Liz Truss WILL make a statement today

[TheFleegleHasLanded]

commonsbusiness.parliament.uk/document/40760/html

Or someone will on her behalf.

My MP said GRA statement coming today.

thank you Eo91 - it's not just me then :¬)

I know we have all said time and time again, the logic is severely lacking and it is so disappointing that such a high number of people in positions of power seem to have such weak critical thinking.

There is an individual on Twitter atm who identifies as gender fluid, male and female on a half weekly basis who has totally got the wrong end of the EA 2010 and insists that they can access any women's single sex space on the days that they identify as a woman (obviously they were not born into a female body).

Still waiting to hear from the EHRC on that correction to their completely wrong advice......

They lost my sympathy when they decided "You don't need dysphoria to be trans!"

As a last ditch attempt to make life liveable for a tiny number of of people with a difficult mental health condition, I was okay with treating transsexuals as women, despite knowing it was sexist and homophobic to do so, on the grounds that it was a pragmatic solution for an issue that couldn't wait until after the dismantling of the patriarchy.

If there's no dysphoria then it's just a lifestyle choice. I'm not prepared to actively engage in sexism to validate someone else's lifestyle choice.

There is an individual on Twitter atm who identifies as gender fluid, male and female on a half weekly basis who has totally got the wrong end of the EA 2010 and insists that they can access any women's single sex space on the days that they identify as a woman (obviously they were not born into a female body).

Oh FGS how can someone get the equality act so wrong. The individual should get protection from discrimination in men's loos rather than imposing on the women's. Its ridiculous how keen men are to foist people who aren't stereotypically man onto women instead of practising a little acceptance :/

It annoyed me that my identity was being sacrificed to validate the choices of others. I get to decide what it means to me to be a biological female not to have a definition I don’t accept imposed on me. I refuse to be kind when no kindness is shown to me.

I suspect that it wasn’t entirely that women were against it. A big part seems that the “trans community” aren’t one thing and don’t have the same needs. There is a table at the back showing even Mermaids and Stonewall supplied different standard responses. I learnt on here that trans meant lots of different things, and this consultation is another piece of evidence for that. One example:
*The majority of respondents (83.5%) were in favour of retaining the statutory declaration requirement of the gender recognition system. Of those who were in favour of retaining the declaration, around half (52.8%) did not agree with the current declaration wording that the applicant intends to “live permanently in the acquired gender until death”.

In terms of the actual declaration wording, a substantial number of respondents thought that the phrasing “until death” was excessive. A number of respondents also noted that the statutory declaration wording did not sufficiently accommodate non-binary people, whose gender identities could be more fluid*

That and some responses being batshit. All those abusive relationships where the trans person doesn’t want an annulment.

Searching in here for “Mermaids” is fun assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/919890/Analysis_of_responses_Gender_Recognition_Act.pdf%20%0d

That was and also, whoever Level Up are (7% of responses) They supplied both the online form for responses, and actual different questions:
Level Up also provided an online questionnaire, but with only a limited number of consultation questions, which had also been re-worded. [Level Up edited and simplified the original wording of the consultation questions, which may have had an impact on responses: ● Questions 3 [Do you think there should be a requirement in the future for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria? and 4 [ Do you also think there should be a requirement for a report detailing treatment received?] were replaced with a single question using the following wording: “Do you think that trans people should have to prove to medical professionals that they are trans enough?” and so on.

and actually now I think of it, how can there possibly be any dysphoria if a person chooses to identify as their birth sex for half the week?

I really really can't get my head around that.

What's the practical outcome from today's decision?

Can we start challenging any Trans in a toilet or changing room, particularly in schools that we don't think belong there and quoting the confirmation of the Equality Act by the Government today? Can a pub owner demand to see someone's GRC?

That would be a positive outcome.

EHRC showing their neutrality - not!

twitter.com/ehrc/status/1308436751896244225?s=21

If you look at the fact we pay £75 for a passport every 10 years, GRCs aren't that expensive for something that is (a) a one-off and (b) a serious change of status, not be taken lightly. If they are reducing it to a nominal administrative cost then I hope they do the same for passports!

Nothing has changed? If we feel physically safe we can challenge people who we think shouldn’t be somewhere. Eg this is a staff toilet, this is for children only, this is for women. Most women don’t mind a challenge and speaking is enough to resolve. The characteristic women hasn’t changed. You could always challenge people under UK law. The authority (your pub landlord) has to opine as to ID required/definition he is using.

No one will be carrying a GRC. The GRC is to produce a birth certificate/marriage certificate. I don’t carry those things around. The GRC itself can be private.

For prisons, changing rooms, there may need to be more digging for those law cases.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of the challenge to the Labour Party's All Women's Shortlist rules. Seems a non brainer. AWS are a time limited single sex exemption. Don't see how allowing anyone who identifies as a woman a place can possibly stand.

Surely this means that there will be more people we can’t challenge if they go down the GR route. How does it apply to eg lesbian only groups, women only CR or action groups. Will we be able to say no?

Helpful piece of evidence there from the EHRC.

It will eventually have to be admitted and confronted, however hard they try to fluff it, single sex spaces for females and chosen space on gender identity are not compatible things. You can't use the same space for both things without issues arising and one or the other group having to give ground. Which is why additional spaces are the only way forward.

@MishyJDI

What's the practical outcome from today's decision?

Can we start challenging any Trans in a toilet or changing room, particularly in schools that we don't think belong there and quoting the confirmation of the Equality Act by the Government today? Can a pub owner demand to see someone's GRC?

That would be a positive outcome.

Someone pointed out earlier that under 18's can't have a GRC, so aren't protected under 'gender reassignment.' 'Gender identity' isn't protected either, so unisex toilets have no place in schools for under 18's.

We'll have to fight it though, because everyone seems too chicken shit to actually enforce this law.

The toilets and changing rooms is baffling me. She says we're entitled to single sex facilities if there's justification. I have PTSD because of sexual abuse, so where do I stand? Do I have to get a member of staff to scour the toilet before I go in, in case there's a biological male in there, and they can tell him to get out Or am I supposed to get over it and ask the person I'm scared of to leave myself.

Who gets to decide whether there's justification to exclude males? Quite frankly, all the women who say they're absolutely fine sharing changing rooms and toilets with bio men should go and use the men's then, if it's such a non issue to them.

The statement says single sex facilities can be justified, but also people are free to use the facilities of their gender. That makes facilities mixed SEX and not single, Liz. It's the clash we've been talking about for God knows how long.

Time is not on the side of the trans activists. As time passes the consequences of cross-dressers and the like being within the scope of the definition of trans will start to emerge.

I totally agree.

Detransitioners, children left sterile and unable to enjoy sex, men who will use the protocols to predate, all of it.

There was a reason why all the advice was to keep it under the radar, don't debate it, don't publicise it, shut women down.

The fact is, the movement has attracted so many raging, violent misogynists, they're not sticking to the plan. See the outrage over what has happened to JKR.

However slow it is, this appears to always only go one way.

[quote Kit19]EHRC showing their neutrality - not!

twitter.com/ehrc/status/1308436751896244225?s=21[/quote]
so is that the EHRC sticking two fingers up at Ann Sinnott's action? I've not seen anything on her twitter and today was the deadline for a response from them so I guess we as taxpayers will be paying for a government organisation to defend itself against us asking it to communicate existing law accurately?

TRAs complained about bureaucracy so process now online. TRAs complete about cost, this will be reduced. TRAs complained about healthcare, 3 new gender clinics. The government has pretty much met every demand.

Quite. TRAs are wailing though, as this is not what they wanted AT ALL!

We know aswell as they do that they wanted womens rights removed wholesale. But they cannot just come out and say this. So them trying to pretend they wanted something else has kinda bit them on the arse, as the things they pretended they wanted (cost, healthcare, etc) have been met! Oops.

7000 trans people, it says, and then we're told that 40% of post-transition respondents claim to have a GRC - but what proportion of the seven thousand identify as having completed their transition?

I find it quite hard to believe that 40% of the 7000 had GRCs. As that would be 2800 GRC holders, while we are told that only 5000 GRCs exist? So over half the existing GRC holders happened to reply to this? Some porky pies being told I think..

I read
nauticant

The best asset of the trans activists was momentum.
As
The best asset of the trans activists was Momentum

Slowing things down is definitely key. (As ever I await the SNP bulldozer )

Huge number of responses using the stonewall template. Almost half of all responses and more than the number of responses submitted through the official website. Trans people replying through stonewall are more likely to be unsuccessful in applying for a GRC and are less able to access support if they experience domestic abuse or sexual violence.

18,370 responses were submitted through Fair Play For Women, and many individual responses will have drawn on their excellent research. for Dr Nic, everyone at FPFW and everyone who went out spreading the word.

The huge glaring difference between the two template responses is this:

Q22: Do you have any further comments about the Gender Recognition Act 2004?

FPFW: 100% said yes
Stonewall: 0.5% said yes

Amused that Ben Cohen is claiming that it's a win as the Times had before "leaked" the possibility of genital checks.

Ahahaha

Its the TRA side that crow about 'genital checks'. I cannot imagine anyone, at all who is even half sensible ever even mentioning them. I dont remember any stories in the times about genital checks either..possibly a quote/pisstake with a quote of a TRA on twitter saying something about them?!

'OMG they want genital checks' sounds like a pink news story anyway, about a statement saying 'single sex exemptions are legal'.

Good game everyone.

War ain’t over but this Self-id thing was important.

@BatShite

TRAs complained about bureaucracy so process now online. TRAs complete about cost, this will be reduced. TRAs complained about healthcare, 3 new gender clinics. The government has pretty much met every demand.

Quite. TRAs are wailing though, as this is not what they wanted AT ALL!

We know aswell as they do that they wanted womens rights removed wholesale. But they cannot just come out and say this. So them trying to pretend they wanted something else has kinda bit them on the arse, as the things they pretended they wanted (cost, healthcare, etc) have been met! Oops.

Yes i agree. I also think the complaints about the cost (£140! , hardly an outrageous amount) as if anyone really thought this was a major hurdle to a gra has backfired as it was an easy for the gov to agree to this

TRAs complained about bureaucracy so process now online. TRAs complete about cost, this will be reduced. TRAs complained about healthcare, 3 new gender clinics. The government has pretty much met every demand.

Indeed. Excellent isn't it.

Moaning about getting a GRC, because it was too difficult, has resulted in it becoming easier.

What it hasn't done is made it obsolete in favour of self ID. Because that would be absolutely ridiculous.