Women & Equalities Commitee live today at 2.30

[ArabellaScott]

'The Women & Equalities Committee will hear from witnesses tomorrow 9/12 on Reform of The GRA at 2.30 pm. Witnesses include @Docstockk
@ProfAliceS
@GoonerProf
& Prof. Stephen Whittle, Alex Sharpe.'

(from Allison Bailey's twitter feed)

www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/dfc9f53e-2ac4-4c30-8712-e3df47938fd7

Thanks Arabella. Interesting to compare the following submissions which have been posted recently (shared from the previous thread):

This is the Stonewall submission:

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/17743/pdf/

And the Pankhurst Trust (Incorporating Manchester Women’s Aid)

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/17412/pdf/

Placemarking.

Just seems to have started streaming.

There are some clever people on this hearing but so far they don't seem to grasp that the 2018 consultation is not a referendum.

Grrrr! Alex Sharpe going on about "... endless attacks by... well we all know who we're talking about". Nice way to throw mud while leaving room to weasel out later by saying "I wasn't talking about you" when pulled up on it.

@GAHgamel

Grrrr! Alex Sharpe going on about "... endless attacks by... well we all know who we're talking about". Nice way to throw mud while leaving room to weasel out later by saying "I wasn't talking about you" when pulled up on it.

I thought exactly the same thing.

Yeah gods, Stephen Whittle don't half waffle on. I'm not sure that he actually addressed the question at all about the issues surrounding "living in the gender you identify as" requirement at all there.

Passive aggressive much! "There's an example of a great feminist"

I do so enjoy being told how to feminist

No problems in Argentina or Ireland!

hmm, absolutely no problems with id fraud in Argentina

Stephen Whittle watches university students 'flower' because they can change their legal gender within 2 weeks just before they go off to uni (not sure which country he is talking about) - that sounds like it might be a recipe for disaster!!

Alex thinks a waiting period before GRC is 'insulting' - and we've been thinking about it for months and years beforehand.

no transparency in the Gender Recognition Panel - why would they want to be fully transparent about their decision making - does someone want to be able to 'game' it like they do with GIDS?

On the school run so can't actually watch it myself .... Will catch up later!

Whittle - Advocating for no fee to change gender/sex other than the cost of a new birth certificate.

Whittle trying to say that young people don't have a laptop therefore the online process won't make it easier. Really? Young people are attached to the internet most of the time regardless of economics

I struggle to understand how the panel can ask about whether the minimum time of "living in one's preferred gender" is appropriate without asking what on earth that even means... What do they think it means? What are we even talking about?

I might have to stop watching. They're making me cross.

Is the sound quite bad? I can hardly make out what Whittle is saying.

Ahhh, ginza, that's one of the questions nobody is supposed to ask.

Spousal consent and non-binary people now. Very gracious of Whittle to accept that the spouse of a transitioner might feel the basis of the legal contract of marriage has changed and that should be recognised in law.

I'd like to know the definition of domestic violence Ruth Pearce is referring to here. Apparently a poll has suggested that trans people experience disproportionately high levels of DV so Pearce feels this is a particular reason why partners of trans people should not be allowed to exercise any power of veto over a GRC. Is this the literal violence of misgendering? I find it extremely hard to believe that women married to males who decide to transition are routinely violent to them in the sense most of us use the word 'violent'.

Whittle - don't call it legal consent. Changing document other party should be informed, but it shouldn't stop the process. The trans person has usually been living in their new gender for at least 2 yrs by this point and is unlikely to change back.

Alex - spouse shou!d be informed, but not able to veto. Shou!d be able to arrive at consensus without too much issue.

Ruth - as currently worded gives abusive partners power to control! Trans more likely to experience DV. Divorce should be able to take place alongside GRC.

NB's half trans population, they also need protection. Fluidity and detrans not taken into account when having to state they intend to remain in their gender for ever

SW: "I don't think we should call it spousal consent... it's about informing the spouse about a change in their legal contract"
FFS! YOU DON'T JUST GET TO INFORM SOMEONE OF A CHANGE TO A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT, YOU HAVE TO AGREE THAT CHANGE FIRST!!
(Apologies for the CAPSLOCKING but this annoys me so much).

And now Ruth Pearce is mentioning the risk of this enabling abusive behaviour, which having read the TransWidows' stories makes me wonder if she's not considered the risk from the other direction, or is just conveniently ignoring it.

The Ireland model was pushed through without consultation, and now it's held up as an 'ideal' model tombs emulated

SW "We are totally understanding of the issues raised by gender critical feminists"

LOLZ