Response from GRA feedback

[SoulSaver]

After completing the consultation, I emailed the address provided stating my concerns with the process around the proposed change in legislation as well as the form itself. I've just received the following response:

Dear xxx

Thank you for your email. We have not yet decided how we want to see the Act changed and that is why we launched this explorative consultation. We welcome views from anyone who has an interest in the issue.

The Gender Recognition Act consultation looks at how the existing framework for changing legal gender could be reformed. The current framework is set out in the Gender Recognition Act 2004. This is a complex and lengthy piece of legislation and in order to consider reform we wanted to find out what people thought about the existing provisions. That is why the consultation is structured as it is and why we have asked detailed questions on the key areas in the existing law.

We recognised some people would struggle with understanding the document due to its complexity and that is why we published an Easy Read version of the consultation. This is available on our website. We have also published the consultation document in Welsh and a factsheet for those new to the topic.

We have been working with a range of LGBT and women’s groups for over a year to ascertain their views and concerns about reform. We have held a number of roundtable events with key stakeholders interested in reform. These roundtables have included meetings with LGBT groups, womens organisations, offender and rehabilitation organisations, clinicians and healthcare professionals and organisations in Wales.

We have also published our consultation on the Government Equalities Office social media channels. The consultation has received press coverage and has regularly been discussed in public by the Minster for Women and Equalities, Penny Mordaunt MP.

The term ‘gender’ is often the term used in the context of the Gender Recognition Act and the gender transition process. Moreover, 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.

Kind Regards,

Oh for heaven's sake. Mealy-mouthed platitudes. And if the government doesn't know the difference between sex and gender, and thinks it doesn't matter, we are in serious trouble.

Interesting that they admit to conflating the words sex and gender. Relates to this thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3396560-The-Govt-knew-but-refused-to-use-the-definitions-of-sex-and-gender-in-the-GRA2004

Aww you poor confused woman, take a look at our easy read version, where we tell you it's all fine and you don't need to worry your pretty little head about it.

Oh. Is this where lots of words are belched out and everyone says 'Oh ok then'. Nah. I've spoken to my 13 year old son about this for the first time this afternoon. He gets it.

FFS, how utterly patronising. Isn't that gaslighting?

Interesting that they admit to conflating the words sex and gender.

Very interesting indeed. Because gender identity is a hugely different thing from biological sex. Once you have a GRC, that legally makes you a member of the opposite sex, and therefore you can be treated as such in terms of access to single sex spaces.

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

I think that reply is gob-smackingly stupid.

One of the scottish councils, defending its use of the term 'gender' instead of 'sex' when referring to the Equality Act, said that Stonewall had advised the council to change it: 'Gender' was more inclusive, Stonewall argued. Since Stonewall was providing state-sponsored training, the council believed that they were being advised correctly.

That's how key legal terms like 'sex' are erased from public consciousness and use - by stealth.

I would expect a civil servant in the Equalities Office to know their law, know the difference and the danger of making 'gender' and 'sex' interchangeable, and know the importance of stating the legal terms accurately. They make the draft laws and regulations, ffs.

How does the Equality ministry expect someone to find out about their rights and responsibilities, if the people in the Equalities office themselves connive at a sleight of hand to confuse the public?

Which "women's groups" were those, then? That they supposedly met with.

If the law means the same thing by sex and gender then why are they listed as two classes on the Equality Act?

I will say in Scotland the government funded women's groups went along with all of this as did every agency that receives any government funding because guess what THEY NEED THE MONEY. Sell outs.

Only the self funded groups are speaking out because they have nothing to lose financially.

That consultation is a joke. Half of the questions ask about the interplay between the GRA and the EA, and how the proposed changes would affect that. It wouldn’t, of course, because a person would still be issued with a new birth cert on getting a GRC, and a birth cert is all organisations are legally allowed to request when checking someone’s eligibility to access single sex spaces and services. Self ID is what would change the situation, because anybody could have a birth cert of the opposite sex to their actual biological sex, not just those who have been vetted and approved, and even the single sex exemptions wouldn’t keep them out. The consultation is a mess. It’s not fit for purpose.

Pat pat on the head, off you go dear...



Argh, emoticons arent working. Cross face below.

I'd also like to know what these 'women's groups' are that they claim to have had around their tables. Consisted of transwomen, no doubt.

We have held a number of roundtable events with key stakeholders interested in reform

This is an ambiguous and possibly misleading piece of information, without further details.

As we know, the consultation started from the premiss that the reforms were to make it easier for transgender people, with or without gender dysphoria, to change their sex on their birth certificate. The MInister said that this was the end point too and objectors needed to move on.

We also know that the Equalities Office could not see any possible clashes with sex-based rights. They said that there would be no changes to the Equality Act, and those who saw unintended consequences were just being awkward and needed to move on.

It's the job of the Equalities Office to meet with stakeholders day in day out, so I'm sure they did hold meetings to discuss reforms on how to make a GRC easier to obtain.

Or possibly, 'stakeholders' were there for other purposes and the reforms came up in 'any other business'.

According to Blacks Law dictionary:

What is GENDER?
Defined difference between men and women based on culturally and socially constructed mores, politics, and affairs. Time and location give rise to a variety of local definitions. Contrasts to what is defined as the biological sex of a living creature

I feel I should be escalating my concerns as this response is deeply troubling, especially as it has come to light that there were voiced concerns over the wording in the original GRA legislation that were glossed over.

I'm with Debbie in that the current GRA should be repealed or at least reformed with clear definitions of the terms 'sex' and 'gender'.

I wouldn't know where to start though! No point in asking for clarification from the equalities minister herself as that would simply be a waste of time and likely to raise the blood pressure to boiling point

the current GRA should be repealed or at least reformed with clear definitions of the terms 'sex' and 'gender'

I feel that there is no room for the word 'gender' in the law. There is no reason why the law has to 'recognise gender'? It's a ridiculous notion.

It should never have been called the GRA. It be something like : Alterations to Sex Category recorded on Birth Certificates Act 2019.