Definition of man and woman used in the GRA consultation

[Elisheva]

Apologies if this has been discussed already. I emailed the GRA consultation to ask which definitions of man/woman and male/female the government were using. This is the reply:

*The definitions you asked for are not provided [in the document]. However, to provide some context, the term ‘gender’ is is often the term used in the context of the Gender Recognition Act and the gender transition process. Although many people make a distinction between a person’s sex and their gender, this is not a distinction that is often re-produced in day-to-day usage of the terms, nor in the law, which uses the two terms interchangeably.

Indeed, in the text of the current GRA (section 9) it is stated that a person who changes their gender using the process outlined in the Act is also considered to have changed their sex.

Thank you for taking the time to write to the Government Equalities Office*

I’m not sure what to reply. There is so much wrong with this that I’m not sure it’s even worth engaging with.

Well, everyone, fortunately the law does define man and woman, in Section 212 of the Equality Act 2010:

man: a male of any age
woman: a female of any age

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/212

Has Corbett V. Corbett been overturned? Corbett v. Corbett determined whether a male-to-female transgender person could marry a biological man.

The judge (Lord Justice Ormrod, who was himself a medical man) created a medical 'test' and definition to determine the legal status of April Ashley.
Ormrod set out four criteria for determining 'sex':
(i) Chromosomal factors;
(ii) Gonadal factors (i.e. presence or absence of testes or ovaries);
(iii) Genital factors (including internal sex organs);
(iv) Psychological factors.

The Court ruled that it was impossible to change sex and plainly distinguished legal statuses for which gender, which could change, was appropriate (National Insurance) from those for which sex was the determining category, among which marriage was the most prominent, it being stated that marriage was necessarily between a man and a woman (both defined according to sex rather than gender).
The ruling was then taken up and used to define the sex of transgender people for many purposes until the introduction of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (which ultimately defined the sex of transgender people as whatever is on their birth certificate, until such point as a Gender Recognition Certificate amends the birth certificate; hence for those who do not possess such a certificate, nothing has changed since 1970).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corbett_v_Corbett

Trans rights campaigners are asking for major changes to the fundamental meanings of the words which define us human beings in science and law.

Firstly, in science, or specifically biology it simply isn't possible to change the meaning of the word male / female. Human beings biologically cannot change sex. It is a fact.

If British university departments suddenly changed their teaching on this in order to appease the trans movement it would be a lie and they would lose all credibility on the international academic scene.
This is what is meant by science is not a democracy. You cannot carry out an opinion poll to change the laws of physics for example. Gravity is still gravity, the apple will always fall from the tree.

Law can be changed by governments. However, if it is not based on fact it becomes a lie. If it is tolerated by the majority of the population then that could be acceptable. But since the proposals could potentially have a negative effect on half the population there needs to be full open discussion and honesty on the subject.

The new meanings need to be made very clear.

The current trans movement have not offered clear definitions and the half of the population which would be most affected is being shouted down and silenced as much as possible.

upstartcrow my understanding was that the Ormrod criteria specifically EXCLUDED the psychological 4th criteria. It was considered and discarded for the purpose of the test.

This is important. Because in the GRA debates, Filkin (on behalf of the govt) referenced Thorpe (from the Bellinger case). Thorpe had said "how can we exclude psyche, that's not fair" in other words, ladybrain is how we should determine sex. Filkin said "yup, sounds right to the govt, ladybrain is very important and should be a measure".

So if I have this right, the Ormrod / Corbett criteria are ONLY the first three.

Which is exactly as it should be.

The last criteria, ladybrain, was rejected in law UNTIL 2003, and the bloody govt of 2003/4 are the ones who brought it into law with the GRA.

OP, what the email address you used? I might email them and ask for definition on a list of words, plus the question about a Trans women having a child, are they then the mother or father?

Btw, it's entirely obvious that the TRA side are increasingly aware that providing definitions destroys their own position so efforts are shifting to claiming sex and gender are the same.

This is what I'm taking away from their recent wording changes.

I emailed the address given on the government website. It specifically invites questions about the GRA:
[email protected]

plus the question about a Trans women having a child, are they then the mother or father?

By the trans logic, they are the mother. Which means they would be entitled to statutory maternity pay and leave.

@SittingAround1

Don't forget free dental treatment and prescriptions.

I hope @Notveryblissful come back and answers that question. To me, of course the trans women is the father. I child has one father and one mother, the trans women would have provided the sperm, they are the father.

I would change birth certificates so that it just lists the two parents, with whatever "label" that people want to apply to themselves being up to them in their unique family structure.

I don't think its relevant to the state or society which parent was the one that gave the sperm and which gave birth to them, though if it is really necessary you could specify which "parent" was which without using the terms mother/father

@SittingAround1 They aren't "the mother" in the sense that they are the one who gave birth to the child. Though I think both parents should have access to equal parental leave, and with them being able to split it between them (if they are a couple, if they are single then the one parent should get extended parental leave).

@Barracker Sex and Gender are the same though, both in law and reality.

I would change birth certificates so that it just lists the two parents

But birth certificates are not changed (as far as I know?) They have space for a mother, and a father, what is the trans woman?

Indeed, in the text of the current GRA (section 9) it is stated that a person who changes their gender using the process outlined in the Act is also considered to have changed their sex.

For a man to woman 'change' this statement should continue: "Will subsequently only be entitled to half to two thirds of their salary, be overlooked for promotion should a male candidate apply for the same post and is expected retire early to care for aged parents as society expects." After all, the person is a 'woman' now.

though if it is really necessary you could specify which "parent" was which without using the terms mother/father

What term would you use?

I don't think its relevant to the state or society which parent was the one that gave the sperm and which gave birth to them

Except it is relevant. For example, if unmarried, afaik, only a mother can register a birth, if the father wants his name on the birth certificate he must also attend. The mother has certain health based rights and needs after having a baby, the father has different rights. Some nationalities can only pass citizenship rights to children through the male, or sometimes female line, also depending on marrage status and state. Custody rights can firstly belong to the mother or the father, depending on the state they are living in. There are lots of genetic conditions that are carried through the male or female line. Perhaps most importantly, the child has a right to this information and should not be fed a biological fiction.

"I am not trans so I don't feel entirely comfortable putting forward a short definition"

Dictionaries are really useful for that sort of thing. You really should get one.

In that dictionary (any dictionary), you will also see two definitions that will go a long way towards alleviating your difficulty in comprehending why transwomen are not female or women:

Female = Of the sex that can make eggs or bear young.

Woman = Adult human female.

I am not trans so I don't feel entirely comfortable putting forward a short definition
But you have not put forward any definition - short or long. Nor has anyone else. No one can define what, in this brave new world, will be a ‘man’ or a ‘woman’, and for me this is absolutely crucial.

Why would you need to be trans to put forward a definition?

The very existence of transgender people proves that sex and gender are NOT the same. If they were, nobody would be trans. If sex and gender were always the same then it wouldn't be possible to have a gender that doesn't match one's own body with its physical reproductive system at birth (sex). In order to be "trans", there must be a mismatch between sex and gender, because if everything was aligned, you'd just be a regular "cis" person.

Sex and Gender are the same though, both in law and reality.

No they aren't. Where do you think "non binary" people fit in?

Female = Of the sex that can make eggs or bear young.

Woman = Adult human female.

Why don't you tell us why that definition doesn't work?

To Notveryblissful if not clear.

Notveryblissful

No they are not.
The government, judiciary, WHO, medical Institutions and all the genderist charities and orgs have confirmed that sex and gender are not the same thing.

The law distinguishes between sex and gender.