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.

daim Lets call a spade a spade here. You are an advocate for trans rights and you get huge pleasure winding the GC women up. #weseeyou

It's a bit late for that, daim, after spending weeks being openly abusive to women who disagree with you.

What 'equality' do they not have? Even a lawyer at a trans forum struggled to come up with anything.

Also what they said

I am a woman and want to make sure I'm doing my bit to support women but I'm also a big advocate of LGBT equality

Me too, which is why I don't engage in the debate over real women, pronouns etc. But surely even the most ardent LGBT supporter can spot the logical problem in a male bodied individual competing in sport against female bodies and someone who retains full male genitalia sharing a prison cell or a homeless shelter with someone with female genitalia? I don't think trans people are violent perverts or anything like that, but if we don't need to segregate based on people's sexed bodies, why do we ever need to segregate? If I am in an intimate space with someone with male biology and I don't even speak to that person, how am I to know their gender identity and that they are 'really' female? It's their body that makes me uncomfortable in that scenario, not their mind.

BettyDuMonde

🏆 🏆 🏆

Also when you said 'I am a woman' we don't know what you mean

"Apart from they're not" Google trans toolkit and your local area, @daimbars you may find your area is already allowing natal boys into the girls toilets. Or at least saying they can go on if they wish to.

@massivelyouting 'You can't take disability access toilets away from the disabled and make them "gender neutral and disabled". There would be a massive outcry and it would be an own goal in terms of public support (apart from which morally it would be wrong.)'

Who is arguing to take disabled toilets away from disabled people?

I said ' 'Gender neutral' already exists almost everywhere' except they are currently called disability access toilets and often have a baby change in them.'

They are already gender neutral. We know how to build them. More could be built!

If we have built thousands of these toilets why not build thousands more?

I think it is morally wrong to force females to share intimate spaces with non-females. Do you think I am just thinking of myself?

I am thinking of my teenage daughter and my elderly mother-in:law. I don't want to take anything away from disabled people!

I am saying we knows how to build self contained gender neutral, aka unisex, toilets.

Yes, thank you, I mean EA not GRA.

Yeah, agree with Italian. I think it's easy to build gender neutral self-contained toilets if need be. I am sure people were pissing and moaning about having to provide disabled facilities years ago, yet now it's commonsense and second nature. To be honest, I would use them if they existed- I hate hearing people listen to me use the loo and I like being able to wash my hands in the cubicle rather than getting toilet-germs all over my clothes when I do them up.

So, I'm sorry, is daim actually taking the piss in some smug point proving exercise? What the actual? What an intensely shitty approach to an issue that has clear real life implications for many of the women who are posting here.

Disabled toilets should never be brought into this debate, full stop. They can be used by disabled trans-gendered people anyway. For able bodied trans people they should not even be considered as an alternative.

Trans-gendered people need a separate space of their own.

Most places only started providing disabled loos (and other accommodations like ramps in some areas) when forced to by law. It will probably be the same with gender neutral single user toilets. Yes, businesses won't want to spend the money, but if doing so is the cost of doing business then they will. That's where this should be going, imo.

Would you back self ID if...
There are no circumstances under which any rational person would back Self ID.
Writing any law that requires accommodation of an assertion made by a person can only be successful when carefully limited and constrained. Religious observation is an example of legal rights written based on an assertion that requires no one else to act on the religious persons belief.

Disabled toilets should never be brought into this debate, full stop.

We cannot prevent transgendered from claiming that transgenderism is a disability. By law they can currently assert and receive accommodation on the basis of gender dysphoria being a disability.
This latest change to medical condition may alter their eligibility for various kinds of medical and financial support.

Would you back self ID if...... No. A male can't magically become a female after 5 years of "living as a woman". The idea that biological males should ever compete in women's sports events is so ridiculous I don't know where to begin. Also, the fact that a male who has lived, for example, 50 years of her life as a man, married to a woman who she has fathered/mothered (not sure of the preferred word) 7 children with can opt to "live as a woman for 5 years" and then at 55 become legally female and start volunteering in a women's shelter counselling young female domestic violence and/or sexual assault survivors is a f'ing insult. Just stop. The idea that this 55-year-old "legal" female can start talking about FGM is even more insulting.

Daim - why do you think it's your 'job' to play devils advocate? Who made you the teacher?

I think it's pretty manipulating. Youre putting views out there and then saying 'ha, fooled you!' when people criticise it so that you don't have to take the criticisms and try to make yourself look clever. You're arguments are just lacking any substance.

Your!

2 more bits to add to my enormous post -

Anyone wanting to access single sex spaces based on their birth sex should be prepared to show ID if requested. This could work much like showing age ID to buy booze. You may or may not be asked for it dependent on whether the service provider requests it, but if you ARE asked to present it and you are unable to do so, the service/access can be refused.
People whose appearance is somewhat unusual for their birth sex will likely need to carry their proof, much the way those who appear young need to carry their ID when wanting to purchase age restricted items. Obviously, if you don’t plan on accessing stuff reserved for your birth sex, you won’t need to carry it. Your privacy will be legally protected and you will not be compelled to show it to anyone when you are not accessing things reserved only for your birth sex (excepting law enforcement officials).

If you wish to participate in sex segregated sports reserved for your birth sex, but have received medical treatments that might be considered performance enhancing (testosterone, for example) you must be willing to participate in tests or assessments and/or provide medical evidence if it is requested. You may be refused participation on this basis (rules to be decided by individual sporting bodies. Decisions can be appealed/referred for second opinions). In some circumstances there may be the option to enter ‘open’ categories or specific categories for gender variant people, where they exist).

@Kettlepotblackagain nobody is making you engage with me on this thread. There are plenty of other threads with only GC posters you can join in with.

So, I'm sorry, is daim actually taking the piss in some smug point proving exercise?

I think there is still some question as to whether or not Daim is a true believer and evangelical or a misogynist trying to dominate the board with these repeated efforts to engage women in a negotiation of women's rights.

Not in a boat, not on a moat...

daimbars

Starting a thread does not confer ownership or a right to control the thread.