CALL FOR ACTION Women&Equalities committee calling for evidence on GRA reform - again?!?

[Cwenthryth]

committees.parliament.uk/call-for-evidence/291/reform-of-the-gender-recognition-act?fbclid=IwAR2OBw5dDqd0oWBzQrZOjcxb7N0S34f_rEWw7QVnOuzeQfI55co_w0CvFsc
Not quite sure why they’re asking all these same questions again, but looks like we all have more homework to do!

Transsexual people are dysphoric about their sex. They change their secondary and in some cases primary sex characteristics. Most want to be seen as their transitioned sex.

And having a way to permit this has been destruction tested, and it's proven that it doesn't work for female people.

Who incidentally were never consulted or even considered in all this, who had no input. It doesn't matter how distressed anyone may be: it can never be ok to make use of another person or curtail their rights in your own interests. And never ok for a government to make use of and curtail the rights of a whole sex class for the better interests of the other.

Women were made to compromise. It has led to this place, where women are fighting to retain any rights in law because some males in very exceptional circumstances because any male at all at any time with any agenda, gleeful enjoyment of women being unable to say no with misrepresentation of the law and death/rape threats, and a direct war on women having any sex based rights at all. And being called 'menstruators' and 'cervix havers'.

I'm afraid my sympathies are no longer there to be played on.

in very exceptional circumstances *became any male at all

Most want to be seen as their transitioned sex.

Is it possible to compel others to see someone as the opposite sex?

LOLeater absolutely yes do mention all of those. Do mention your professional experiences as a teacher. MPs rate a personal letter or email. I think it’s one of the most effective things we can do. Enjoy your nice wine

mobile.twitter.com/christineburns/status/132143794423903436

This awful person never stops with the lies. Don't they realise no one believes them?

Deleted, Escape?

Thought it might be useful to read another perspective on the process, no idea of how accurate this is:

mobile.twitter.com/WhatTheTrans/status/1321435329069539329

Here you go

Hilarious response from hairy legged Harpy

Oh, I think we'll be just fine.

We are well able to answer questions, transparent about grassroots funding, and after all, you'd really have to be a 'bogus popup woman' to be a member of a 'bogus popup women's group'. Slightly smiling face

Not really a problem then.
At least, not for us.

Conversation
What The Trans!?
@WhatTheTrans
Seeing SO MUCH MISINFORMATION about this new Transgender Inquiry.

Weirdly, and hilariously, in 2015 I was a video editor who ended up reporting on the first trans equality inquiry. I don't know everything, but I know roughly what this actually is. (RETWEET WIDELY) (Thread)
12:55 pm · 28 Oct 2020·Twitter Web App
210
Retweets
30
Quote Tweets
255
Likes
What The Trans!?
@WhatTheTrans
·
8h
Replying to
@WhatTheTrans
THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC CONSULTATION.

Let me say it again.

THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC CONSULTATION.

This is not the same as the 2017 cluster fuck of nonsense. It has potential to be super weird, but this is not that.
What The Trans!?
@WhatTheTrans
·
8h
First myth that needs debunking. Liz Truss is not in charge of this inquiry. She is the minister for women and equalities.

This inquiry is being done by the Women & equalities Parliamentary Sub-Committee. This is a cross party committee of MP's.
What The Trans!?
@WhatTheTrans
·
8h
The committee is chaired by Caroline Nokes, a conservative MP but...a probable trans ally.

Will show why we believe this further down the thread.

I know that at least four of the members are trans allies.
What The Trans!?
@WhatTheTrans
·
8h
A parliamentary inquiry like this is very different from a consultation. For a start, this has more in common with a court case. The committee seeking evidence to be submitted. This evidence will be taken into account and will inform the committee of issues...
What The Trans!?
@WhatTheTrans
·
8h
...that need to be discussed during the evidence sessions that will come later.

You can expect evidence to come from Terfs, bigots, extremist religious nightmares...

...and Stonewall, and the LGBT Foundation, and the LGBT Consortium, and GenderGP, Mermaids, even us.

Oh how funny that last tweet is. PMSL

Oh, the shady links to the US right. Has anyone ever produced any evidence of these shady links? Or are they purely fabricated?

The only ‘Shady US links’ I’ve seen are big pharma and very very wealthy individuals pushing medical interventions.

@TinselAngel

Just when I thought I could have a break from constantly defending the Spousal Exit Clause.

@TinselAngel Can I ask why you feel the GRA needs spousal consent? I've never understood the logic myself—I understand that a partner changing gender can massively impact a marriage & be something that the non-transitioning partner didn't sign up for & doesn't want to be part of, but GRA feels... weirdly late in the whole process to start dealing with that issue. Since they've kept the requirement of "live for at least 2 years in the target gender before you can apply for a GRA", surely the marriage has already been impacted, and blocking a partner from getting a particular piece of paperwork won't fix the underlying issue?

I'm also not comfortable with the idea of Spousal Vetoes in general: my life is my own, my partner's life is her own, & while we each try to take the other's feelings & wishes into account, we're also each the ultimate arbiters of our own choices. She could choose to do all sorts of things that would massively impact our relationship, like enlist in the armed forces or leave the country to start a new life in America, and while I would be very upset at her choosing to do either of those things, I would have no legal power to stop her. I feel like "get a GRA" should be in the same category, but I'd be interested to understand why you feel differently.

Here:

uncommongroundmedia.com/spousal-exit-clause/

Oh look, someone trying to imply that even if only a few trans people respond, there would have been many, many more, if only they weren’t so terribly oppressed....

Why isn’t there a roll-eyes emoji???

See also numerous threads passim.

@TeaPoweredScientist

Have you noticed that you have changed the quoted name of the Spousal Exit Clause to Spousal Veto which is a phrase that a) means something completely different to the actual clause and is b) not the actual clause, and then you pontificated at length about the wrong word you switched it to?

Having read the useful advice from Maya and Ralph Lucas, I've put together a first draft/ outline. I will find references/evidence to support my arguments.

I found it easier than expected - I've given these areas so much consideration that my views are now clear and easy to express. The questions that they've set out also help with structuring. Although at first glance, they look to be coming from a pro-gender ideology perspective, there's ample opportunity to express a view that centres women.

I missed out on the first GRA consultation so happy to contribute my views this time round!

Thanks to mumsnet for drawing my attention to this Call for Evidence!

I missed out on the first GRA consultation so happy to contribute my views this time round!

Yes, same. I'll do this over the weekend.

Tinsel I applaud your patience.

I’m thinking this morning of how I will write my personal submission. In terms of phrasing, rather than “I would not feel comfortable with mixed sex spaces”, writing “I do not feel comfortable” - no conditional, couching language. Be clear and be strong with what you are saying. You are making a clear point about your lives experience, beliefs, thoughts and feelings, you don’t need to give anyone the benefit of the doubt or worry about how anyone else feels about what you are saying. As women we are so socialised to do that a lot of the time.

I, very unfortunately, have personal experience of a transwoman behaving inappropriately/taking advantage of me when I accepted them in what should have been a single sex situation. Don’t want to say more about that incident here, it’s 2 years on and I still haven’t really processed it properly and don’t want to attract the inevitable critics if I do talk about it openly, but I am thinking I might write about it in the submission as an illustration of how self-identifying into a single sex space can so easily lead to the abuse of women and the impact it has had on me. It was a turning point for me in my approach to all of this.

Do we think anonymity will be granted when disclosing personal incidents like this?

Having read the call for submissions from the Women and Equalities Select committee.

I want to respond (though I am concerned about the lack of anonymity) but I am amazed that a parliamentary committee get to be so leading on their questions by saying ‘we only want to hear from you on these questions’.

Usually select committee inquiries set out to investigate a theme or at least attempt to include balanced questions or say please respond on ‘questions including xyz’. So they are deliberately trying to off-put women it feels like.

I agree with anyone complaining that respondents can’t have a guarantee to be publicly anonymous. It’s going to deter a lot of people if the committee will decide if requested anonymity will be OK when the committee also decide whether or not a response will be published..

This is a massively sensitive area and part of the whole point is that women who want to talk about women’s rights in this clash of rights have been doxxed and been threatened with their employer’s involvement and been sent rape and death threats.

It would have been fine if this committee had simply and in an open way asked for views on what people thought of the government’s recent response. And allowed anyone who wanted to be anonymous, not have their name revealed in public.

Is there a way to complain about select committees and get them to change it so that anyone can be anonymous? (Anyone know?). Should we contact the committee itself about this?

I will definitely include in my submission that my MP told me he knew I am not free to express my views publicly. That's an outrageous statement for an MP to make and not speak out about.

This is not the same as the 2017 cluster fuck of nonsense

They don't even get the year right! 2018 was the year of the public consultation.

Also, I think i might include this example of a one-sided list of invited responses to which anonymity can’t be guaranteed, within a wider political context that means women are already being silenced.. in my submission about standards in public life that is currently looking for evidence - about Parliament, civil service, political parties etc:

The Committee on Standards in Public Life
Standards Matter 2: Public Consultation

The Committee on Standards in Public Life is carrying out a landscape review of the institutions, processes and structures in place to support high standards of conduct. The terms of reference for the review are available on our website.

This consultation runs to 18 December 2020.
Anyone with an interest in public standards may make a submission. The Committee welcomes submissions from members of the public. Replies to this consultation should be emailed to [email protected].

Consultation Questions:

Question 1: Standards of Conduct in the UK
A. How well do you think ethical standards - as enshrined by the Seven Principles of Public Life - are upheld in public life today?
B. Do you believe that there have there been any notable shifts in approaches or attitudes to ethical standards in public life in recent years?
C. What do you see as the most significant threats to ethical standards in public life today?

Question 2: The Seven Principles of Public Life
A. Do the Seven Principles of Public Life accurately describe the appropriate ethical responsibilities for those in public roles, including both political and non-political office-holders?
B. Would you amend or replace any of the principles or their descriptors? If so, how?

Question 3: The UK's arrangements for regulating standards
A. Are you confident that the UK's arrangements for regulating ethical standards are robust and effective?
B. Are there any areas of public life where regulation on issues of ethical standards is not strong enough?

Question 4: Best practice in standards regulation
A. What makes an effective standards regulator?
B. Do the UK's standards regulators have the right powers and remit to act effectively?
C. Should the independence of standards regulators be enhanced and protected, and if so, how?

Question 5: Creating ethical cultures
A. How can the Seven Principles best be embedded within a public sector organisation's working culture?
B. What are the most significant obstacles to embedding high ethical standards in a public sector organisation?

www.gov.uk/government/consultations/standards-matter-2-public-consultation-and-public-sector-survey

We have a separate thread about this consultation but I just thought I would mention it in case anyone had missed that one.

Testing

More homework chattylion, I've not seen that thread, do you have a link?