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.

Hence my OP, if trans women had to wait five years to do all the above then at least it would limit it to those who are genuine rather than any old chancer.

Genuine what, Daim???

Genuinely have gender dysphoria and aren't a bastard??!

Again, you're telling women to budge over, because a man really, really, really wants them to.

No.

No chance.

The reason we're in this position now, is because we gave them an inch and they've not just taken a mile, they've gone into fucking orbit.

Let's get rid of the legal fiction that males can become women, get rid of GRCs and all that. Retain sex-segregated spaces, then ask transfolk what protections they need that are specific to them that they haven't got. Which might actually advantage the rest of us, like not requiring stupid male only and female only uniforms/dresscodes at work/school, but instead allowing people to wear what they wanted if they wanted to without having to justify. Like having the freedom to wear a suit to the office one day, and a dress and stillies the next without having to declare you are gender fluid. After all, if sex mattered less where it doesn't need to matter, then it would be easier for those whose sex might be different to what a casual observer thinks it is.

After all, making women move aside and us all pretending wasn't a good solution to trans rights, and certainly isn't a good solution now that we are all supposed to pretend things that we know are not true, and we are not allowed to say what is actually true.

Trying to shift timescales or different hurdles for the existing legislation is just trying to predict the cracks and paper over them, whereas I think current trans activism is instead going to destroy the whole thing once people realise what they are being asked to believe or pretend to believe. And will, unless we address it, make life worse for the genuinely dysphoric, not better.

No. Totally agree with poster above:

The process of legally changing sex SHOULD be difficult, because the stakes are so high both for the members of the sex the trans person wishes to live as, and for the individual themselves who may be making permanent alterations to their body, fertility and health.

love but changing sex is not possible. And while it might be cumbersome to get a GRC there is no evidence that it is very cumbersome to get hormones because you can buy them over the internet. It is the hormones that cause irreversible effects on the body, not the GRC. The GRC is actually relatively unimportant especially since many trans people don’t have one and because it’s not standard practice for anyone to ask to see a GRC. That is why I advocate an approach based on biology rather than ascribing huge weight to a piece of paper. The feminist position is surely that despite a GRC there are some spaces where there should not be any male bodies, irrespective of whether they have a certificate?

So sick of saying NO.
It reminds me of my youth and trying to fight off some teenage boy.
First his hands go one place and you push them away - then they try something else and you push them away there too - then they slip back to the first place, but just an inch away from where they were before, and on and on and on.

I increasingly think that the GRA should be repealed and that GRCs should be scrapped altogether. People can't change sex, so why should the law endorse this pretence? I agree with everything SomeDyke said above.

No.

Personally I think Equality Act should ensure no one can ever "change sex". So you can be protected against discrimination for being different, but you can never be recognised legally as something you're not.

Yes. Agree with SomeDyke.

The proposals put forward don't make sense.

How is it humiliating to live as the opposite sex if the person actually wants to live as the opposite sex?

How does a person live as the opposite sex anyway? Are you reducing it to clothes, hair and makeup again?

Who polices whether or not a person is living as the opposite sex?

These questions have been repeatedly asked on this thread but no answers forthcoming as yet. It's not hard to see why.

No to self id - you cant change sex. For those with gender dysphoria/living as transsexual i would support access to some womens services. But for those people where womanhood is a costume or a fetish or a part time hobby or actually a narcissistic pd i dont see why they should have any right to be women to access womens sex segregated spaces. Sort out your male culture so that you can perform femme without having to use made up rubbish that you have a ladybrain.

Also broadly agree with SomeDyke. The reason kids think they are trans is largely because girls and boys are treated differently for no reason.

Yes I agree with SomeDyke too.

daimbars

Two people who have been through the process have said that obtaining the GRC was not humiliating

Why do you think it's humiliating?

No.

Gender isn't fucking real and you can't actually change sex.

As such there's no point where a man qualifies for things like women's sports and women's scholarships and women-specific-roles. (Even if that man is really really nice and lovely and kind and wonderful and more feminine than anyone on the planet.)

There should however be hardcore protection, provisions and help - but it should be separate.

Where an award or an opportunity is to single out and endorse women in fields where they are still disadvantaged, then it should not be open to males, Daimbars, however they identify. Women face inequality because of our sex, not because of our clothes or cosmetic surgery.

Self-ID is a misnomer anyway.

Every TW, GRC or not, has 'self-IDd' into womanhood, that's the point - they've claimed a biological reality as an identity.
The only difference is that a GRC panel rubber stamp the identity based upon pointless criteria to provide a false veneer of validity.
What we are referring to with 'self-id' is the idea that any and all gatekeeping criteria be abandoned.
But there is no way to be a TW without self-identifying into it.

All TW self-identify into their target status.
Those of us born female ARE the target status.

MrsMcWoodle, isn't it just? The old school transsexuals tend to have empathy for women and respect. The activists couldn't behave more like pushy entitled MRAs if they tried. The misogyny comes off Twitter like smoke.

I suppose we should be grateful we're not being accused of being frigid for not wanting them in our showers. Gropers usually accused women of that.

Never in a million years. Men are not, by definition, women.

Now I'll go back and read everyone else's opinion.

@daimbars you said" At the moment the process of getting a GRC is humiliating for a trans person (having to live as the opposite gender for two years). If they want to present as the other gender stereotypes, how is it humiliating to have to show you've done so for 2 years?
Surely they're doing that anyway, so it would be easy for someone who's truly dysphoric as they'd be living on the opposite gender stereotypes anyway.

Women have to prove to a doctor (2 wrt abortion) that they want an abortion, or that they really want to be sterilized, etc. So why shouldn't the same gatekeeping apply to trans?

Oops, I see others have made the same point. Will try to finish reading the rest before commenting again (on large threads, I tend to post as I think of something, else I'll forget my point).

The only physical difference between men and women is biological differences.

It's not their name, their clothes, their hair, their makeup, the way they walk, the activities they enjoy or anything else that can be affected or changed.

None of these things make a man a woman.

It's really not possible for a man to live as a woman. The number of years is irrelevant because no-one can define what 'living as a woman' is.