SCOTTISH GRA REFORM ANNOUNCEMENT BROUGHT FORWARD

[Mbwashenzi]

It was going to be announced on the 25th - now moved forward to Thursday. Anyone going to join me in the public gallery at Holyrood??

twitter.com/wornoutmumhack/status/1140953953758261248?s=19

It seems a bit 'peoples front of judea' up there

ha! You know, I get mixed up between Fairplayforwomen, Standingforwomen and WomensplaceUK 'down there' too. ;-)

And, actually, GIRES and GIDS

Huge thanks and well done to all fronts of Scottish Women. And more power to all female elbows ongoing.

Massive props to everyone that played a part in halting this juggernaut.
It will have a ripple effect far beyond Scotland.

Incidentally, the Scottish consultation was one of the first things that made me go
A trans identifying male person posted a link to it in a closed Facebook group for women (the new, unofficial definition, obvs) asking cis-sisters to fill it out. There was something about their request that put my hackles up but I clicked the link expecting to fill it out in support of reform.

Working my way through it, it was full of red flags, and it ended up being part of my ascent to the peak.

Funny how things work out.

But you can't make a law about 'living in an acquired gender' without defining what that actually means.

And if they can define for legal purposes 'living in an acquired gender' how will that work?

Will women (born female) have to follow this law? If not, why not? And surely, if women (born female) don't have to follow this law, then we'll back where we are now with women (born male) complaining they are being treated differently, are not validated, are oppressed, have to conform, blah blah blah ad infinitum.
So, where we are today. Except with Gender Police.

Well done to all the brilliant women getting this debate opened up

And if they can define for legal purposes 'living in an acquired gender' how will that work?

It depends on what sort of definition they come up with. I think now it is based mostly around changing their name on documents.

I have seen stuff about transsexuals in the past being expected to dress in stereotypical opposite sex clothing and use opposite sex facilities, but I'm not sure if that was the 'living as the opposite sex' test for a GRC, or for surgery.

It's clear none of these things are actually living as the opposite sex, though.

It's worth looking at the current process for getting a GRC.

www.gov.uk/apply-gender-recognition-certificate

Applicants are already required to provide proof of 'living in the acquired gender' but it's just a few name changed documents:

Proof you’ve lived in your acquired gender

This proof must cover the required time that you’ve lived in your acquired gender. It could include copies of your:

- passport
- driving licence
- payslips or benefit documents
- utility bills or other documents of an official nature

All documents should be in your acquired name and gender. The earliest document must be dated before the beginning of the required time.

The indepth guidance that comes with the application form suggests 5 or 6 documents to cover the whole 2 year period.

This is obviously utterly meaningless. You need a GP letter to change the sex on your passport but the other documents can be changed just by asking.

One of the Man Friday chaps managed to change her driving licence to male just by sending the form with no supporting evidence, and then changed it back again just as easily.

Thank you for all your hard work getting us here

Could someone point me towards some information on what I can help with now (emailing, meetings etc)? Would it help to have a specific thread to bring it together in one place?

Proper accessible Equality Act guidance on single sex exemption would have an immediate effect. Establishments are frightened of getting it wrong, of being targeted and of being found in breach of the law so they have been capitulating to utter nonsense. They are at fault but when their next grant is dependent on evidenced inclusivity best got by paying for government sanctioned and funded staff training complete with incorrect guidance with a government stamp and a rainbow on the cover...

Completely agree. Thank you for everything ScottishWomen. You're amazing.

This is obviously utterly meaningless. You need a GP letter to change the sex on your passport but the other documents can be changed just by asking.

Indeed. I was saying elsewhere yesterday that living as a woman evidentially essentially comprises changing the name on your gas bill now. And, if the medical diagnosis criterion for getting a GRC is removed, that is all it will mean.

I think this is why ScottishWomen is right and a focus on the sex exemptions in EqA is so vital. We need to look at it as to the limits of entitlement a GRC will extend.

Applicants are already required to provide proof of 'living in the acquired gender' but it's just a few name changed documents

yes, I think when responding to the new consultation, it's going to be important to make the point that if there's no medical involvement, and the key objective indicator of applicants sincerity is that they have been 'living as their acquired gender for 6 months', then we need to be very clear on what that means. With the removal of medical gatekeeping, that becomes very important

Also, the political dynamics in Scotland are different than in England. The policy is unpopular intellectually but still motivates a relatively small number of people to get involved in activism or campaigning. However, if it's perceived that a headlong rush to self-ID will have a negative impact on indy support, it will mean a large number of people get off the fence to protect their main political priority.

I wonder about Sturgeon's wisdom in all this.

Man Friday blog on self-ID and driving licences

manfridayuk.org/2018/04/20/self-id-and-driving-licences/

I think this is why ScottishWomen is right and a focus on the sex exemptions in EqA is so vital. We need to look at it as to the limits of entitlement a GRC will extend.

I agree but this won't work unless changes are made to the current GRA. Section 22 of the GRA prohibits disclosure of someone's birth sex without their permission if they have a GRC, if that information has been obtained in a professional capacity. There are a tiny few exceptions - courts, tribunals and social security.

Where a tw has a GRC, and therefore a new birth certificate that says 'female', there appears to be no way of preventing them from claiming to have always been female.

I think an additional exception to section 22 of the GRA should be added so it is not an offence to disclose in relation to an EA single sex exception. Also it should be a criminal offence for the GRC holder to fail to disclose in these circumstances.

I think an additional exception to section 22 of the GRA should be added so it is not an offence to disclose in relation to an EA single sex exception. Also it should be a criminal offence for the GRC holder to fail to disclose in these circumstances.

Absolutely agree.

And if they can define for legal purposes 'living in an acquired gender' how will that work?

Will women (born female) have to follow this law? If not, why not? And surely, if women (born female) don't have to follow this law, then we'll back where we are now with women (born male) complaining they are being treated differently, are not validated, are oppressed, have to conform, blah blah blah ad infinitum.

This is one of the things I was pondering. The only way it works is if all men and women have to follow strict gender laws - skirts and nail polish for women, beards and ties for the men!

Will it be argued that ‘living in the acquired gender’ means accessing single sex spaces? After all how can you live as a women without using women’s spaces? The GRA needs abolished not filled with exemptions. It is a lie. The whole concept of ‘gender’ needs abolishing. If we recognise and separate out sex what is left to ‘protect’ or ‘recognise’ apart from a wish to present oneself in a certain way? Why does the wish to present according to opposite sex stereotypes need more protection than a wish to present as goths or punks or other ‘rebellious’ presentations of the past? Or even as a Rangers fan?

I have a nagging anxiety about the statutory declaration and the criminal penalty for making a false statement. Not just because it's SO unlikely that a predatory male could be successfully convicted for failing to 'live in the acquired gender', but also what about detransitioners? Especially if gender dysphoria is a mental illness, a symptom of mental illness, or a manifestation of unaddressed trauma?

Over the last few months I have come across so many formerly trans people (mostly women, but a few men), who have come to an accommodation with their natal sex. Typically their gateway drug was identifying as non-binary in early/mid-teens, then trans: change name, docs and pronouns, , then hormones, then for the women mastectomies (but rarely genital surgery - more common for the young men). And THEN in their early 20s they come out of the trans cloud and realise the harm they are doing to themselves. Lots of these stories on Reddit and Twitter.

Would this be a criminal offence under the ScotGov proposals?

Also wondering who else was in the public gallery on Thursday? So many wonderful women in this conversation

what about detransitioners?

yes, this occurred to me. the very last thing we should be doing is making it harder for those teenaged girls who have been victims of rapid onset gender dysphoria to de-transition

the statutory dec is essential un enforceable in terms of gate keeping, and could encouage people to keep harming their bodies with hormones and surgery when they're not sure it's what they want

if public responses are invited, I will be arguing against it vigorously on that basis

Detransitioners worldwide have reported great difficulty with putting their documents back in order.

Here, I believe you would have to do the whole GRC process in reverse (change name and live 2 years as your birth sex before submitting written evidence to a panel) for the birth certificate.

Stressful, but at least equal. It would be awful if we end up with a situation where it’s easier to assert a legal fiction than it is to revert to historical and biological fact.

I wonder if any detransitioners will be consulted?

It would be good if they could be empowered to do so as a group - perhaps Transgender Trend could help facilitate?

Will it be argued that ‘living in the acquired gender’ means accessing single sex spaces?

'Living in the acquired gender' currently means getting 5-6 documents in your new identity to span 2 years. Both consultations have suggested getting rid of this requirement altogether. The suggestion in Scotland now is that the 2 years is cut to 6 months. I have seen no suggestions that the nature of the evidence should change - if the requirement survives it will still be documents with new name and sex marker.

The GRA needs abolished not filled with exemptions.

I agree. I also think that is vanishingly unlikely to happen in the near future.

Meanwhile, adding an exception to the GRA so that it's not an offence to disclose when it comes to EA single sex exceptions, PLUS making it an offence for the GRC holder to fail to disclose in those circumstances, would mean we could actually use the EA to secure single sex services and spaces (we also need new statutory code but the EA itself is sound).

Best of all, what possible reason could they give to object?

Making gender identity all about the official name you go by could be confusing in a county where Pat, Ally and Sandy are all blokes.

A credit card company is offering cards with your chosen name on it.

Indeed. I was saying elsewhere yesterday that living as a woman evidentially essentially comprises changing the name on your gas bill now. And, if the medical diagnosis criterion for getting a GRC is removed, that is all it will mean.

That sums up the absolute contempt women are held in.

A credit card company is offering cards with your chosen name on it.

Really so do you apply in your real name but they print whatever you like on it?

I shall be Princess Consuela Banana-Hammock next time I order a credit card then.

Interestingly I have worked for several major banks and at the last one I noticed if you want to change your ‘gender’ with them they ask for NO proof
When I got married I had to provide original copies of marriage certificate etc. to be able to change my name. Seems to be one set of rules for some and different for others.