GRC changes dropped?

[WishThisWasLangClegGin]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/d19ad4fe-54d9-11ea-a869-24971f770bf3?shareToken

Bloody hell if that's true, that's fantastic!

If self Id is shelved it is hard to argue the 'just getting ahead' of a law that is coming.
It will be what it always has been and that is illegal.

I’m only going to say this once - thank Christ labour isn’t in charge of this ship...

While it's good news if it's true I dont see how it directly affects children as you had to be 18 to apply under the gra. Were they talking of lowering that?

There is a link to a Times article on another thread. Clinics have been giving puberty blockers to children as young as 11 so they 'dont have to undergo surgery' as an adult. So by the time they have got to 18, they have already been pumped full of hormones and effectively sterilised. The GRA is just a part of this.

If self ID is shelved, then how can a male person live their life 'as a woman' for 2 years in order to gain a GRC? None of it makes sense. The whole GRA needs to be re-examined. How can they make an Act in law without being able to even define the words that the Act relates to.

Let's get rid of it all and start again. What is a woman? How does one live like a woman? Let's start with a legal explanation of that.

This will open up some interesting legal questions if Scotland goes ahead and England does not - people will just come north of the border (does the Scottish gender recognition bill have a domicile requirement attached?), and gain their GRC in Scotland from age 16 (will that be valid in England and elsewhere?)

How does one live like a woman? Let's start with a legal explanation of that.

Didn't the Scottish law on gender equality on public boards do that? If I remember correctly living as a women meant having a stereotypically feminine name on a gas bill.

If self ID is shelved, then how can a male person live their life 'as a woman' for 2 years in order to gain a GRC?

By providing documents such as gas bills showing that he has been using a female name for two years. That's the current requirement for 'living in acquired gender'.

I don't really get the link to children in the Times article though? I understand the dangers of puberty blockers etc but don't really understand what that has to do with self ID and the GRA.

It doesn't. This is tactical. The govt are using the most palatable excuse they can, for halting the progression of transactivism.

The vehicle of transactivism has been like a runaway car gaining speed for years. It looks to me like the govt have chosen to tap the brakes a bit.

Self-ID, child transitioning, the GRA, male offenders in women's prisons, people losing jobs for speaking facts, court cases of 'hate crimes' for speaking of biology.

They're all parts of a greater whole, which is a state sponsored lie that male and female are an identity, a state of mind, a 'right to choose'. Something we should encourage and affirm. The govt, I think, are becoming savvy to the realisation that affirming any part of it causes an associated increase in harm within another part.

The consequences of supporting the lie are coming home to roost. The distancing of those who see this from any part of the lie is beginning.

The justification of 'but the children' is given in this story today because it's the most compelling, even though children are not directly affected by proposed GRA changes. But I think what is happening is a slowdown on the velocity of the 'celebrate sex change' insanity.

The consequences of supporting the lie are coming home to roost. The distancing of those who see this from any part of the lie is beginning.

Barracker
I agree. This radical agenda has zero public support, yet it has advanced at speed over the last twenty years. I think the unraveling is beginning. And if Labour wants to die on the hill of trans activism? Rebecca LB, Butler et al can lead the charge into political oblivion.....

PUUUULLLL.

If the GRA reform is halted, the next step is to challenge Stonewall law which misinterprets the existing law to say that the Equalities Act allows for self-ID irrespective of the GRA, meaning that someone can identify into benefiting from the single sex exemption intended for the opposite sex. The critical thing to tackle in this is challenging the EHRC statutory guidance (the existence of this guidance is mandated by law and though it is not legally binding, it would be used as persuasive evidence to a court) which suggests that when considering discrimination on the grounds of gender reassignment the correct comparator is someone of the sex to which that person seeks to transition, when in fact the correct comparator is someone of the same sex unless the person with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment also has a GRC.

Having written all that, I haven't looked at the guidance recently and I vaguely recall that there was movement by EHRC on this. I will go back and have a look when I get a moment, but if anyone knows the current position, perhaps they could comment. Am I also right that the new head of EHRC is previously of Stonewall (or something)?

And if Labour wants to die on the hill of trans activism? Rebecca LB, Butler et al can lead the charge into political oblivion

I think that's why the govt has dropped this little teaser, they don't want Labour to run out of steam

But let's not forget that many Cons are just as batshit as the Baileys and Butlers.
For example Penny Mordaunt, who is quoted in that article and is now back in cabinet. She is a firm believer in people's ability to change sex.

I think Barracker is right, they will let Labour take all the flack while they negotiate behind the scenes something that will enable more self ID in practice. The Equality Act is clearly on the table.

Brilliant news.

Because of the effect on children...

What about the effect on women?

But let's not forget that many Cons are just as batshit as the Baileys and Butlers.
For example Penny Mordaunt, who is quoted in that article and is now back in cabinet. She is a firm believer in people's ability to change sex.

I think Barracker is right, they will let Labour take all the flack while they negotiate behind the scenes something that will enable more self ID in practice. The Equality Act is clearly on the table.

This^
The reason The Tory's are quiet right now is because Labour is making themselves unelectable to many of their voters.
The fact they are quiet means that a lot of lobbying is going on behind the scenes.
These words, while hopeful are meaningless.

^But let's not forget that many Cons are just as batshit as the Baileys and Butlers.
For example Penny Mordaunt, who is quoted in that article and is now back in cabinet. She is a firm believer in people's ability to change sex^

Absolutely true ThePurported This crazy agenda has advanced at top speed during the last decade under a Conservative government.....

Can you get a gas bill in any name though? Don't you need any proof at all?

The reason The Tory's are quiet right now is because Labour is making themselves unelectable to many of their voters. The fact they are quiet means that a lot of lobbying is going on behind the scenes.

Absolutely true. The lobbying is relentless. I don't think much of Boris Johnson, but surely even he can grasp as he watches Labour's antics that this agenda has zero public support? If the Conservatives don't figure out why their newly minted voters switched parties, they don't deserve to stay in power.

Are we bound by EHRC at all now we have left the EU though - Keir Starmer seemed to imply that we weren’t, in one of his answers during hustings recently.

I get the point that it may be held as an example in any case though.

IANAL, but I agree that the correct comparator for assessing discrimination on the basis of ‘gender reassignment’ (which itself is a confusing term really), is someone of the same sex who has not ‘reassigned their gender’, not someone of the sex the claimant says they have reassigned their gender to. For one, how would that work for claims of discrimination on the basis of gender reassignments for anyone non-binary - there are no non-binary non-gender-reassigned people to compare to.

The law absolutely needs reform - to clarify sex and gender and the status and recognition of each. Not to mishmash them together and render them meaningless.

Are we bound by EHRC at all now we have left the EU though

The EHRC is quite separate to the EU, as is the ECHR.

In any case, the Equalities Act 2010 is UK legislation. That's the one we need to keep our eye on - any proposed changes that would dilute the meaning of the act in relation to single sex exemptions.

I agree with PP. This is hopeful news but no time to relax. Too much time - and let's be clear, money - has been invested in advancing the TRA agenda.

The EU Court is the ECJ. We are out of that.

The ECHR is the court of the Council of Europe and its Convention on Human Rights. Every European nation is a member except the Stalinist dictatorship of Belarus and the illegal regimes in parts of Cyprus, Ukariane and Georgia.