Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Who wants to repeal the GRA?

40 replies

littlecabbage · 18/10/2018 21:13

Whilst I'm waiting for the pages of the consultation to load stupidly slowly.... I was wondering how many of us think the GRA should be repealed altogether?

And does anyone know what certain prominent "genuine" transsexuals think about it? (I don't remember reading anyone commenting on this).

OP posts:

BesmirchingMotherhood · 18/10/2018 22:09

Knicknackpaddyflak · 18/10/2018 22:20

Me.

howard97A · 18/10/2018 22:21

Yes. Repeal the GRA !

LangCleg · 18/10/2018 22:24

I think it should be repealed.

loveyouradvice · 18/10/2018 22:27

OldCrone · 18/10/2018 22:29

It should be repealed.

terryleather · 18/10/2018 22:30

I'd like to see it repealed.

FadingMint · 18/10/2018 22:37

Yes, and noted this in the consultation.
But several of you on this thread have expressed it far more clearly and eloquently!

Angryresister · 18/10/2018 22:41

Absolutely ...have it for those who have got it now but stop the rest.there is no point ,

MagicMix · 18/10/2018 22:49

The thing I don't understand is if it's got nothing to do with accessing women's spaces/services etc, as so many people on the other side of the argument keep saying, then what on earth is a GRC even for?

Was it really just to let transsexual people get married without it being legally a same-sex marriage? If so, surely it's now obsolete. And my eyebrows are also raised at the thought that this was considered a better solution than just bringing in marriage equality.

transdimensional · 18/10/2018 22:53

I think when people say it was only brought to avoid same-sex marriage, that's not quite right. I mean, even supposing that was the main reason that it was being campaigned for, this was only one of the grounds on which the ECHR had ruled against the UK - and it's not clear that same-sex marriage would have been enough to satisfy the ECHR. Perhaps in combination with the pension changes etc? Even then, it's unclear.
I think the main people bringing up same-sex marriage in the Hansard debate were opponents of the bill (who were worried that technically it legalised same-sex marriage). Of course, the government, responding, were also keen to stress that they didn't intend to introduce it.

I think GRCs have only been issued to 5,000 people, genuine dysphoric transsexuals (perhaps the rules need tightening up a little in light of the Jay case)... That's OK, the important thing is that the medical preconditions, two-year requirement and review by a panel of experts should remain in place.

yetanotherusernameAgain · 18/10/2018 22:58

I don't.

But I now realise I don't actually know what the point of a GRC is. I thought it was so that official documents (eg passports) would reflect the gender the person presented as. But is that not the case? Is it just to sort out the same-sex marriage issue?

I'm looking on the legislation.gov.uk website and it appears to just effect marriage and civil partnership. There are sections saying it doesn't affect peerages, sport, gender-specific offences etc.

If that's the case, then I agree that the legislation is redundant and should be repealed.

RepealtheGRA · 19/10/2018 00:14

Me.

It’s a homophobic nonsensical law that should never have been passed in the first place.

There needs to be greater challenging of gender stereotypes and greater acceptance of people not conforming to them.

Badmoonsarising · 19/10/2018 01:03

Yeah, repeal and nuke the whole Act from orbit - it’s the only way to be sure.

ohello · 19/10/2018 07:53

Flip

1 2