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.

Posts are not posting..

Ah, maybe quoting is not working..

Looks like spousal exit clause retained, which is good news for trans widows.

Why do they insist on misleading people about this

'This is absolutely trash still requiring both spousal consent and a list of treatment. Unacceptably bad'

No spousal consent is required to transition. Its solely abouit being able to seperate if the pother decides they are transitioning s as not to suddenly be in a 'same sex marriage'. Ugh. Why do they think it should be made harder for partners to divorce if the terms of marriage are changed drastically? Why do they think transwidows should be MADE to stay with a guy who suddenly declares he is actually a woman?! Its cruel

But the misrepresentation annoys me the most. Pretending its that the partner can actively block any transition ever happening. WHY lie in this way? Its ridiculous.

I've already be yelled at on facebook for saying self ID is a huge issue and giving an example I was called a bigot and told no one ever ids as the opposite sex to gain access to vulnerable people and FURTHERMORE nurses doctors etc can be perverts anyway so its just my bigotry showing

I posted karen whites headline and fucked off life is too short for shrill wannabes on my social media

I am sure someone else has highlighted this but not only is this good news for women and girls in the UK, it is also good news for women and girls everywhere.

The UK may not be as influential as it once was bit nonetheless other countries will be watching what happens here and it will hopefully embolden women in other nations where self ID has been pushed through to at least raise the concerns the UK has idenitified.
If i was a policy maker in this area, i would be reading this v carefully to see if i had missed some of the issues.
Some policy makers in some countries may not care what the UK does, and actively be pleased to do the opposite but the women in those countries (50% of their populations) may not feel this way and this could give them confidence to challenge and demand safeguards.

I've already be yelled at on facebook for saying self ID is a huge issue and giving an example I was called a bigot and told no one ever ids as the opposite sex to gain access to vulnerable people and FURTHERMORE nurses doctors etc can be perverts anyway so its just my bigotry showing

Ahh the Ruth Hunt argument - "men will rape you anyway".

The point of safeguarding and the notion that maybe we shouldn't make it super easy for loopholes to be exploited seems to completely go over the heads of some people.

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark

Britain leads the world as a country where...transgender people have been.... able to use facilities of their chosen gender;

The war is far from won. This is surely giving the nod to self ID as the default practice, without actually legislating it.

Character trumps biology. Gender identity is a real thing. Bullshit.

Yes, it’s not as bad as full on self ID in law, but it’s still a massive concession, and betrays a level of institutional capture and craven kowtowing to TRA ideology that should still worry us all.

The plagiaristic equivalence with MLK‘s famous speech, as if sex segregation were in any way comparable to racial segregation, is particularly vile.

Good of course that the EA exemptions remain but until we know now easy (or not) it will be to implement those, I’m not celebrating. It reads to me like there will be de facto self ID for the most part, with women having to jump through hoops to justify spaces/services being single sex.

If it’s being lauded as a good thing that transgender people are able to use the facilities of their chosen gender, then surely that means a green light for biologically male people in women’s changing rooms (etc etc) if they say they identify as women?

I don’t think this is good news at all.

I agree with this. I'm not seeing much cheer in this. Self id has all but been adopted by institutions and organisations. Even if a transwoman has a GRC, organisations are not allowed to ask to see it. So what is to stop any old non-transitioned or bloke chancing his arm to say that they do have one and gain access to female spaces. And even if you could ask for id, you can have your sex marker changed on your important documents - this is a sop to women as well. Because you cannot change your legal sex. Your legal sex is the one you were born with. I am not happy with this at all.

for the transwidows.

FPFW didn't include a suggested response for that question. None of the 'gc' women's orgs had really grappled with what you were going through back then, or the implications of removing the spousal escape clause.

It was not fair to prioritise the voices of male 'gc' transsexuals over the support and solidarity you needed. I hope we've all moved on in the last two years.

This is what I wrote -
-------
A marriage is a contract between two people. If one of those people legally changes their sex then the contract has changed - something that should only happen with the agreement of both parties. For example, a man in a heterosexual marriage applies for a GRC and beomes legally female. The wife is henceforth in a lesbian marriage having never agreed to this. Conversely, in a lesbian marriage, if one party transitions and becomes legally male, the other party is now deemed to be in a heterosexual marriage, without her consent.

Much is spoken about the importance of respecting people's identities. If this is important then it is important for everybody, not just the person who is transitioning.

It would be wholly unfair on a spouse to remove these provisions. The spouse would then need to wait up to five years or cite 'unreasonable behaviour' in order to end the relationship through divorce. Part of the public sector equality duty is to foster good relationships between those with a particular protected characteristic and those who do not share it. Removal of the spousal consent provision would be likely to actively worsen those relationships by removing a straightforward, no-fault way to end the marriage.
-------

I don't understand this idea that the spousal escape clause enables abuse An interim GRC makes ending a marriage incredibly easy, for either party. Of course you still need to sort out property and child arrangements, not because you are trans but because you are a human being. And so are women. And so are children.

Self ID is dead!
We’ve come such along way- remember the mayhem at Bristol when women were barred from entering a venue to talk about the Self ID consultation. We were “transphobes” for talking about this and there were were shouts of “No Debate”. Well they didn’t win, so well done To all you women who have fought for today.

The use of '(non trans) women' throughout the document - objectionable though this is, it does seem like they've taken on board women's objections to the term 'c*s', which I'm sure they were advised to use by everyone around them who has had The Training. I think they've done the wrong thing for the right reason, probably in the face of some extreme pressure.

The effect of reading '(non trans) women' over and over, instead of 'c*s women' is interesting. It kind of drives home how unnecessary any prefix or adjective is when we are talking about women.

Everyone knows what a woman is.

It makes it much clearer that the word 'woman' has been appropriated. Ordinary women who might be intimidated by special language like 'c*s' can see what's happening more clearly.

It also doesn't imply we're all happy with, or even have a 'gender'.

So it's horrible but it's better than c*s.

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

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

This is not surprising at all.

(non sea) horses
(non butter) flies
(non lady) birds
(non trans) women

Absolutely astonished at the responses calling into question 'legitimate aim' in the EA single sex exceptions.

I was expecting to see lots of arguments about whether excluding tw was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim.

I was not expecting respondents to question whether women's rights to safety, privacy and dignity were legitimate in the first place.

Now we know.

arf at mermaids

Good to see you LangClegsInSpace, sherpa extraordinaire! ❤️

The suggestion that transwomen with GRA have been using women's spaces without problems for years. So keeping the status quo means this just continues.

So how would you like to stop trans women using female toilets? Do you want to encourage women to go up to (people who they suspect as being) TW and say hey you’re a bloke what are you doing in here?

How do you think the average, reasonably passing TW would react to that? How would society react? How does this work?

I can't fathom what the BMA are thinking to support any aspect of self-id/concealing birth sex/medical history as it puts their members at huge risk of killing someone accidentally - it is not fair on the trans people and not fair on the doctors.

They don’t. They support concealing it from people who don’t need to know. Original birth sex remains noted in primary care records. Hospital referrals are notified confidentially.

The phlebotomist taking someone’s blood doesn’t need to know they were born a different sex (assuming it’s not obvious). But the consultant or doctor treating them and using the result does.

The HCA measuring your weight doesn’t need to know but the consultant using it does. Etc etc.

I popped on twitter to see what Fair play for Women were saying and got distracted. Saw this tweet below and thought I had better come over to join in the back patting, but you are all quite sombre!
On another tweet someone has added up the followers of FPFW, Woman's Place and Transgender place and saying how few there are, yet so many women can't be on twitter! Also complaints about the 20,000 FPFW templates and how these were likely submitted by just 200 people copying and pasting.
I find it incredible the mirroring that goes on.
Anyway thank you to this board for opening my eyes, enabling me to go off and do my own research and contribute to this consultation. I can look my daughters in the eye now and say I made a difference, but still much more to do.

I'm not sure what to say about non-binary identities except that I'm glad those reponses are there and I think we can all learn a lot from them.

Sex is a protected characteristic for a whole host of very good reasons that have nothing to do with 'identity'.

BatShite no, they don't say that 40% of the 7000 have a GRC. The wording makes you read it that way, which makes the average non-invested person think that 2800 GRC holders responded.

It actually says 7000 identified as trans. That's pre op, post op and non op; old school dysphoric and self IDers who love their own genitals - all lumped in together. And then some unspecified number of them feel they've completed their transition, of which only 40% have a GRC.

Struck me as a bit misleading.

Also suggests the majority don't feel the GRC is a necessary part of transitioning - otherwise they wouldn't say they'd completed their transition if they didn't have one.

@gardenbird48

I get so confused when the activists call for de-medicalisation of being trans - if someone has gender dysphoria so that their deeply felt body image does not match their actual body, and their end goal is surgery and hormone treatment, how is that not a medical/mental health condition? No one else is allowed to self diagnose for major surgery and medical treatment.

If they don't have gender dysphoria, presumably meaning that their body image does match their body, then how are they trans?

I've been trying to work this out for 6 months now and I'm still none the wiser. Am I over-simplifying?

My understanding is that it all hinges on this notion of “gender identity”.

The idea (ideology) is that everyone has an innate gender identity, and it is that which determines whether you’re a man or a woman, not your actual sex.

If your internal “gender identity” is that of a woman* (so their logic goes), then you are a woman, regardless of your sexed body.

You can have a “female” gender identity while being male and you don’t have to actually experience gender dysphoria. This is where the whole female penis/bearded lesbian thing comes from. You are a woman because you just know you’re a woman, and, say the TRAs, that’s all that matters. No mental anguish or MH issues need to be involved at all.

So you can be a “woman” that is completely untroubled by your male body - because in fact it’s female, because you say it is; you can be very happy to retain a “female” penis, and enjoy having sex with it, and nobody has the right to challenge this belief because that is straight up, bigoted transphobia.

This is one of the reasons I was so aghast at the statement today, because by the liberal use of the term “gender identity”, it would seem that Truss & co are buying into this ideology.

I think (hope) now though that all it means is that they genuinely haven’t grasped what gender identity means in genderist ideology. And who can blame them?

*Nobody has yet managed to define what the specific components are of a “female” gender identity though. Puzzlingly.

The consultation mentions how they established where multiple submissions had come from the same person, and how they dealt with this. More than 18,000 women took the time to do that consultation because of Nicola Williams and FPFW, and women here. I keep coming back to that thought and finding it so brilliant.

Of course there aren't those 18,000 women on Twitter fighting about it all, most of us don't have the luxury of the time or energy. The consultation got filled in between the many other commitments being juggled, like the holes we dig are often the few quid spare at the end of the week. It's because we care about women and their needs, it's not rocket science.

"This is one of the reasons I was so aghast at the statement today, because by the liberal use of the term “gender identity”, it would seem that Truss & co are buying into this ideology.

I think (hope) now though that all it means is that they genuinely haven’t grasped what gender identity means in genderist ideology. And who can blame them?

*Nobody has yet managed to define what the specific components are of a “female” gender identity though. Puzzlingly."

TalkingtoLangClegintheDark, yes, the widespread acceptance of a concept derived from gender theory is quite troubling, especially the assumption that all women and men possess some gender essence inside their heads and that this is identity and that this identity has absolutely no basis on the sex of the body that head is linked to, though it may correlate with it and then you are a privileged cis person.

Among other things, this has led to the situation we have now where 'inclusiveness' means regarding being a woman as just one of the many Head Essence Flavors,, so why should 'women' be used in health care writings if other identities are not? And so we get 'pregnant people' and 'individuals with a cervix.'

My informal surveys suggest that lots of people don't have an identity of that type but are now simply told that they do. What that would actually mean for me is that my gender has been invalidated as I cannot find that head essence however hard I look for it, but very much feel socially like a woman because of my body and how others regard me due to it being female.

This is a battle won.

It doesn't fix everything, we haven't won the war but we have won this battle and everybody who had any part in this should feel very proud.

We have successfully opposed a change to primary legislation and that is not to be sniffed at.

Now that same sex marriage is legal-why are GRCs needed?

So people can be legally recognised as their transitioned sex. Otherwise what is a transsexual?

Well I'm pleased.

There is more to do - Liz Truss has confirmed today that self ID won't go ahead, and that women are legally entitled to single sex spaces, based o their biological sex.

But companies, schools, sports etc seem to have policies that act as though self ID is law - so this needs to be challenged.