Ministers commit to preserving sex-based exemptions

[EmpressOfSpartacus]

Open access link: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-put-curbs-on-trans-rights-7zx2cbh2j?shareToken=71ea2e364a4682a6395af2056695238d

Yes it is a reiteration of the Government's response to the petition but it's good that the response is being reported in the press.

Well done Man Friday and WPUK.

To Personwithavulva (from another person with a vulva)
The statement says the current process for gaining a gender recognition certificate “is not working well for the people it is designed for”, with only 4,850 certificates issued since the Gender Recognition Act came into force in 2004. But the statement adds: “That does not necessarily mean we are proposing self-declaration of gender.”

Thank you for making that clear:- “That does not necessarily mean we are proposing self-declaration of gender.”
Anyone who pretends to know what the amended act might say is either misinformed or deliberately lying. No-one knows what is going to be proposed.

PS - The number of certificates issued is more than 4850. Not a lot more, but 4850 is definitely wrong. Mine is number 5xxx

So it looks to me like the current system is working exactly as intended? Works for those who actually have sex dysphoria, and keeps out those who just follow different stereotypes (and abusive males who would otherwise exploit the fuck out of it)
No, it doesn't. I know several post-op TSs who consider the whole process too difficult and/or expensive. Know others who are in a position rather like that of the Windrush generation: they can't produce the evidence that the Gender Recognition Panel demands because they never imagined that they might be required to produce it.

PS The term is Gender Dysphoria — not Sex Dysphoria.

Good news and much more of a definitive statement about balancing the rights than previous ones that focused only on trans rights.

Needs tightening up though as it should not be a choice made by the service providers. Where it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, it should be mandatory and women should be allowed to sue a service provider who fails to provide a service.

Can see from that statement that Stonewall are not happy. They don't want any exemptions, ever, full stop. A bit like Snappity it seems.

Anyone who pretends to know what the amended act might say is either misinformed or deliberately lying. No-one knows what is going to be proposed.

Well, apart from that is what the government has previously said they would do in terms of amending the Act.

Mmmm they will launch the consultation to co-incide with Pride (not IWD eh?) - what a great day to create a bias in your responses govt!

I am not convinced. "Case by case basis" what the fuck does that mean and why is that clause even there?

Also males with a GRC are not women. The sex exemptions should also excludes them.

In a major victory, ministers have vowed not to change a law nobody was proposing changing

This. The government has never proposed changing the Equality Act and removing the single sex exceptions.

Nothing to see here, move on.

Also males with a GRC are not women. The sex exemptions should also excludes them.

So you want people like Debbie Hayton kept out too?

I think we could equally make a case for contact sports (increased injury risk to women).

Please do. Please put all your anti-trans campaigning efforts into this. Because the thing is that both the GRA and the EA already exempt women's sport and the government had never proposed removing these exemptions.

But perhaps in 6 months a government spokesperson will reiterate that sport is not affected and ManFriday can claim another great victory for women's rights.

So you want people like Debbie Hayton kept out too?

Extremist Trans activists have made threats the latest being bomb threats against women, how do we know who is like Debbie and who is like the Speakers corner crew or the KFC bomber? Mexico is having trouble in women's political representation telling the differences between a man and a trans person, according to a Guardian piece.

Debbie must understand by now, how damaging the impact is on safeguarding children and women and that Debbie would be supported in a campaign for a trans specific space or service.

I know several post-op TSs who consider the whole process too difficult and/or expensive.

How is it too difficult? And its means tested also.

I use sex dysphoria, as transsexual people are dysphoric about their sexed body. Not their 'gender' which is nothing but a bunch of stereotypes.

So you want people like Debbie Hayton kept out too?

1. Sex is a biological reality. It is a binary of reproductive classes: female and male. Females are discriminated against, exploited, oppressed, disadvantaged and subject to violence on the basis of their reproductive Sex. For this reason, certain special provisions and protections have been fought for, hard won and put in place to allow women to get somewhere a little closer to equality with men, to remove some of the barriers only women face and to offer protection, respite and recovery from oppression and domination by men.

2. Sex change is impossible. No male can ever become female. No male will ever be oppressed for being reproductively female, therefore no male is ever entitled to the protections and provisions which help females.

3. Some males are really lovely, sweet, intelligent, sane, kind, charismatic, fun people. Some males are have a disorders where they prefer to live 'as though' they are a woman. But this does not make them a woman or entitled to women's protections and provisions.

Therefore, some protections and provisions must be for females only, which will exclude males including the lovely and/or ones who want to live 'as though' they are women.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5878763/Report-reveals-paedophile-attacks-far-widespread-previously-feared.html

Rebekah Eglinton, one of IICSA’s clinical psychologists, works closely with the Truth Project. She said: ‘We’re learning that many people have put themselves in positions of trust and authority to have access to children.

We should be cautious about ANY males placing themselves in these positions, with an agenda to dismantle safeguarding.

anti-trans campaigning

Ah yes, never can bring yourself to say 'pro women'..it has to be anti-trans, which is not even true.

I thought you got banned, Damned?

In a major victory, ministers have vowed not to change a law nobody was proposing changing...

Perhaps parliament wasn’t considering changing it but it’s incredibly disingenuous to suggest that nobody was proposing changing it. There are posters here that would like it changed. See attached screen shot.

So it is actually a victory, and it is heartening to see that the government does not agree that transwomen are women.

I think we have made huge strides forward recently. Only a few months ago no one in the media would discuss the trans issue at all and it was all bogged down in "no debate" and the general public thought all transwomen had had genital surgery.

The Scottish issue of the Times has a variant on this article because in Scotland the government has given schools guidance saying children as young as 4 can change gender in school without their parents being informed! A Christian Institute is challenging this. The article goes on to mention Man Friday and the woman with a fear of men being in a locked ward with a 6 foot transgender patient.
The article ends with a Scottish gov spokesperson talking about supporting trans people and Scotland being progressive re LGBT issues but does show that this has implications for non trans people unlike gay rights.

not to change a law nobody was proposing changing...

It is not true that "nobody was proposing changing" the EA as it regulates single sex exemptions. See
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmwomeq/390/390.pdf

Paragraph 132 on page 34:

We recommend that the Equality Act be amended so that the occupational requirements provision and / or the single-sex / separate services provision shall not apply in relation to discrimination against a person whose acquired gender has been recognised under the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

So you want people like Debbie Hayton kept out too?

Fgs YES. God, would you ever question me if I said I didn't want to get changed with males and say 'what, you want to keep people like your dad and your brother and your male friends out?'. It makes no difference whether they are friends or I like them or what, it is about privacy and dignity.

Trans people need their own spaces.

Surely the fact that such spaces are sex segregated in the first place, and the reasons for that..means any space that is sex segregated is 'a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim'?

Absolutely!

It's an interesting insight into how the other side thinks though, this insistence that we ought to be willing to let say Debbie into spaces in which we'll be naked. Like that's a reward for political support, or ought to be.

It reads pretty meaninglessness to me. Just trying to pacify women and shut them up
Instead of the assumption that spaces will be single sex they have to justify why trans women cannot access those spaces. The default seems to be trans women can access spaces for women
Arse about tit if you ask me

I have no problem with sharing space with transwomen who have had genital surgery. The problem with self ID and GRCs being given without genital surgery is that they are being swamped by men identifying as women without this.

It's an interesting insight into how the other side thinks though, this insistence that we ought to be willing to let say Debbie into spaces in which we'll be naked. Like that's a reward for political support, or ought to be.

^ This. It doesn't matter which side of the fence people who present as opposite to their birth sex are on during this. We want sex segregated spaces and not human made sex's but birth sex.

Arse about tit if you ask me

Agree, they should have said "sex segregated spaces should remain that - people who identify as opposite to their birth sex admitted on a case by case basis."

i suspect this is on the advice of transadvocates who will see this as a temporary loss leader for Self ID. They saw the lie of the land with ManFriday and have changed tack.