GRA consultation question 17

[oooompa]

So sorry to put this here but I can't find anything in the consultation document and the guide from A Woman's Place that I'm using doesn't cover this question!

Does anyone know what this means? (Yep, I'm not very smart!)

Q17 Do you think that the operation of the marriage exception as it relates to trans people in the Equality Act 2010 will be affected by changing the Gender Recognition Act?

The information with the question says:

"The Equality Act permits those who authorise or solemnise marriages according to religious rites to refuse to marry a person they reasonably believe to have obtained legal recognition of their gender under the GRA.

This exception specifically mentions the GRA, rather than referring to the broader catergory of 'gender reassignment.' Should the changes to the GRA result in more trans people having their gender legally recognised then this exception may see greater use."

From what I understand (which isn't much!) the answer would be yes? Could someone please give me a very simple "what it means"? I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed but I want to finish and get it right!

Yes, I think it's probably "Yes". Some of the churches might well lose their shit over this...

It's not that you aren't smart at all, OP, it's the incredibly complex structure of the entire thing which is clearly designed to put off us ordinary mortals. I've done the consultation but have no idea now what I put in that bit. So it seems that people who solemnise marriages can refuse to do so if they believe one (or both presumably) of the couple have a GRC. I suppose this is some 'moral getout' clause. Will this be affected by the proposed changes? They say themselves that if more people are trans then they expect this 'getout clause' would be used more often. Seems logical, unless people suddenly all stop wanting to get married.

Yes - the answer is Yes, if following WPUK.

afaik, the exception exists to allow religious organisations to refuse to marry a couple if they suspect that they are being asked to perform the ceremony for 2 people of the same biological sex, at least one of whom is presenting as the other sex.

However, if in doubt - ignore the question as it isn't necessary to answer all of them.

My advice is to just skip the question. You don't have to fill them all in.
Fair Play for Women advises answering only key questions that are relevant to women's rights. So if you don't know how it is relevant or can't really answer, then just leave it, I think.
THANK YOU for filling out the consultation, oooompa!
You can always check out the other woman-centred guidance here if you are unsure of anything.
fairplayforwomen.com/how-to/

Thank you guys so much! I just need to tick that box and then I'm done.

I may not have explained myself well, the guide really helped me out on a lot of the questions, but I'm glad my voice will be heard.

I have daughters and I'm so genuinely scared for their future

I'm just about to send some messages to family and close friends asking if they're aware of the proposed changes about self ID and ask them, if they haven't, to look into it and fill out the consultation.

Me and DP have been discussing nothing else for the past few days, he's going to fill it out next

I pointed out that this question appears to acknowledge that transwomen are not women. I pointed out that the GRC was a legal fiction, which is fine, as long as everyone is not forced to accept it as fact. I found it quite a useful question. But I very much agree about the unclear wording!

I put ' I don't know' for some of the answers as I wanted it to be based on my own opinions and concerns. I think this is fine as it's a public consultation so everyone's views should be heard and some questions won't be relevant.

Having said that I did go off on a tangent on the military question despite starting with 'I have no experience of the army', then going on to mention that the first woman on the front line in the British army was in fact a transwoman, which led to a bit on the history of women not being recognised for their achievements and I finished with some recommended reading for the poor person who will have to trawl through all these replies.

I do think they'll end up with three piles when sorting it all out- pro self id, the mumsnet pile and a few randoms in between.

The whole idea of the ‘religious get out’ makes me so cross. How is it ok for priests not to go along with TWAW, but women just have to put up with it?

Gentlygently The way they word it masks as much as possible that this is what they are basically asking.

I think it's fair enough that religious organisations do get to opt out, they gave churches and other religions this option with gay marriage.

But no one is going to accuse the church or other religions of transphobia.