Chuka Umunna and the LibDem policy on GRC reform

[Binterested]

Two weeks ago I had our LibDem candidate - Chuka Umunna - at my door canvassing for my vote. This is a LibDem / Tory marginal. I told him my concerns about the GRC reforms and he appeared to listen (although he mentioned how awful and intrusive the current GRC process is - much more awful and intrusive than women having to share medical wards and changing rooms with men obviously ).

Anyway I emailed him the Jenni Russell Times article and told him he could only have my vote when he can say his party stands up for women. This was before the Jo Swinson car crash interviews by the way.

He has just replied with this :

“Liberal Democrat policy is to support the Equality Act 2010 and reform the Gender Recognition Act, which would make the gender recognition process easier by removing the requirement for medical reports, scrapping the fee, and recognising non-binary gender identities.

However this policy does not contradict our support for women. Our proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act does not impact the use of single-sex spaces, and therefore the law dictating use of spaces would be unaffected by reform.”

I’m glad he has said this and I think he probably thinks this ought to be the case but it’s just not the case in practice. If people get a GRC they can insist on being treated as a biological woman (and increasingly even without the GRC men are claiming access to women’s spaces and the NHS, prisons, schools, sports are all capitulating.)

Part of me is pleased that at least he’s not insane and insisting that TWAW always and forever like some of his party. But frustrated that he has no idea what an appalling policy mess this is and how seriously women’s rights are being endangered for the ideology of a few indulged fantasists.

Long term MNer by the way but name changed.

So is he saying that having a GRC wouldn’t change access to a certain spaces?

It’s a nonsense unless the GRA is scrapped.

Sounds like he side stepped it tbh.

And the fee? Isn’t it tiny, like to cover admin costs. I mean I’d be good with some form of funding if necessary for those who desperately can’t pay this, but these days we have to pay £15 + for a doctors letter so I don’t see how that’s even an issue. It costs to get a passport or a provisional licence or any form of ID and surely it’s the equivalent cost not the cost.

Shoot, I meant not the cost of the assessment being considered.

Obfuscation, obfuscation, obfuscation

Man, that’s hard to say three times.

Of course it's not the cost, it's a one off payment. They'll pay far more in prescription costs.

Come to think of it, does anyone know if the long term prescribed hormones are on the 'free' list?

He has side stepped the issue. There can be no single sex spaces if self id is in place. He doesn't get it.

However this policy does not contradict our support for women

The party leader can't even explain what a woman is.

How can you support people you can't describe?

gender recognition process easier by removing the requirement for medical reports, scrapping the fee, and recognising non-binary gender identities

Also, what is a gender identity and why does the government need to recognise it?

The obliteration of single sex spaces and he doesn't get it.

“Liberal Democrat policy is to support the Equality Act 2010 and reform the Gender Recognition Act, which would make the gender recognition process easier by removing the requirement for medical reports, scrapping the fee, and recognising non-binary gender identities.

However this policy does not contradict our support for women. Our proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act does not impact the use of single-sex spaces, and therefore the law dictating use of spaces would be unaffected by reform.”

The GRA allows people to change the sex on their birth certificate.

Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person’s gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender (so that, if the acquired gender is the male gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a man and, if it is the female gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a woman).

When referring to the protected characteristic of sex and single sex exemptions in the Equality Act, there is no mention of what definition of 'sex' is being used, and there is no indication that someone who has 'changed sex' via a GRC will be excluded from the spaces and services for someone of their 'acquired' sex. It must be assumed that once a man has 'changed sex' via a GRC, he is legally a woman, and indistinguishable (legally) from someone born female.

Allowing people to change sex on a self ID basis means an end to actual single sex spaces - they will be single sex in name only, since a space for women will be open to male women as well as female women.

"Our proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act does not impact the use of single-sex spaces, and therefore the law dictating use of spaces would be unaffected by reform.”

Agreed OldCrone. The only way Umunna's statement makes any kind of sense is if the LDs magically believe that TWAW and/or that legal-fiction-single-sex is all that matters. So males with a GRC using women's spaces 'are female', per McKinnon/Dr Veronica Ivy's view.

That is insane, dangerous and sinister IMO.

When he was my local Labour MP, he replied similarly, producing what was at the time the Lab line - an inclusive society benefits us all. And a refusal to define or separate sex and gender - he know, he must do, he is a lawyer and sharp as a pin.

I get enraged when told loftily that people with non-binary gender identities need X. How dare they imply the rest of us are either Ken or Barbie, as per that stupid graphic.

I worked with him for a few years before he went into politics. My personal view was that he wasn’t necessarily the sharpest pencil in the box, but he can’t be so daft as to think that statement would reassure anyone.

Ha- crossed posts re his sharpness or otherwise!!!

However this policy does not contradict our support for women. Our proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act does not impact the use of single-sex spaces, and therefore the law dictating use of spaces would be unaffected by reform

Whaaaat? This IS and always was a conflict of rights. "Does not impact..." Man becoming woman would certainly have some impact on woman's spaces, no? This is what they are telling you they are expediting. Glad a part of you is pleased, I hope every part of you is not fooled by this nonsense. He has tried to trick you. He has shown you who he is, believe him.

Oh don’t worry. I’m not voting LibDem. No way - and I’m a natural LibDem supporter and a Remainer and a hater of Corbyn and Johnson. They should be counting me among their most ardent supporters. Instead I’m telling everyone what a car crash they are.

However I was slightly pleased that he thinks single sex spaces will be protected. He’s wrong - but at least it means he’s not arguing with me about the the need for their existence. Jo Swinson was telling us last week they are not really necessary and in fact they are bigoted because lesbians.

So I take some comfort from his assumption that single sex spaces still matter. I think it’s just possible that most people - even MPs - just don’t get this yet. After all that was the aim, as laid out in the Dentons report - to get this through without proper debate.

If the LibDems do really badly tomorrow (hope they will) but Chuka gets in here (think he will), he could even end up as leader. In which case we have evidence of his view that single spaces will be protected under any GRA reform - and can infer from that that he thinks they should be.

In which case we have evidence of his view that single spaces will be protected under any GRA reform - and can infer from that that he thinks they should be.

But how does he propose to keep all the self-identifying transwomen with GRCs out of women's spaces?

Obfuscation, obfuscation, obfuscation

Man, that’s hard to say three times

If you can say it five times while facing a mirror, you can summon Jo Swinson.

“ If you can say it five times while facing a mirror, you can summon Jo Swinson”

Imma keep quiet now 😱

I also emailed him about this when he was my MP under Labour and got patronising guff back. Don't trust him.

However this policy does not contradict our support for women. Our proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act does not impact the use of single-sex spaces, and therefore the law dictating use of spaces would be unaffected by reform.”

This is a lovely, deliberately vague, political response. Single-sex spaces are only single sex if people of the opposite sex are not included.

If, however, you believe, (or pretend to believe), that TWAW, then you can both support the concept of single-sex spaces publicly, while undermining them in reality.

Because that’s every politicians line, “yes, we support women’s rights to single-sex provision”, but behind their backs they’ve got their fingers crossed, “since TWAW, we’re not at all duplicitous.”

And what they’re not willing to say publicly is that they’ve seized upon the emergence of the trans-movement and it’s inherent misogyny with absolute glee. At last an excuse to roll back women’s rights while appearing to be supportive of women and the most oppressed.

If it wasn’t reality, it would be the kind of mad, twisted plot a deranged anti-hero in a comic book would invent, while muttering to himself and adjusting his wig.

If you can say it five times while facing a mirror, you can summon Jo Swinson

To think, the worst we had to be afraid of at sleepovers was Bloody Mary.

Lydia - as in, the Queen? Interesting, not heard of that as a childhood bogeyman before.

Might be an American thing. In fact, I'm positive there has been at least one (truly terrible) Hollywood slasher flick about her popping up to scare those foolish enough to say her name in front of the mirror of an unlit room.

Not helped when you're 10, alone in the room, and your friends are especially invested in fucking with you from the other side of the door.

No my dd and her friends scare themselves stupid with this one.

Not jo swindon (sic - I'm liking it more and more) the other one.