Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The New Equality Act (according to Betty) 2018 - what do y'all think?

131 replies

BettyDuMonde · 21/06/2018 22:21

This began as a post in Daimbars Self ID thread but it grew so big I figured I would put it in a post of it’s own!

......

It occurs to me that the reason I have, up til now, been very sympathetic to the trans cause, and been willing to look for some kind of negotiated middle ground, is because I have been thinking of the wonderful transfolk in my life, and how they pose no danger to me nor my children, and how the absolute last thing I would want is for them to have harder lives than they do already.
I haven’t posted anything gender critical on my social media, because I wouldn’t want to upset any of my trans chums, nor my friends who have trans partners.

This afternoon I’ve concluded that I’ve got to stop thinking this way.

It’s not about MY trans friends, it’s not about MY comfort.

My trans friends are kind, thoughtful, quiet, attempting to fly under the radar, not trying to break down barriers and insert themselves into spaces they know are not their spaces.

I’m a weightlifting, brick removing, tree pruning, able bodied, educated, heterosexual, married woman who isn’t at risk of homelessness, drug addiction or domestic violence.

But, as we know NATALT, and lots of women are far more vulnerable than me.

So, with all that in mind, here is my current position on how we reform both GRA2004 and EA2010, whilst both preserving women’s sex based rights AND making the lives of transfolk easier.

Firstly:

No to Self ID that allows male born people to co opt the legal designation of ‘woman’ or ‘female’
No to accessing ANY of the places or positions allocated only for women.
No changing birth records, no hiding of criminal pasts.
No to competing in women’s sports.
No standing on AWSL
No policing of the language women use to describe their own bodies and their own experiences.
No to conflating sex and gender,
Statistics to be compiled based on birth sex for everyone AND adopted gender by those that have one.
Options to request medical examinations or airport pat downs etc be carried out by people sharing your birth sex. Options for professionals to refuse to provide medical examinations or airport pat downs to those of the opposite sex.

No negotiating. No changes to the above to be made without consultation with women and women’s advocacy groups.

***

However - yes to Self ID that gives you legal protection for your adopted gender and gender presentation - no need for a medical diagnosis, it can be like deedpoll.

Yes to a selection of theoretical genders to chose from (none of which can be named man/woman/girl/boy/male/female - these terms are to be used to describe biological sex alone) to be decided by the community who will be adopting them.

Yes to gender protections against discrimination, in the workplace, in housing, in healthcare.

yes to exemptions that allow for those with the legally registered characteristic of adopted gender to provide services and spaces that exclude people who do not share the self id’d legal characteristic of adopted gender. Yes to sports and facilities for adopted gender people as well as access to single sex spaces based on your biological sex.

Yes to schemes that work towards proportional representation for adopted gender people in public office,

Yes to safe, secure, appropriate spaces for adopted gender people in the prison system.

Yes to statutory time off work for health care appointments that relate directly to your adopted gender needs (although the self ID system will mean some adopted gender people will not be attending specific healthcare appointments. Those that are can prove their entitlement by doctors certification (similar to how pregnant women prove entitlement to maternity protections).

Yes to properly funded, in-depth and ongoing research projects relating to adopted gender people to ensure any existing inequalities are identified and addressed. Priorities should be decided by the community (I believe the things that most worry TRA are currently suicide rates and violence against transwomen of colour?)

Any future changes to these provisions must be made in consultation with those that have registered for this characteristic and their advocacy groups.

…..

Current Gender Recognition Certificate holders could choose to retain their current legal status for life or transfer to the new protected characteristic of adopted gender, depending on their personal preference. No more GRCs to be issued.

....

Basically, separate sex and gender completely - protect both against discrimination, but sex remains forever as observed at birth (with the current extra time for doctors to diagnose intersex conditions prior to registering the birth retained).

Everyone has the protected characteristic of sex, gender is an optional extra with minimum gate keeping that adults can sign up to just prior to turning 18 (so when you sign up to vote).
You can sign up any time from just-before-18 onwards and it’s free the first time. If you want to change it again you have to pay an admin fee (same as you do when you get a new passport etc). Titles relating to adopted gender (to replace Mr/Ms etc) can be part of the same process.

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 on request by 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)

……

Minors - anything divided by sex in school should be divided via birth sex and gender stereotypes should be minimised - all uniform items should be suitable for all school activity but individual items should be freely chosen by pupils themselves without traditional restrictions (boys can wear skirts, girls can wear trousers/shorts etc). Children must not be told that ‘changing sex’ is possible, but instead should be encouraged to research and explore the various gender options that will become available at adulthood, and the option of having no adopted gender should be given equal weighting.

Dysphoric or distressed children should be able to access private changing/toileting facilities on request, and have their mental health needs properly supported by professionals inside and outside the school environment. Guidance for schools regarding dysphoric pupils should be vetted by Tavistock and Portland and regularly updated.

.......

Am I getting somewhere? What have I missed?

OP posts:
Picassospaintbrush · 22/06/2018 19:50

But you are just making that up Snappity, no-one is saying that, only you.

Macareaux · 22/06/2018 20:15

Oops I was deleted. I will try again using more restrained language.

It is possible that some people who were born male but who wish other people to consider them to be women (and who may in some cases genuinely consider themselves to be women) and who are engaged in activism in favour of transgender rights may indulge in a fetish of a sexual nature in which they gain satisfaction by considering themselves to be a woman. In which case, such people may not be over-enthusiastic at the suggestion of third spaces as their predilection relies on being able to be considered as a woman and not as a third gender and in some cases it may rely on being able to access spaces and things belonging to women. like used tampons

Rufustheyawningreindeer · 22/06/2018 20:21

It is possible that some people who were born male but who wish other people to consider them to be women (and who may in some cases genuinely consider themselves to be women) and who are engaged in activism in favour of transgender rights may indulge in a fetish of a sexual nature in which they gain satisfaction by considering themselves to be a woman. In which case, such people may not be over-enthusiastic at the suggestion of third spaces as their predilection relies on being able to be considered as a woman and not as a third gender and in some cases it may rely on being able to access spaces and things belonging to women. like used tampons

Awesome

Real shame you have to use such convoluted language to say something that in some cases

IS THE ABSOLUTE FUCKING TRUTH

I dont remember your exact wording but i am fairly sure that you didnt at any point say"all transgender people........"

Macareaux · 22/06/2018 20:56

PM'd you the deleted version Rufus

Rufustheyawningreindeer · 22/06/2018 21:01

Thank you

Ive just read it and I can't see the problem with it

You didnt say all and you were very careful to clarify that it was TRAs that you were referring to

The new guidelines remind me of the indiana jones movie

The New Equality Act (according to Betty) 2018 - what do y'all think?
BettyDuMonde · 22/06/2018 21:21

If someone who purports to be in favour of trans rights can read through all of this and respond only with ‘but transwomen are women’ and has nothing at all to say about important issues such as appropriate care for elderly transfolk and legal protections to ensure that transitioning will not result in losing your job, then I think it is safe to assume that they do not really care about the legal rights of transfolk at all, and are posting here with the sole intention of being a goady fuck.

OP posts:
Rufustheyawningreindeer · 22/06/2018 21:25

Abso-fucking-lutley betty

I think there are a number of excellent points in your OP so i dont really understand why someone cant go

Good
Good
Shit idea
Pants

Etc

scotsheather · 22/06/2018 21:52

Though I don't agree with some points in the OP I think it is refreshing to see people challenging the prevailing views on both sides of the debate. Middle ground may not be too far fetched an idea, when on paper both groups (trans and women) are battling ingrained prejudices. And by trans I don't mean those headlocking women, not masked protesters intimidating women, not sex pests invading our private spaces, I mean good honest trans people who I don't doubt still exist. (which of course is where self ID wouldn't work in practise)

Rufustheyawningreindeer · 22/06/2018 21:53

Anything in particular scots

BettyDuMonde · 22/06/2018 22:12

Thank you!

Please do pick it apart though - I went to art school, I can handle critique Grin

OP posts:
AncientLights · 22/06/2018 22:28

I am interested in the removal of the spousal veto. While I understand the objection to the idea of one's partner being able to say yay or nay to such a pivotal change, we still have to consider where that leaves the non-trans spouse.

Years ago, I married a man. However, if the man I married then decided he was a woman I would be married to a woman and, I would argue, was a substantially different person from the one I had entered that marriage contract with. So what happens then? Would I have to instigate divorce proceedings and on what ground? Unreasonable behaviour seems the only likely one but I can imagine arguments that such behaviour isn't unreasonable. Could such a person get an automatic annulment if they wished? I'd favour that myself.

scotsheather · 22/06/2018 22:31

Bit late at night to pick apart in detail but like yourself I have known transgender people who would be just as concerned at the direction of the debate as most on MN. They always knew the boundaries, about appropriate conduct towards women and not demanding access to womens spaces and services at any time or stage of transition. Even the suggestion of self ID seems to have given rise to a more militant group who would not be classed as having gender dysphoria under the medical definition and are more concerned with encroaching on womens protections (places of sanctuary, private spaces, AWS etc., its a barmy idea and makes them indistinguishable from each other.

scotsheather · 22/06/2018 22:33

Spousal veto has got to stay, surely. Better end the marriage on those terms than let problems spill over further down the line.

PeakPants · 22/06/2018 22:42

I like it Betty. I think it attempts to strike a fair balance. I don't have an issue with self-ID as long as we ensure that what is being self-ID'd into is not 'being a biological woman'. It's much better to do it your way than to focus on making getting a GRC really hard, with the implication that getting one gives you access to all female spaces.

Snappity I actually think you're the one who doesn't give a shit about trans people. You're trying to force them into a stereotype, forcing them to deny their own experiences and trying to prevent them accessing services and help. You should feel quite ashamed of yourself and if anyone is transphobic on here, it seems to be you. Educate yourself before returning.

LadyLance · 22/06/2018 23:44

@Snappity it is easy to extrapolate something wrong. I am part of the LGB community and strongly support LGB rights, and I do not believe trans women have the same perspective on life/feminism as women. I am concerned that allowing trans women into women only spaces opens the floodgates to the AGF community as @Macareaux has discussed. I'm also concerned about the exclusion of women from some religious groups from public life if they cannot access toilets/showers as all are used by people with penises.

Just because someone is in favour of LGB rights does not mean they are in favour of the "Transwomen are women" lie.

Also, it is possible to be on the right side of history once, and wrong on the next debate.

Finally, Archbishop Tutu is a man, and therefore his opinion on women's spaces is utterly irrelevant.

Italiangreyhound · 23/06/2018 00:38

@BettyDuMonde 'What about women’s stuff? Should we add misogyny being recorded as a hate crime?' Yes, definitely.

Loads of positive comments on here and I don't want to be the negative voice, but I am guessing you would want to hear some negatives too?

If so, read on, if not, skip...

'... yes to Self ID that gives you legal protection for your adopted gender and gender presentation - no need for a medical diagnosis, it can be like deedpoll.'

People can already change their name and change their gender on documents like passports and driving licenses, apparently. Their gender is already protected, I think, under 'gender reassignment' (nothing to do with surgery etc) under the The Equality Act 2010.

So I am afraid it is a No from me for any further self id on gender because (it appears) people conflate it with sex.

For me, no more sanctifying of self id - you cannot self id as older than you are and get a pension, or younger and pay less on the bus, you can't self id into a professional job without the proper qualifications (if needed), you cannot self id as disabled and gain disability benefit, etc.

All people deserve protections in law for physical safety and for jobs etc. And everyone should get those protections.

If you want to enshrine in law the genders that are not 'men' or 'women' then I am not sure you will get trans people on board.

Personally, I would rather see gender disappear as it is a social construct that causes harm to women. And as I say, in many people's minds sex and gender are the same thing, because once they really were (apparently).

Italiangreyhound · 23/06/2018 00:42

Don't want to de-rail but if anyone wants to watch this, it is quite interesting. On the subject of there only being two genders...

Picassospaintbrush · 23/06/2018 00:48

PeakPants

Quite enjoyed that "educate yourself" there to the snippy one. Normally I hate the silly phrase but I love how you banged that down!

Snappity · 23/06/2018 03:06

"if someone who purports to be in favour of trans rights can read through all of this and respond only with ‘but transwomen are women’ and has nothing at all to say about important issues such as appropriate care for elderly transfolk and legal protections to ensure that transitioning will not result in losing your job, then I think it is safe to assume that they do not really care about the legal rights of transfolk at all, and are posting here with the sole intention of being a goady fuck."

No. Your whole house of cards relies on you saying that some women - trans women - are biologically so inferior to other women that they don't deserve to be treated as women. And I don't think you have any defence to that argument other than saying trans women aren't women - which is pretty much an admission that the challenge to your house of cards is a solid challenge.

Picassospaintbrush · 23/06/2018 03:28

No. Your whole house of cards relies on you saying that some women - trans women - are biologically so inferior to other women
inferior? Who has ever stated male biology is inferior?*

Feminism is all about females not being inferior. Have you not read any liberation texts, there are lots of them?

that they don't deserve
deserve? That is an interesting word? Why are you using that word?
to be treated as women.

And I don't think you have any defence
why do you couch your argument in warlike terms?
to that argument other than saying trans women aren't women - which is pretty much an admission that the challenge to your house of cards is a solid challenge.
We agree, your house of cards has no solidity, although I expect you think you are saying something profound as usual.

Rufustheyawningreindeer · 23/06/2018 09:29

If people said

Transwomen should be treated as women regardless of biology

Then i think you could have a debate about the finer detail

Transwomen are women is a position that can't possibly be argued as its obviously incorrect

ClareFlourish · 23/06/2018 09:46

Two things occur to me about this, @BettyDuMonde:

First, you talk about the wonderful trans folk in your life, who pose no threat, who want to live under the radar, kind thoughtful and quiet, but you fear the bad ones, elsewhere, threatening others. About fifteen years ago you would hear old people openly racist, yet saying that the BAME people they actually knew were OK. We hoped they would realise, and make generalisations from the people they knew rather than what they read.

We're almost all like that- not wanting to be noticed, revolted by much of what revolts you, pleasant enough company- yet you are going the other way, judging the people you know by what you read. Though the internet radicalises people, and the hard Right in the Times and the Spectator desperately wants to radicalise the Left against itself, you will go by what you read not what you see.

Second, I agree that schools should minimise sex stereotypes, encourage both sexes to play with their masculinity and femininity, to experiment and find themselves, but those who speak against trans people, most of them- David TC Davies, The Daily Mail- think this is rubbish. Boys should be boys, they exclaim, stridently. You get this in the Question Time audience as well. The people who agree with you that sex stereotypes are harmful, are trans people and our allies.

EmpressOfSpartacus · 23/06/2018 09:48

some women - trans women - are biologically so inferior to other women that they don't deserve to be treated as women.

I'm not sure where you think inferiority comes in. It's about recognising different sexes and also people with declared genders, & catering for the different groups.

Betty, I read this article about transgender people with dementia. www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-wales-43365446

ClareFlourish · 23/06/2018 09:58

@AncientLights: "unreasonable behaviour" in divorce is behaviour which the divorcing spouse cannot be expected to live with: the idiosyncrasies of the claimant matter. Your husband or wife has behaved in such a way that you cannot reasonably be expected to live with them. So even if a court thought it was entirely reasonable for a person with gender dysphoria to transition, it would be unreasonable to expect the other spouse to stay married to them if s/he didn't want to.

BettyDuMonde · 23/06/2018 10:12

italiangreyhound - we’re in agreement really - sex and gender need to be enshrined in law as separate, the fact they aren’t right now is why my plan involves going back to the drawing board and seperating the two.

The only exception would be people who already have a GRC - that would stay for life, but no more would be issued (I think it’s around 4500).

(Replying on phone so can’t check back for user names who asked)

Re trans widows and partners - i’d like to see a government funded support group that is entirely separate to trans support groups. I also think there should be some best practise guidelines issued regarding divorce - these days all U.K. divorces are processed at a few regional centres, rather than county courts, so staff theoretically can be more easily trained.

I reckon it comes under the ‘behaviour’ part of ‘irretrievably broken down’. Weirdly (this is from memory so I need to check) same sex marriages cannot be dissolved on the basis of adultery, so there must be some ancient law underpinning what defines ‘adultery’. I guess that needs to be looked into too, in regards to new equality laws.

Anyway, I have to put this stuff down for the weekend before I am served divorce papers Grin but I intend to add:

  1. the stuff about unaccompanied children on flights being seated next to ‘F’ people - big reason to keep birth sex on passports

  2. the toilets being single SEX with additional unisex, as highlighted by the spy camera thread.

Feel free to @ me in any other threads flagging up stuff that needs to go in here, either as an expansion/evidence of something already listed or something new.

Thanks for the dementia vid, will watch it when I get a chance.

And Snappity ‘different’ and ‘inferior’ are not synonyms.

OP posts: