Brainstorm your ideal outcome

[BarrackerBarmer]

This is what I think a fair society would look like.

1. Repeal the GRA. Noone changes sex, and society shouldn't force people to pretend they can.

1. Create a SEX Recognition Act in its place. Sex is a protected characteristic, we can define and describe it, and we have an obligation to do this in law. We must give it watertight legal protection. Make it unassailable. Outline the same sex rights that are protected.

1. Legally separate terminology -ALL terminology that relates to sex Vs gender.

All legal institutions already recognise the fundamental difference between the two, but currently they rely on deliberate ambiguity and conflation of terms to make two opposing concepts opaque and interchangeable to suit an agenda. This ends. There are legal terms which relate to sex (male/female/man/woman) , and terms which relate to gender (masculine/feminine) and these concepts are not synonymous in law. No crossover of terms. Sex has a legal lexicon, and gender does too. They are not interchangeable. .

1. New legal protections for 'gender expression' such that no discrimination is allowed on the basis of how someone presents themselves. Not protections for 'trans' which should not exist as a legal concept. Protections for male people who present themselves as whatever they perceive their gender to be -feminine, etc. And vice versa.

A person's sex status is immutable. Their gender status - and this is NOT a compulsory characteristic, JUST LIKE RELIGION, is subject to change if wished.

1. 'Grandfathering' of the 5000 already granted a GRC. They have passed through a period of history that endorsed a legal fiction, and they benefitted from it and will continue to do so. But that door is now closed and none will follow. Those people will be the last to be legally recognised as the sex they are not.

That is my desired outcome. What would yours be?

Don't start with the compromise you think society will give you.
Start with how you think things SHOULD be. Uncompromising.

The 2010 Equality Act allows for the exclusion of those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment from provisions made specifically under the protected characteristic of sex.

It was an attempt to clear up the mess that the 2004 act created.

I think the nail on the head is legal protection for gender expression as those that don't believe they have gender dysphoria can present how they wish free from harm and prejudice. However this also means the rest of us do not have to go along with the notion they have changed sex and everyone is absolutely clear on what is meant by sex and gender. If, as many of the trans population are saying, they don't have gender dysphoria, and it is society's perceptions and reactions that cause them harm, then why wouldn't this be a good solution.

@LauraMipsum @barrackerbarmer I think you’re irony detectors went the same way as your knowledge of the law.

Under the EA trans people are legally their aquired sex,
Perhaps you could raise some money to get a proper legal opinion?

That is true Betty

but

what it doesn't explain is how exactly you would also exclude someone who has acquired the protected characteristic of sex.

I've been talking to a lot of lawyers about this. About two thirds of those I've spoken to say that once someone has acquired the protected characteristic of sex, then the fact that they also have the protected characteristic of having undergone g.r. is irrelevant: they can't be excluded from the sex exemptions because they now legally share that sex "for all purposes" (this is also what I think).

The other third say that the EA overrides the GRA, and that the GRA should be interpreted to mean "for all purposes except the EA."

My view is that the two statutes are in conflict.

Under the EA trans people are legally their aquired sex

How do you 'acquire' a sex?

Perhaps we already are well acquainted with the respective laws?😉

You are wrong.
Even if you identify as right.

You are simply wrong. About zoos, and attacking, and the equality act, and legal sex.
But if you keep going, the law of averages suggests you'll probably be right about something soon. Remain hopeful.

That was irony by the way.

Under the EA trans people are legally their acquired sex

But given that they aren't actually that sex, it would surely make more sense not to have that confusing lack of reality as a starting point. I think you missed the idea of this thread, which was to be genuinely fair to all.

Laura it’s two patchy, nonsensical laws that have never really been tested in court!

Cath not true - transpeople can be excluded from provision for the opposite-to-their-birth-sex, as long as the provision is ‘a proportional means to a legitimate aim’ - such as a women -only exercise session provided by a council to improve fitness/lower BMIs in say, Muslim women in that geographical area.

How do you 'acquire' a sex?

By creating laws which are unmoored from reality.
In reality noone can acquire a sex.
All that can be done is to create a legal lie that can be observed by all to be a false statement, and punish those who refer to truth.

Outlawing truth is a very, very dangerous legal precedent.

Which situation has been created by the GRA, and is the reason it should be repealed.

@LauraMipsum that was irony by the way.

Agree OP, and with Upstartcrow .

1. Removal of the concept of 'gender' in UK law
2. Repeal of the Gender (sic) Recognition Act

or

1. Renaming it: the Changing Sex on Official Documents and Erasing of Personal Histories Act
2. Removal of Gender (sic) Reassignment in the Equality Act

@Bettydumonde The EA is part of my job. The bar for exclusion is high. You must have a good reason why a trans person cannot do a particular task or activity. The EA does not allow blanket exclusion.
Please all of you. Get proper legal advice.

Jesus Christ this thread, but since we are fantasy role playing on - "what if the "gender critical" bunch got in power and everyone's worries about them being fascists were realised" ...

You'd have to have some genetic "purity" screening at all immigration entry points. Trans people abroad would have no documentation identifying them as trans only their acquired sex. Anyone deemed not "woman" enough by whatever "biological" standards you set can't ... Well, what? Present as a women? They have to be "marked" somehow as not allowed in the hallowed "womens spaces". Not quite clear what our ubermensch GC overlords have in mind there for any foreign trans people, or Caster Semenya. I'm sure Caster would be perfectly happy to have sat in an XX immigration detention center for three months while the genetic purity police determined if she is a "woman" by their standards. That's how long it took the IoC to decide she was a woman, then change their minds later, then change them back again. Or the few days while a karotype was performed. Of course all this will be done on the basis of what the person looks like, so good luck traveling as a butch lesbian into this country!

Maybe forced hormone therapy for any women or men not quite meeting the standard above?

Intersex women currently considered women under the law will need to pass these new biological standards. Some won't ... So these are also lumped in with the category "men", not allowed in "women's spaces".

All hail the new XX genetic purity police and our new status as the pariah anti-LGBT state of the world! Not even KSA has this level of intrusion into their citizens lives, I'm not joking there.

I find that when people are getting a bit overexcited a cup of tea can help.

Misogyny recognised as a hate crime everywhere

Please don’t @ me - it generates an email I don’t need!

Like I said, ‘a proportionate means for a legitimate aim’.

I don’t need any legal advice right now, ta!

The government does...

Silly SistersofMercy

Under Barrackers proposal all Transpeople would be completely protected from discrimination under the protected characteristic of ‘gender expression’.

Well sisters of mercy, if we just stick to sex , apart from intersex, one is either male or female. Us GCs are not making it up so we can keep all males and females in segregated boxes. How ever in terms of gender we are happy for anyone to dress , act, play the role of whomever they feel most comfortable, but not conflate that gender expression of the opposite sex as actually being a member of the opposite sex. Wouldn't it be great if we lived in a world where men could wear whatever they want and express their femininity but still remain men !

(Still can’t read your username without immediately getting ‘This Corrosion’ as an ear worm - m.youtube.com/watch?v=q-RVJyNpfDk 🐛)

Birth certificates have sex on them sistersofmercy. HTH.

You could have spared yourself quite the rant about 'purity' there.
Are you in any way connected to that twitter Nazi account that has been trolling and pretending to be a gender critical feminist group? It uses swastikas and talks of XX genetic purity.
It has nothing to do with feminists, it's a fake profile.
It's actually run by masquerading TRAs. Of course it's completely obvious, and had been reported to twitter and I think the police.

You sound awfully like it.

But forgive me if I'm wrong but wasn't the GRA created in response to the Uk losing a case in the ECHR, who is this proposal to end it going to resolve this issue

@Sistersofmercy sort of makes a good point. The EA does not define make and female. I think that was deliberate as that’s a hard definition to get right.
The identification of who is which sex is left to the individual and to society as a whole. Hence the heated debates on forums such as this one.
That said, I think the definitions proposed here are largely based on predjudice and ignorance - most people here have very wrong ideas about legislation. They’re also not helpful. Excluding trans people in the ways proposed here will simply move them from gender identity clinics to mental health clinics and push up the already huge levels of make suicide.

But you have prompted an important point to add:

1. All official documentation to record sex not gender (where it is necessary to record it at all). Legally this must be concordant with birth certificates.

None of us should have gender on our passports or driving licences. This is patently nonsensical and is apparently inaccurate data held on the majority of the population without their consent. I don't have a gender and I strongly object to one being assumed for me and used on my documentation. Sex is a matter of empirical fact and where relevant should be a matter of record.