Email response from senior tory cabinet minister...

[SoulSaver]

re GRA concerns...

Thank you for contacting me about transgender equality and protecting women's rights.

I would like to assure you that there is a strong commitment to achieving equality for all. There is no hierarchy of equality. The profile of transgender equality has rightly been raised in the past few years as many transgender people still encounter prejudice and discrimination. This, however, has not been to the detriment to women. The equal rights of women and of transgender individuals are being strongly promoted.

Transgender people often face some of the worst discrimination in our society. Proposals to streamline and de-medicalise the process for changing gender are part of a broad consultation of the legal system that underpins gender transition, the Gender Recognition Act (GRA). For many transgender people, and organisations that support transgender people, the legal recognition process is no longer delivering. The consultation aims to improve this public service to make the system less bureaucratic and intrusive for the trans people that use it.

There has been some misunderstanding and confusion about what this consultation covers and what it might mean. The consultation only asks about changes to the GRA and there will not be any amendments to the Equality Act 2010. Under the Equality Act 2010, some organisations may treat people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment differently in particular circumstances when it comes to accessing single- and separate-sex services, such as services provided to survivors of domestic abuse. The guidance on the issue makes it explicitly clear that the exception can only be used in exceptional circumstances and where there is no less discriminatory way of providing the service. The consultation is open and I know the Government Equalities Offices is keen to reassure organisations, especially women's groups, with concerns about what change to the GRA might mean. I would encourage you to contribute your views.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me

The equal rights of women and of transgender individuals are being strongly promoted.

How can they be equal, when women are half the population, with specific needs, and trans are a tiny proportion? What about 'your rights end where mine begin'?

Summary:

Previous changes haven't had an impact on women so the proposed ones won't either.

Trans people are the most oppressed ever.

This vital change necessary to make trans people's lives better will not lead to any changes for anyone else.

The P.S. is missing: "I have not studied this issue in any way and have literally no idea what the impact of the changes might be".

Nottakingthisanymore
But the whole point is they legally change their sex. They are woman so an use women’s facilities. Isn’t this the whole point. Trans woman with GRC get to use women’s facilities because they are women. Self if makes it easier to become legally a woman. Or have I got this wrong? Why are they not listening? Why are they not reading things properly.

Lawyers don't seem to agree with each other on this. I have seen lawyers saying that the grc makes a difference if someone prosecutes for discrimination on grounds of having gender reassignment - if they don't have a grc their treatment will be compared to those of their own actual sex, if they do it will be compared to their new legal sex. In that case a trans woman is treated legally as a woman.

The ehrc guidance is clear that a grc holder should be treated in their new sex, and states it in relation to lots of contexts. But it doesn't state that in some contexts (ie sport, and refuges I think). The lawyer who gave evidence at the House of Commons inquiry into the equality act a couple of days ago said that a grc holder can be excluded from single sex services for their legal sex (or provided with the service a different way) if there is a legitimate need. She was very very clear on this.

This is why this whole discussion is such a mess. Plus the fact they are not reading things properly so do not know the questions to ask.

The P.S. is missing: "I have not studied this issue in any way and have literally no idea what the impact of the changes might be". yes.