Does the government consultation re changes to the GRA start this week? Janice Turner thinks so

[R0wantrees]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/this-gender-battle-is-harder-to-solve-than-brexit-0jc0pn867
Janice Turner The Times:

(extract)
If Brexit is the most divisive issue in British politics, requiring a talent for squaring ideological circles and cajoling compromises from bitter enemies, reform of the 2004 Gender Recognition Act (GRA) runs it a close second. The consultation, long-delayed while three successive ministers for women and equalities scratched their heads, is finally launched on Tuesday.

Although even that isn’t official. Bizarrely the government wouldn’t confirm (or deny) the date. But I’ve seen emails: groups will give evidence in late July, a sleepy summer recess slot calculated, perhaps, to contain the GRA firestorm. Some chance.

Opposing forces are drilled for battle. On one side the trans lobby, including Stonewall and Gendered Intelligence, who claim changes to the process by which a trans person acquires a gender recognition certificate (GRC) are merely a tiny administrative tweak. On the other, feminist activists who fear that a legal redefinition of “woman” from biological sex to the nebulous, inner feeling of “gender identity” threatens female safety and privacy....

Most controversially she sought to replace the GRC process whereby a person must live in their new gender for two years and have a diagnosis of “gender dysphoria” (a mental disorder whereby a person feels their identity is opposed to their biological sex). Instead Mrs Miller proposed “self-identify”, ie a man could simply declare himself a woman with no requirement to transition physically.

The report caused a furore. Without hearing evidence from a single women’s group, Mrs Miller also proposed abolishing exemptions to the 2010 Equality Act which allow domestic violence refuges or hostels to admit only biological women. Interviewing Mrs Miller last year, I was flabbergasted by how little she had thought this through. She saw no conflict of rights at all: women, she said, must learn to accept without challenge male-bodied people using their changing rooms."
(continues)

Link to previous thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3269463-Government-response-to-the-petition

This comment is terribly sad. Women are suffering.

The trouble with polling is, as we know, that the broader population don’t have an informed view on the issue. Most are like I was - wanting to be nice and helping people who seem to be suffering, and not realising what a Trojan Horse is presented by this campaign.

The Wings Over Scotland polling was clear (about transition status under self-ID). Even with an under-informed population, the results were 3:1 against self-ID.

We need proper polling which asks about things like mixed sex overnight accommodation on school or Guides trips; male sex offenders in women's prisons; penis in changing rooms with girl children. Etc etc.

I have been wondering if there may be mileage in small informal groups of sumbissions or comment which focuses on particular aspects eg re clinical trials, data, homeless provision, gyny services, schools, cultural/religious groups etc etc.

In short, small orgs to carry out impact assessments on their service users should self-ID be instituted?

It would have to be the small orgs - all the big ones are headed by pomo-addled nitwits.

or even small groups of individuals with specific shared experience, knowledge etc.

Collective comment?

Are they still planning on making women who identify as men exempt from inheritance laws (sorry for the life of me I can’t remember the legal term)? If so I think this really needs to included in publicity too. The impact on women’s service is absolutely crucial but I think including this point really highlights the hypocrisy of it all. This is not about making things easier for trans people, it’s about validating the identity of TWAW.

Primogeniture

One of the problems with the consultation will be thinking that an adequate consultation involves e.g. Asking women's aid as an organisation. Most of them have been groomed.

We need to make sure they consult more widely. These organisations have to toe the trans line to get funding. It's not what service users want and transactivists have shown that they don't care.

All they need to do is actually listen to one person to start the ball rolling. One person, like Nic Williams, will point them to all the problems of listening to the larger organisations and not the users. Girl Guides is a prime example: a top-down, anti-female policy that is opposed by parents and pack leaders.

Lucy from Deptford is another key voice, and Ruth Serwotka, as an experienced trade unionist, is another. Stephanie DA must be listened to on schools.

Polly Carmichael said it's easy for teenagers to get a trans diagnosis because they just go online and find out what they need to say. I really hope she is called.

One of the problems with the consultation will be thinking that an adequate consultation involves e.g. Asking women's aid as an organisation. Most of them have been groomed.

Exactly. Queer theory and pomo has infiltrated the top of all the corporate third sector.

The consultation must hear grass roots orgs who are actually still in touch with their own service users.

It’s important that all of the organisations we have formed respond as organisations because there will be clout there, and as many individuals as possible. Get your friends, families and partners to respond too.

I agree we should have organised responses where we can. It’s also important to share widely on social media and help people who may struggle in filling it out.

This thread seems to be discussing a wide range of important issues but I expect the consultation will involve specific, focussed questions. I am concerned that due to the level of concern about gender ideology etc. the influencing power of some responses to the consultation may be weakened if they do not focus on the specific issues being consulted upon.
The crux of the issue re GRC reforms is whether getting a GRC should be easier and a matter of personal choice.
I think the thrust of the argument against is that of the impact of reforms eradicating sex as a meaningful category/ being able to meaningfully categorise people according to reproductive role.
I think the most powerful arguments against reforms will centre on the impact of removing sex as a category.

I think the most powerful arguments against reforms will centre on the impact of removing sex as a category.

Yes. Absolutely. And women will obviously have to come at this from a perspective of the impact on women and girls.

I shall write again to my MP.

I've said this before, but I'm concerned we may need to find like-minded allies who are worried about changes to the GRC process potentially impacting on freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, accuracy of data, legal repercussions, etc to present those concerns. I am sure there must be a British Jordan Peterson-type who objects on the "compelled speech" principle. I mean, even those super exclusive traditional male's clubs ought to be raising their eyebrows at this...

PS - Thank you Janice Turner! You really ought to have won the Orwell Prize, given your expose of actual newspeak happening right now

Integrity of the data that informs public policy is another vital aspect of this. Crime statistics, for example.

If the consultation is indeed published next week, are Fair Play ready to go with their awareness campaign? Or do we all need to chip into the crowdfunder PDQ?

How fitting would the Orwell prise be indeed.

Nice.

It's a pity she ignored disability as a protected characteristic. I note the schoolgirl article earlier in the week is gaining momentum for trans people to vacate the female spaces and colonised disabled spaces in the comments.

broader population don’t have an informed view on the issue

All too often, I think neither the broader population nor our elected officials have an informed view on a number of issues until unintended consequences surface. (I'm think of all of the policies around housing, health, Universal Credit etc. that are still playing out in all of their ramifications. And, how often do we find that these policies disproportionately impact specific vulnerable groups.)

Government is on public record saying consultation will be launched before the start of the summer recess. Nicholas Hellen (also Times) has stated that the consultation likely to be launched to coincide with London Pride (next weekend). I think Janice Turner or Nicholas Hellen likely to be in the right ballpark - next week - even if they don't have absolute concrete knowledge of the day.

I was in Sunderland this morning and there was a TRA rally going on, so I suspect that the consultation will be starting soon. Could n't help noticing that all the speakers were male and the crowd chanting TWAW had a lot of female voices in it. There's something about men telling women what to do that irks me greatly...

Just remember that you will need to respond to the consultation in your real life name which, on the basis of past consultations, is generally published.

That applies to both sides, of course which will inhibit some trans people from responding.

The consultation must hear grass roots orgs who are actually still in touch with their own service users.

I am dubious about this. The Equality Act 2010 went out for consultation and there was then debate in the House. I can't recall whether it was the full House or a Committee but some groups were invited in, but only the prominent ones. I am personally sceptical how much influence individuals and small groups can have.

I will still respond personally but I am realistic that the impact of my personal response will be miniscule.