Would you back self ID if...

[daimbars]

Once a trans women got their GRC they had to wait a period of time (say 5 years) before they were able to have the same rights as all women? For example they would only be able to apply for a job as a women’s officer, appear on a female only panel or to compete in women’s sport after five years of lived experience as a woman?

Someone I know is meeting with her MP to discuss how to propose this legislation. She thinks it will address possible repercussions from self ID and stop it being abused. I thought it was an interesting idea I could get behind.

I'm still not clear what the issue is? It would be helpful to know if anything concrete is being proposed that may harm women and girls?

We've established there is no risk to single sex services due to the Equality Act and exceptions which are not under threat.

We know there was a proposal put to parliament to amend the EA but this was rejected.

We've realised self ID won't make much difference to women as trans women are already using self ID to get their GRC.

Is there an actual genuine threat to women and girls coming from a reputable organisation or political party or is it just the TRAs on Twitter making noise that's making everyone so upset?

MyRelationship the advantage we have though is that we already have law (in the EA) that is on our side and was included to protect women, so the 'female penis' arguments will need to show that there is a definite reason to repeal these protections.

Our problem with the existing protections is that they are misunderstood and service providers just don't know when to apply them. They are also a bit weak in that they just give the service provider an opt-out rather than putting an active duty on the service provider to ensure same sex facilities.

Just using my imagination here, I reckon it would take some sort of test case to be taken to the higher courts. E.g. if a woman was assaulted by a trans woman in prison, she could bring a case against the prison service for failing to protect her under the EA. Or if that person who got a male nurse for a smear who said he ID'd as female could bring a case arguing that her rights were not protected. I reckon then there would be more legal clarity and would probably lead to more detailed guidance. Hmmmm. I guess the other problem is that human rights groups like Liberty wouldn't touch those cases (because of transphobia) so it would probably get taken on by those awful fundamentalist Christians in the Alfie Evans case. Hmmmm.

It's not easy.

In some countries, single unit toilets are commonplace.

I went to a restaurant with a row of unisex toilets the other day. Every single one covered in piss and stank like the men’s toilets. Gross. Men need to learn to aim into a toilet bowl or at the very least wipe up after themselves if we’re to endure unisex toilets. Plus most of them don’t wash their hands, so every door handle has hundreds of men’s penis germs all over it! Just grim.

Yes, what we need Peak is for some women to be assaulted, that will help. Sadly I have already said I think this is what it will take for anyone to take any notice. Because why listen to women who have lived in this society their whole lives and can see it unfolding before their eyes.

Exactly massive - have you ever seen how few men wash their hands?

Is there an actual genuine threat to women and girls coming from a reputable organisation or political party

Yes, Daim. There have been hundreds of threads about such threats. You know this. Don't be disingenuous.

I'm still not clear what the issue is? It would be helpful to know if anything concrete is being proposed that may harm women and girls?

Stonewall have said that they want to repeal the current EA protections and most service providers ignore them or are unaware of them. This may harm women and girls due to violations of safety, privacy and dignity.

We've established there is no risk to single sex services due to the Equality Act and exceptions which are not under threat.

No, we haven't established that. You have been shown at least two documents showing an intention of various groups to repeal this. They are definitely under potential threat. Why are you pretending you didn't read that upthread.

We know there was a proposal put to parliament to amend the EA but this was rejected.

No, it hasn't been properly considered or debated. They have said there are no plans at present. We will see what Penny Mordaunt's report looks like. Then we can say for sure whether this has been rejected or not.

We've realised self ID won't make much difference to women as trans women are already using self ID to get their GRC

They are not already using it to get GRC but the GRC is of limited value because you can get female ID without one and most service providers will let you use female facilities regardless of a GRC.

Is there an actual genuine threat to women and girls coming from a reputable organisation or political party or is it just the TRAs on Twitter making noise that's making everyone so upset?

Stonewall. The government select committee. Reports from the prison service about housing male prisoners on the female estate. We will have to see what the actual plans are and they should be clearer in the next few weeks. But it's not just a load of upset from Twitter. There have been very credible threats made to the EA, plus all the evidence that local authorities are unaware that sex is a protected characteristic.

Apparently 40% of women and 63% of men

Lovely And yes I do wash my hands but then I have to open the door their scuzzy hands have also touched to get out!

Yes, what we need Peak is for some women to be assaulted, that will help.

Not sure if we should be wishing for this tbh. Surely we should be looking at the fact that no women have been assaulted since the GRA in 2004 and feeling reassured.

That was meant to be sarcastic of course - thought that was obvious!

Yes, what we need Peak is for some women to be assaulted, that will help.

Err, I think that's a bit harsh. I obviously don't want women to get assaulted. But I do think it will probably take a legal challenge of some kind. Anyway, as many of these things (assaults, intimidation) are already reportedly happening, it wouldn't really be anything 'new'.

Surely we should be looking at the fact that no women have been assaulted since the GRA in 2004 and feeling reassured.

But are you going to claim that no self id transperson has ever assaulted a woman?

MyRelationshipIsWeird wrote: "...Just grim".

sitzpinkler - Old German term typically referring to a man who sits to urinate.

I don't speak German but I've seen claims that, in colloquial usage, it can be interpreted as deprecating the masculinity of one who does this. Others use it as a case of someone who is a tidy/considerate user of shared facilities.

I think what I find frustrating about your post MO, daimbars, is this incessant, "Shh, Shh, be reassured. All of your concerns are baseless. Everything will be fine."
Time and again people are posting evidence; links, events, plans, goals, etc of groups intent on dismantling necessary protections, and you constantly say "I see no ships."

Surely we should be looking at the fact that no women have been assaulted since the GRA in 2004 and feeling reassured

Where does this sudden leap come from? There are several trans people in prison for violent offences, including rape and murder. You have no statistics stating that there have been zero assaults on women by anyone identifying as trans.

Also, we are not just talking about assault, it's also about dignity and privacy in intimate spaces. Not toilets necessarily, but sleeping facilities, prison, intimate examinations, and refuges. A woman may not think a male HCP will assault her (although there were 2 gynos struck off this week for doing that), but she wishes to be examined by someone of the same sex for reasons of privacy and dignity. Same with full body or cavity searches. It's not always about assault.

massively she is referring to daim, not you. MO is modus operandi rather than massively outing. . You definitely haven't done that!

massivelyouting, I haven't addressed you at all, so I'm not sure what you think I've said that you have said...

Pre and post the GRA access to women's spaces and resources was policed by a system of common understanding of where the boundaries lay and the right of women to challenge eg finding a naked man in a womens changing room and to expect that their challenge will supported by the authorities. This consensus is being removed.

I think the debate also needs to focus on the need for the strengthening and extension of protections for women under the Equality Act to mitigate abuse of any relaxation to the existing GRA requirements. For example communal changing areas should not be made gender neutral without the necessary changes to the physical structures to ensure privacy and dignity.

It is naive to suggest that abuse will not happen, all the history of safeguarding scandals shows that where systems are lax predators will move in.

Also, there must be provision for natal sex to continue to be recorded somewhere and for natal sex to be recorded in eg crime stats.

For example I have just discovered that a person can choose to be male or female or female for a driving licence without any checks. So I wonder how this will skew accident/road crime statistics.

Oh, I see the confusion! Sorry, posting while form filling and didn't make the connection between your posting name and the phrase MO.