Participants Sought for View on Future of Legal Gender

[Lumene]

futureoflegalgender.kcl.ac.uk/further-participation/#

Anyone interested can sign up via above link.

futureoflegalgender.kcl.ac.uk/further-participation/#

I am confused. The link is that of King's College London while the links to the 2 studies are Loughborough's. Joint effort? I remember the dog's breakfast of a survey KCL produced last year, conflating sex & gender in a most puzzling manner. Here, it seems to be 'gender' all the way. And Beth Whatshername from Loughborough is the one who said on Woman's Hour that competing against men would make women work harder. I have no faith in them.

Yes the project seems to be set up by people with a particular view on abolishing legal gender. They claim to want a variety of voices so might benefit from some balancing views from participants.

Scroll down and they are also looking for 20 parents where they can discuss both the parent's and child's views. Perhaps some parents taking a different path to Susie Green may be interested?

Aims of the overall project (my bold and [comments])

1. To critically explore different ways of reforming legal gender status, focusing on England and Wales, while drawing on experiences in other countries, the different legal approaches taken towards other social characteristics, such as religion, disability, ethnicity and sexuality [NB not sex], and the views of activists, policy-makers, NGOs, lawyers and the wider public.
2. To contribute to ongoing policy and political discussions relating to current legal reform proposals, while taking a longer-term approach.
3. To understand different people’s hopes and worries in relation to both the current legal framework and different approaches to legal reform.
4. To contribute to broader discussions about the changing character of gender and the contribution law can make to how it is changing.

I remember the dog's breakfast of a survey KCL produced last year, conflating sex & gender in a most puzzling manner.

Me too, and I'm surprised no one has pulled the plug on this bad joke of a research project.

Me too, and I'm surprised no one has pulled the plug on this bad joke of a research project.

It is so obviously biased it’s ridiculous. But if it’s going ahead should really get a full range of views.

The researchers' requirements will put off all but the most motivated volunteers.

I sent the link to a mother of babies and toddlers, knowing that she would be interested, but she (quite rightly) pointed out that she didn't have the time and was put off by the frequent references to the 'gender' rather than the 'sex' of her children.

But if it’s going ahead should really get a full range of views.

Of course, I will do it. I persevered through the first phase survey, so at least I know what to expect.

I am on my way to the inaugural lecture of Prof Davina Cooper at KCL tonight.

If there is a Q&A after I may ask what she thinks of Maria Miller now saying it was a mistake of the government consider making self identification legal.

GO Trousering

Well all I can say is that there is nothing to worry about from that project.

Weirdly there is no clear description of what constitutes ‘a young child’ with regards to being a parent of a young child. There is no age criteria - presumably under 18 or do we think very little? I guess I could self-identify as a parent of a baby and toddler triplets? And there doesn’t appear to be any process to verify what parents say about what their young children think - or even that they have any?

So my thoughts in no particular order.

Preconfiguration
It's such a waffley way of going about things that the meaning slips away the moment you think you have grasped it. All I have come away thinking is that it is just a useful idiocy to continue to mask and gaslight the real agenda and the reason for so much money being chucked at stripping sex based rights.

Bias

Again the mention of section 28 and opposition to same sex marriage. Characterising opposition as Christian, traditional, not progressive, and wanting to maintain rigid life long binary.

Talking about it being playful to imagine having no sex based equality rights. A progressive activism.

Mmm.

She did mention age of being able to change legal gender, this was illustrated by moving her hand down as if to represent smaller and smaller children.

I would definitely recommend parents of children angry about the blithe ignorance of the damage caused by ROGD get involved. There was quite a number of young women in the room who clearly buy into the fabulousness of this destruction.