected.

I’d also like explicit legal protections for intersex people who don’t fit the definitions of male or female as given. I’d also like to extend protections for trans people, ie the Equality Act definition of ‘Gender Reassignment’ is quite outdated.

Ooh, what an interesting question.

I would

• repeal the existing GRA which conflates sex and gender, and was written with a view to a very old-fashioned understanding of medical transsexuality as representing the whole of the transgender spectrum

• rewrite it, to

1. retain existing protections for those who want to transition to the opposite sex to alleviate dysphoria, and enshrine in law their access to physical and mental health support (because i fear this is about to disappear on the basis that they are "only 1% of transgender people")
2. provide a "self ID" mechanism for those who want a statutory declaration as to gender, but do not want to transition medically, including those who are non-binary - this would be for their own peace of mind and would not legally change their sex.
3. provide that it would be unlawful to victimise, harass or discriminate against those who are gender non-conforming. Anybody should have the right to wear what they like, call themselves what they like, have the hobbies they like etc.

• At the same time, introduce the Single Sex Protection Act, which will

1. allow for single sex services provision where there is a legitimate aim (I would retain the legitimate aim part to prevent the old boys' network problem)
2. allow for all women shortlists etc
3. mandate a certain percentage of women's refuges, shelters, prisons etc to be single sex, with the remainder to have an opt-out policy to provide single gender services if they want

• Update the Equality Act guidance to make clear that sex and gender are not the same thing, and that a belief in an innate gender identity is a protected belief (and a disbelief in it is therefore likewise protected).

• Consult on the best way to provide trans provision for shelters, refuges, prisons etc, and implement it

I'm sure that there's much I've missed and much I would change with a bit more thought.

OP not coming back?

Or were we here for the popcorn and screenshots?

The OP said an honest question

So thats like, fact

So hopefully they will be back soon

Sorry for the wait to reply. I am finishing college finals, and it's a busy time. I'm it posting to debate or argue. I was simply interested in a clear outline of what those that are critical would like as policy. I see many posts regarding anger at current proposals, but not much on what you would like passed. Thank you for the posts and for your candor.

but not much on what you would like passed

I don't understand

Most of us dont want a change to existing laws,,.so we are not going to say what we want passed...

As we are happy with what has passed...have I misunderstood

Can you answer my question if you get the chance

Please and thank you

Yep Mrs TP has it (as do other posters).

Bewilderednow It's a great question, how would you answer it?

Many posters are unhappy with current laws, and I was attempting to ascertain where they would like the law to go. I have no answers to policy. Personally the state of politics and social action has me discouraged. I live in the USA, and here at least in the age of Trump, I think every facet of the LGBT is in for a hurt. Pessimism seems to be everpresent.

My reading of the situation is that the LGB were making great strides, but that the T is now undermining all progress, being, as it is, in direct conflict with the L and the G. The Ls have realised this very quickly, being as they are on the sharp end of 'why won't you sleep with my ladydick, you bigots', but the Gs are yet to reach the same conclusion, having not experienced similar pressure, and showing a brotherly solidarity to their T pals, and not a little glee in the golden opportunity to put uppity women in their place.
However, before too long I expect the G to notice the direction of downward travel for this little episode and make a pragmatic decision to part company with the T, no hard feelings etc.

Well you were given some very detailed answers tonight, which I thought were mostly coherent and, between them, have the makings of a government policy.
Blood, barack and posy were most eloquent imaginative and fair minded.

Thank you all for your input, and for taking the time. I vehemently disagree with the general concensus, but I think both sides of this issue need to talk openly. I'm sick of the cycle of nastiness that permeates this discussion.
As to LGBT tensions, who knows? Our Supreme Court is turning sharply right wing, trans issues will not be the only casualty of that debacle.

Bewilderednow
Do you have a proposal that you think would work for you but not mean that my 9 yr old daughter might have to use the changing room at swimming (no cubicles) with a penis?
(If you dont understand why that is an issue for me I am happy to explain )

The council barely has the money to keep the rubbish collection going - refurbing the changing rooms will not happen.

You have my utmost sympathy for Trump

So what do you think could happen @Bewilderednow? That protects women's rights and trans rights. Recognizing that women have been oppressed for millennia because of men's power over our biology and we have moved over a LOT.

I'm also really curious what brings a young American trans person to a UK parenting website's feminism section...