Debating the GRA consultation with my DB

[TickledOnion]

I though I would test the waters with my brothers. They are fairly woke but also consider themselves feminists.
One asked: “If 200,000 - 500,000 people in the UK identify themselves as some form of trans / intersex and less than 5,000 of them actually have a GRC then something, somewhere, isn't working properly.”

Leaning aside the trans/intersex conflation, how do I answer that?

I think you have to say that it's the trans umbrella under Stonewall now that isn't just including actual genuine transsexual people with gender dysphoria which the gra was intended for but now includes drag queens crossdressers and anything else you can think of.

Here's an image. Includes pretty much anybody I would think.

And another. Even part-time crossdressers.

So really it means that there should be safety in numbers and they should all be safe in the facilities of their biological sex. There's no reason now that there has to be special accommodation made for them.

Yes. I guess we have no idea of the numbers of trans who want a GRC but are unable to for whatever reason.

Only if you think that having a transgender identity of any sort should automatically confer the right to change your legal sex. The whole crux of the argument is disagreement on this point.

Yeah if you support Self ID then a system other than Self ID is bad. So what, there are really good reasons to oppose Self ID.

Ask him why these people can't get a GRC. If it's because they don't meet the medical criteria then why should they be able to get one? If it's because they aren't willing to engage with the process then why should they be able to get one?

The process appears to be working well enough for the people it was designed for- transexuals with dysphoria. If it's keeping out the fetishists, part timers and opportunists that's a good thing surely.

I think the opposite - it shows it is working very well. Gatekeeping. Ensuring a GRC is only issued to genuine applicants who are serious about wanting to live their lives as a member of the opposite sex to that they were born into. The rest are part time cross dressers, fetishists, attention seekers, opportunists and worse.

Also ask him if he supports self ID for other things- disability benefits for example? My son has a diagnosis that isn't going to change but I still have to fill out onerous forms and supply evidence in order to receive help from the state. Why should this be any different? Why would somebody who had genuine gender dysphoria not be willing to see a doctor? And I've seen many TRAs claim that it's discriminatory because not all trans people have dysphoria- in which case why the hell do they need a GRC anyway?

Good points. DB1 has decided to fill out the consultation despite his arguments and my lack of good answers. I have yet to hear from DB2.
I really need to send it to my friends but I’m worried about losing them.

When the govt passed the GRA in 2004, it was recorded in Hansard that this law change would only affect about 5000 people in the UK, who suffered from severe gender dysphoria.

Since then, the bandwidth has been expanded to "anyone who identifies as a woman IS a woman" and, as stated above, the trans umbrella includes a huge number of people, like fetishists, transvestites, AGPs.

I would question anyone's motives who sincerely thinks that any man should actually be able to self-declare themselves legally women, or that such men really are women. They are not. You cannot actually change sex. A legal fiction was created to alleviate the distress of a small number of very dysphoric people .

The GRA was created for what was estimated to be only 5000 transsexuals [see Hansard report from debate at the time]: api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/2004/feb/23/gender-recognition-bill

Also see: twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1049289194370002945
for summary of GRA intended purpose.

See also: transsexualwomen1.blogspot.com/

Considering all of the detrans folk coming forward the current system is letting too many people transition as it is. Which leaves them sterile.

The disability point is such a good one, and not one that I've really thought a great deal about until very recently.

Why are we considering self-declaration of gender - confused with sex - when we don't allow self-identification of disability without thorough medical examination and evidence?

The answer is quite simply, because it would be abused. And benefits set up to alleviate disabled people would be abused. It's the same in the case of the GRC.

The conservative estimate is 660K trans people, the latest estimate is 1.3 million people

The reason why only just under 5000 people have a GRC is because the GRA has worked precisely as intended - to give legal recognition to transsexuals who have medically transitioned and lived for many years by adopting the gender stereotypes associated with the opposite sex.

Before you award someone the legal status of the other sex, a gatekeeping process is needed to protect society from those who would pose a danger to members of the opposite sex and from those who would abuse the system.

So, the GRA is working properly for the transsexuals it was written for.

The 660K are on the whole transgender not transsexual. At least 80% of the UK's transwomen have no intention to ever medically change their body and 95% so far have not changed their body. The vast majority if not all of the 95% are attracted to females.

The GRA is designed to prevent such intact males from receiving a GRC. You might want to ask your DB what purpose a GRC would serve for an intact, straight male who enjoys having penetrative sex with women and has no intention of ever giving that up.

Intersex ppl do not fall into this category and I would tell your DB they have nothing to do with the issue and want nothing to do with the issue. Theirs is a physiological problem, trans is a psychological problem.

They also seek opposite solutions to their problems - less medical intervention in intersex children that seeks to fit them into either a male or female box. Trans ppl are asking for more and ever earlier intervention in children so they can fit neatly into the male or female box of the opposite sex.

P.S. The estimated number of males who potentially have a transvestic fetish is 1.3 million UK males. Some men with a transvestic fetish enjoy using women's spaces as part of their fetishistic role playing and will avail themselves of any opportunity to do so.

Thanks all.
Now how to respond to this.
“For example, if your GP refuses to treat you because they refuse to accept you as trans. And gender reassignment is elective so unless you can afford to spend an awful lot of money and time off for surgery you won't get treatment, won't get gender reassignment and will get beaten up for going in the men's loos”?

Tell your DB he is being a total pratt! He is obfuscating and dodging the central issues by pretending to see the problem for trans women whilst not seeing the issues for women.

He is being a dickhead. He is not being clever, he has completely misunderstood the EA2010 and the proposed changes to the GRA.

If he want to continue to play silly buggers he can do so on his own time. He has offended you and you think he is a childish twat!

Ask him bluntly, why he would choose to distress his sister like that? What kind of kick does he get out of it? Is he considering taking his penis into woman's space and waving at women and girls whilst laughing out loud at their distress?

I said something similar to a friend of DHs at the weekend. He started to reply that I was being touchy, must be menopausal, couldn't take a joke etc etc. The other men in the room looked uncomfortable and one of them said "If it were my mum or my sister? What could I do?" and the conversation changed a bit!

Short version:

will get beaten up for going in the men's loos”? So tell men to stop doing that then!

Respond by saying why should women and girls be a human sheild for male violence against trans women and the law be changed to allow easier access by non-trans violent males to those space by self-identity.

As above, why are men beating people up, and why is it on women to fix it.

Ask him if he thinks Karen White should be able to get a GRC.

Yes, ask him how he is campaigning against male violence and why women should have to accept penises in their spaces because men can't help themselves but beat up someone who doesn't fit their perception of 'man'p

Show him a picture (or better, still a video) of those "lesbians" intimidating women outside a meeting venue last week (thread on here, I think) and ask him if these people should have unfettered access to females in places where we are disrobing or vulnerable. Those are the people whose "rights" he is asking us to accommodate.

Sorry posted to soon. KW didn't even bother turning up to his appointment at the Gender Clinic so wouldn't meet the criteria as it stands. Self ID proposals would allow KW to get a GRC without ever meeting with any professional for even a basic assessment. Is he okay with that?

if your GP refuses to treat you because they refuse to accept you as trans.

Presumably no GP prescribes this kind of treatment (Helen Webberly aside) - they refer to somebody else with expertise in the area?