Should the GRA be repealed ...

[NotAssigned]

... and if so how would that be achieved?

@MForstater

R0 - I don't think that would meet the ECHR ruling which was specifically on birth certs.

(Also not everyone has a driving license )

People have duplicate IDs and passports for different reasons.

I think the thing is to be as easy and liberal as possible in allowing people not to declare their sex where it doesn't matter, and as clear and straightforward as possible that when they do it should be a accurate.

If people want a form of official id which does not disclose sex then obtaining a diving licence (provisional if the person has not passed their driving test) is the cheaper option.

Provisional Driving Licence costs £34
UK passport costs £75.50

This would make it a more inclusive option. Driving Licenece is accepted as proof of identity in most circustances. For those circumstances where sex is relevent for Safeguarding reasons, it would not be.
The current sex/gender identity marker on driving licences, "it will be 0 or 1 for male and 5 or 6 for female" could be easily discontinued.

Also, ensuring UK Driving Licences did not have a sex/gender identity marker would enable those people who identfy as 'non-binary- to have a 'gender neutral' form of official id.

DVLA has already got itself into a pickle confusing sex, gender & gender identity

'Change the name or gender on your driving licence'
(extract)
Send DVLA your old driving licence along with the right application form and any supporting documents to change your name or gender.

The process is the same if you want to change your title, for example from Ms to Dr. You do not need to send evidence unless it’s a hereditary title.

You’ll get a new licence. You can still drive while you wait for your new licence.

It does not cost anything to change your name or gender on your driving licence. (continues)

Just Be Yourself Trans Resources:
DVLA
(extract)
In order to change your name and gender on your UK driving licence you do not need to do anything special but should just follow the standard process for changing your name and photo. However the gender marker on a driving licence is not obvious and it may not be immediately obvious if it has been changed. This document includes an explanation of how your gender is recorded as part of your driver number." (continues)

"The next six characters represent your date of birth but the year is split up giving the unusual format YMMDDY. Therefore a person with a male driving licence that was born on 23rd January 1985 would have the next six characters be 801235. However, a person with a female driving licence gets 50 added onto the month so a person with a female driving licence that was born on 23rd January 1985 would have the next six characters be 851235. That single digit is the gender marker on a driving licence – it will be 0 or 1 for male and 5 or 6 for female." (continues)
justbeyourself.org.uk/resources/trans/dvla/#:~:text=However%20the%20gender%20marker%20on,if%20it%20has%20been%20changed.&text=That%20single%20digit%20is%20the,5%20or%206%20for%20female.

apologies, link to DVLA quoted above:
www.gov.uk/change-name-driving-licence

[quote boatyardblues]There was a really good thread about this on Twitter earlier that made some humane, thoughtful suggestions for supporting trans people’s rights without undermining sex as a protected characteristic. The relevant posts are about 3/4 of the way down this thread: mobile.twitter.com/Grace_Speaker/status/1272891976946462722

Most pertinent tweet (in screengrab): mobile.twitter.com/AlessandraAster/status/1272879005641986049[/quote]
Now THIS has got me thinking.

Thank you.

People have duplicate IDs and passports for different reasons.

I think the thing is to be as easy and liberal as possible in allowing people not to declare their sex where it doesn't matter, and as clear and straightforward as possible that when they do it should be a accurate.

There is a not insignificant cost implication in obtaining a duplicate passport.

"You will have to pay the same fee that is required for a first passport. The price can vary but it is usually around £80"
www.businesstraveller.com/features/apply-second-uk-passport/

A second passport which does not have sex marker is not duplicate it is different to the original which has sex as well as DOB, nationality, place of birth listed as relevant information.

The costs associated with driving licences are much less. They do not have to be renewed every ten years & there is no charge for making changes.

The costs associated with driving licences are much less. They do not have to be renewed every ten years & there is no charge for making changes.

Photocard driving licences do have to be renewed every 10 years. If you still have a paper one it's valid until you're 70 (unless you change your address).

OldCrone Apologies and thank you for the correction. Renewal is free though, which was the main point I was making. Whereas an adult would have to pay in excess of £150 every ten years to hold two passports.

Absolutely. This has always been my position.

@R0wantrees

OldCrone Apologies and thank you for the correction. Renewal is free though, which was the main point I was making. Whereas an adult would have to pay in excess of £150 every ten years to hold two passports.

It's not free, either, but it's only £14 (if you apply online, £17 otherwise), so much cheaper than a passport.

www.gov.uk/renew-driving-licence

Yes, that seems to cover it all Jelly.

It's not free, either, but it's only £14 (if you apply online, £17 otherwise), so much cheaper than a passport.

I think I need to have another cup of coffee!

I like Maya's idea. As to whether it would become an indicator the the person was trans I don't think it would. Look at Ms. It used to be seen as something only divorced women used whereas now it's used by a huge number of women no matter what their marital status.

The GRA no longer seems to satisfy anyone. It's too onerous for one side and too fictional for the other side. Its original purpose has gone.

I love the idea of having different options for photo ID. One (passport) which accurately records sex, and one (driving license) which doesn't record sex at all. And no need to do altering of birth certificates. When applying for jobs where sex is relevant because of safeguarding you generally need at least two pieces of ID anyway - it would be easy to specify that one must have your sex on it.

I don't like the idea of forcing people to "reveal" their sex in order to (for example) buy alcohol. But sometimes it is relevant.

I don't like the idea of forcing people to "reveal" their sex in order to (for example) buy alcohol.

Exactly for buying alcohol, hiring a carpet cleaner or floor sander or renting a flat then sex is irrelevant to the person/business requesting identification.

It is however easier/ clearer in those circumstances where sex is relevent due to Safeguarding for the official identity documents accepted to be those known to have specific and accurate information confirming age (DOB) and sex (M/F).

As to whether it would become an indicator the the person was trans I don't think it would.

If DVLA discontinued use of the sex/gender/gender identity marker it would not identify a person as being transgender since all new driving licences would not have this information.

It is however easier/ clearer in those circumstances where sex is relevent due to Safeguarding for the official identity documents accepted to be those known to have specific and accurate information confirming age (DOB) and sex (M/F).

This would make it easier for organisations/service providers to make explicit that there is specific Safeguarding relevence in seeking confirmation of a person's sex as well as age in official identification documents.
It would make it clearer for those who do not wish to disclose their sex as to the specific reasons why this is relevant and then provide them with choice as to whether or not to proceed with required disclosure.

The only issue with the driving licence / passport split is that I think you have to show a passport or birth certificate as evidence of right to work in the uk if you are a citizen. Would having it the other way round (passport with no sex identifier and driving licence with male/female) be a problem?

I’m sure there are lots of jobs were sex is irrelevant - I didn’t think of it immediately because my jobs have all needed DBS checks.

Would having it the other way round (passport with no sex identifier and driving licence with male/female) be a problem?

Yes because sex is relevant for security as well as Safeguarding issues when travelling.

Its an international standard to have sex recorded on passports.

The primary purpose of a passport is to enable international travel.

I’m sure there are lots of jobs were sex is irrelevant - I didn’t think of it immediately because my jobs have all needed DBS checks.

Employers have responsibilities toward staff which are sex specific such as provision of toilets, changing areas, sex-discrimination cases etc

The GRA should be repealed.

I agree with pp there should be a piece of ID that does not have sex on it, but is should be universal, not versions of official documents with sex missing.

Plus allowing a male to disguise his sex should not be considered a human right, it is lying by omission if a male is permitted to keep his sex a secret, it would only lead to males omitting sex in order to deceive people and lead them to wrongly believe he is a female. I could also see it leading to TRA’s claiming that sex should be removed from everyone’s official documents and back to square one we will be.

The Goodwin v UK [2002] case shows the ECHR thought it was a males human right to deceive others about their sex, and either did not care, or did not anticipate, how enabling that deception would negatively impact the rights of women and girls, and safeguarding.

To be honest I think the AGP motivation should be brought up much more in public debates relating to the GRA. When that is explained it makes it very difficult for people to defend allowing males to legally change their sex and be permitted into female spaces and groups. There is plenty of evidence of males dressing in ‘women’s clothing’ for sexual reasons, and committing sexual offences while doing so. It isn’t as if there is a lack of evidence that such fetishes exist, and men who have them clearly do commit sexual crimes sometimes, again there is a lot of evidence of this. I would say that most people would understand why heterosexual males need to be stopped from obtaining a GRC, when they understand AGP. From there it is fairly easy to argue why the GRA should be repealed and the judgment in the Goodwin about privacy was naive at best.

Maya's suggestion makes sense but it still probably falls short of Article 8: a transsexual person could be outed by reference to the public record held by the register office.

TBH I don't see any government repealing the GRA because they would then need to draft new legislation to satisfy Article 8. Which government is going to want to do that?

Here is my idea: don't touch the GRA. But clarify who is entitled to access EA single sex services so that service providers cab offer female-only services. Transwomen politely told to try somewhere else. That could work if registered service providers were allowed to make an application to check an individual's details against the Gender Recognition Panel's register. That way Art 8 is satisfied because there is no general right to check it. The only way a transwoman would be outed is by attempting to access a service they were not entitled to.

1. No, we are not going to collectively fight for a system that requires every single case where a male attempts to access a women's service to result in an official check against the register.

1. Yes, it's very very obvious why you would be suggesting that.

The Goodwin v UK [2002] case shows the ECHR thought it was a males human right to deceive others about their sex, and either did not care, or did not anticipate, how enabling that deception would negatively impact the rights of women and girls, and safeguarding.

They didn't consider women at all. The judgement was all about the great 'personal cost' to the claimant and how the rest of society should accommodate them in their new identity.

No concrete or substantial hardship or detriment to the public interest has indeed been demonstrated as likely to flow from any change to the status of transsexuals and, as regards other possible consequences, the Court considers that society may reasonably be expected to tolerate a certain inconvenience to enable individuals to live in dignity and worth in accordance with the sexual identity chosen by them at great personal cost.

Here is my idea: don't touch the GRA. But clarify who is entitled to access EA single sex services so that service providers cab offer female-only services. Transwomen politely told to try somewhere else. That could work if registered service providers were allowed to make an application to check an individual's details against the Gender Recognition Panel's register.

This is unworkable.

Organisations and services do not have to be designated/registered as 'female only' to have sex-based Safeguarding policies in place.

Health and Social Care need to be able to exclude men (males of any age as per Equality Act and current government useage) from areas such as single sex accomodation (wards & showers) or roles which involve intimate care or examination of female patients/ residents / service users without female chaperone.

Schools & children's residential services need to implement sex-based Safeguarding with regards male employees contact with female children etc

Gyms, swimming pools and shops need to be able to protect female single sex changing rooms.

Youth hostels need to be able to ensure female dormitories are single sex.

Hampstead ponds needs to be able to exclude males from the women-only area etc.

Here is my idea: don't touch the GRA

January 2013 Guardian
'Voices from the trans community: 'There will always be prejudice'
It's more than 50 years since the UK's first trans person was outed in the press. So how do members of the community think life has changed for them since?'
(extract)
"Much of their campaigning remained on the quiet. The passage of the 2004 law to give trans people legal status was "remarkable," says [Christine] Burns, because "the government was able to pass an entire act in parliament without anyone throwing a fit in the press" In popular culture, the activists became more forthcoming in their attempts to increase popular understanding of trans issues." (continues)
www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/22/voices-from-trans-community-prejudice

Threadreader by Vulvamort@ HairyLeggdHarpy
(extract)
"Tweets from 2003: The Gender Recognition Bill

I'm going to tweet out a few of the illuminating comments from the debates that led to the GRA 2004, to save you all ploughing through Hansard.
One of the primary motivations (if not the foremost) for the bill was to avoid legalising same sex marriage. This featured VERY heavily in the discussions.(continues)

One of the obvious flaws in the entire process was the deliberate confuscation of sex and gender. The govt admitted that the two concepts were NOT THE SAME

And then note the utter balderdash that follows. In this order:

1. Gender is not sex.
2. Govt will legally recognise gender
3. Gender should be legal sex
4. Acquired gender = legal sex
5. Something unexplained about man, woman and male and female
6. Sex = Gender

To recap, sex and gender are not the same, govt acknowledges, but we'd like to create a law that pretends they are, whilst still knowing they are not. Cool. This paved the way for what we've now seen evidence for: that 'female' people with penises can commit rape. As we now know, this happens Tebbit anticipated it, and the Govt acknowledged this would happen." threadreaderapp.com/thread/1049289194370002945.html

Threadreader by Vulvamort@ HairyLeggdHarpy
"Time for another thread of quotes from the GRA debates of 2003/04, I think.

This one about how critical it is to define SEX and GENDER in law and never to conflate the two.

And how the Government repeatedly refused to allow that distinction, despite being asked to.

#GRA2004
Tebbit was relentless, tabling amendments to force the distinction:
"... apart from anything else, my concern is to smoke out in some way the Government's view of the distinction between those words or to ascertain whether they believe that there is a distinction between them." (continues)

The opposition denied and dodged the clear distinction. The GRA falls apart, of course, unless the 2 concepts are both different when needed, and same when needed. That's the basis of all bait and switch games, and this law is one such example.

The KEY CORNERSTONE of the GRA, and of all transgender ideology, is the dodgy idea that the most compelling thing about a female or a male is their 'psyche'.
That's what the law was about. Redefining biology into psychology.

We all are told we have a male, or a female psyche.
Filkin was clinging hard to the opinion of Lord Justice Thorpe who had opined that the apparent female psyche of a man trumped the real biology of every woman. Gender superseding sex. It should be said that other judges disagreed." (continues)

Here is the letter. It was written by EIGHT medical professionals at the Portman Gender Clinic.

"from an intolerable psychological reality...to a more comfortable fantasy"
"the recent legal victory risks...a false belief that it is possible to actually change a person's gender"

"A victory of fantasy over reality"

Medics from the Portman clinic, 2002, regarding legal recognition of transexuals as the opposite sex."
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1052160108489334785.html