Caroline Criado Perez: What’s Sex Please, We’re British

[Redkeyboard]

mobile.twitter.com/CCriadoPerez/status/1052160183319846912

Absolutely brilliant article raising the questions about definitions of sex and gender being used in relation to GRA reform and how this impacts sex exemptions.

Shame Women’s Hour didn’t bother discussing this.

mobile.twitter.com/CCriadoPerez/status/1052160183319846912

“There’s just one problem: the government has, to date, provided no evidence whatsoever that it knows the difference between sex and gender. The proposed changes are to what is called the Gender Recognition Act. But the Act does not provide for changing your gender. It provides for legally changing your sex. Your gender recognition certificate as a trans woman does not state that you are a woman. It states that you are female.”

“If this is the case how can you be denied access to sex-based services? Does sex mean one thing if you are trans and another thing if you aren’t? What does changing your sex mean for crime data? For medical data? For employment data? Does changing your sex mean you actually change your sex or not?”

Worth reading!

This is essentially the point that Nic Williams was trying to make on Woman's Hour. The lawyer kept saying that the sex-based exemptions of the Equalities Act will still apply. Nic's point was that if you allow trans people to legally change their sex, then you will still end up allowing natal males into women's spaces.

Hold on. Where does the Government say this? And why isn't this same thing being said on a senior level to Councils and Trans Activist lobby groups like Mermaids and Allsorts?

Good question Kat I missed that. As apparently have Guides and the NSPCC.

Which is, in effect, bollocks.

This is a lie. It has not prevented males (without GRCs) entering children's toilets, changing rooms, Girl Guides, refuges, hospital wards (and assaulting women there), prisons (and assaulting women there)…..

Either they are clinging to the lie that hides that what they mean by 'same sex' is 'anyone who identifies as' or the idiots really don't know. Or they'll dump the blame on organisations who were blackmailed with funding, harassed and coerced by trans lobby organisations and pushed into creating intentionally 'trans inclusive' policies that did away with sex segregation 'voluntarily'.

Somewhere is the thread with the evidence from the women's holiday group showing the level of harassment, coercion, nagging, pestering, threatening, faux legal misinformation and vigorous lobbying to get them to state they would take transwomen. And how they responded when the organisation dared to insist that it put biological women's needs first. (As this was the whole fucking point of the organisation.)

Yes, the questions by CCP as quoted in OP need answering. The whole debate from a government and Parliament point of view has been an absolute shambles. There is little confidence that legitimate changes could be made given the current understanding on display.

Too many unanswered questions. A lack of clarity over terms, the extremely off-putting/long winded, GRA consultation form, the problems GC people have had in getting public debate going, the cobblers produced by the BBC this morning in Women's Hour.

Political party engagement has been atrocious. Labour, Lib Dems and Greens have all repeated the meaningless TWAW.

Although Green members did push back slightly at their conference but not enough to give any confidence, not any leadership from leaders. Jenny Jones was quite outraged at being labelled a 'terf' and still tries to placate the TRA overlords - only complete submission will do Jenny, don't continue to think we haven't, mostly, all been there.

And this happened thismorning apparently ...from a Tweet by journalist Nicholas Hellen @NicholasHellen
Shocking moment this morning when journalists invited by
@DavidTCDavies to hear MPs and feminists discuss #GRA issues
@HouseofCommons were told MPs asked not to be named - for their own safety.