Mumsnet says Trans Rights are Human Rights!

[ool0n]

I always assumed Mumsnet were not the biggest supporters of trans rights, given the stories about them. But this is a good statement on Twitter, "of course trans people exist, and of course trans rights are human rights"
twitter.com/MumsnetTowers/status/1367071394870276099

Also I thought using terms like cisgender or cis were against the rules, this isn't true either -
twitter.com/MumsnetTowers/status/1367080005193318401

So can I get a trans rights are human rights, trans women are women, trans men are men and non binary people are valid!

Seven Hex describes their transition and that her own testosterone levels were v sky high.

So I don't see where they fit in to all this.

Yes! And none of those who wrote the paper are sports specialists! Not saying that means they don't know what they are talking about, but it limits their ability to contextualise data!

Seven would also say the EA is based on woolly definitions. And is poorly constructed. And destroys women's rights.

Sex is absolutely NOT on a spectrum.
Never has been and never will be.
Humans are sexually dimorphic.
Approximately 0.018% of births result in a DSD (intersex) condition, and the vast majority of these can be determined to be male or female with genetic and other testing. An anomaly doesn't change the rules. A baby born with three legs does not suddenly mean that human are no longer bipedal and that leg number is 'on a spectrum'.

Trans people should be respected and of course their rights are human rights, but please don't spout utter nonsense that every scientist with an ounce of sense would laugh you out of the room for.
It makes you look unhinged and does nothing for the arguments of trans rights.
Biology at the genetic level cannot be changed. Regardless of hormones/surgery. And I can't believe I'm having to tell that to what is presumably a grown adult with a reasonable level of education.

@NewarkShark

There is a prohibitition under s13 of the Equality Act which makes all discrimination on grounds of Gender reassignment unlawful. The section 7 definition of "Gender reassignment" in the act is drawn widely: "A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.” Read the wording of the definition. It creates a subjective test of intention to transition any physiological or other attributes of sex. That doesn't just include binary trans people, it protects non binary people too

Direct discrimination under section 13 requires a comparator.

Where is your authority for the suggestion the appropriate comparator for a trans woman without a GRC is a natal woman?

I’ll give you R (Green) v Secretary of State for Justice [2013] as my authority that the correct comparator for a trans woman without a GRC is a man.

So section 13 when read in conjunction with section 7 says only you must not treat a trans woman less favourably than a man. It protects against less favourable treatment for the fact of being trans, or doesn’t give a right to be treated as a woman.

This case is about prisons, not about public spaces or services.

It also deals with the provision of items to someone who was an escape risk, in prison, and the justification included whether the items (including a wig) could be used to escape.

You've been very clear that you're a lawyer (although you've not said which type?) but that doesn't over rule what the Equality Human Rights commission say, which is the opposite:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/gender-reassignment-discrimination

So I don't know (but I'm sure you'll explain as a lawyer) how a High Court Case about a very different set of facts could be relevant to the question at hand or be good reason to ignore the statute, the guidance and human rights law.

I'd address you to the case R. (on the application of E) v Ashworth Hospital Authority [2001] EWHC Admin 1089 where even restrictions placed on a psychiatric patient’s freedom to dress as a woman and to assume the appearance of a woman constituted an interference with the protected Human Right to a private life and therefore a breach of human rights.

Without the specific issues created by the imprisonment of the people concerned, there doesn't seem to be much room for your argument to stand.

Hence we say sex is a spectrum, as humans can and do have hormonal, genetic, chromosomal sex characteristics that don't match their assignment at birth, or their identity. Humans are amazingly diverse.

Ummm no, I don’t think it has been proven that sex is a spectrum. There is plenty of pseudo science theories but no one yet has proven that sex is a spectrum.

You keep bringing people’s medical conditions in as evidence to your beliefs.

People can be reliably sexed using a combination of criteria. But the basic premise that has as reliable today as it was 100.000 years ago is that human sex is binary. It requires a small gamete and a large gamete to produce another human.

There has always been variations of human bodies but always based around the production (whether successfully produced or not) of either small gametes or large gametes. That is what sex is all about.

There are NO third gametes.

And please share what values are then used to place people along the spectrum? Who is more female than another female? What makes this so? What do you call those in the very middle?

Or are there many just variations of a female and a male body?

[quote Biscuitsanddoombar]Out of date on the sort thing. Dr Joanna Harper has just published to say that after conducting further research, she now agrees with the findings of Dr emma Hilton that TW retain sex based physical advantages after transition.

Dr Harper did the original study which the IOC based their trans policy on

bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2021/02/28/bjsports-2020-103106

Emma Hilton’s thread on twitter twitter.com/fondofbeetles/status/1367149242020737026?s=21[/quote]
From that study ... "After adjusting performance for age, the eight runners were not more competitive in the female category (after GAHT) than they had been in the male category (before GAHT)"

-- So no advantage for running / endurance in trans women, interesting eh?

With the possibility that strength related sports, weightlifting etc, might need longer time on HRT to remove advantage. More study is needed. If those studies showed that 2-3 years was needed, I think you'd find most trans people and allies would agree with the regulations. Will I see gender critical people agreeing with the conclusion for running and endurance sports above, no advantage for trans women, or will that part be ignored?

That's not even the same bloody thing!

The right to dress as a woman and the rght to be legally treated as a woman are very very different!

In extreme endurance sports women may out perform men, certainly the gap may narrow , so a narrowing gap between women and trans fit such sports is consistent with what we know about the sexes

So no advantage for running / endurance in trans women, interesting eh? No, because endurance sports are the area that women excel in! Because biology!

With the possibility that strength related sports, weightlifting etc, might need longer time on HRT to remove advantage Possibility? Possibility? now you are being silly!

Hence we say sex is a spectrum

You could equally say sex is like a box of chocolates, and make about as much sense.

Sex is not a f*ing spectrum. There are people whose bodies are designed (for want of a better word) to produce sperm and those designed to produce eggs. You need one of each to reproduce. Everything else is irrelevant...big boobs, penis, periods whatever. Whether your body does now or ever can produce an egg or sperm doesn’t stop your development being on the pathway to being a person who could produce one or the other. No one produces both, or a gamete that is a mixture. A sperm producer body (whether it does now) is male, an egg producer is female (whether or not they currently or ever have done...the biology is clear). A sperm producer cannot (with any amount of hormones or plastic surgery) become an egg producer!

Sex isn’t a spectrum. We’re a dimorphic species. Unequivocal proof of your sex is available with a DNA test.

@Winesalot - your argument is based on "gametes" being the sole determinant of "biological sex". When I already linked thousands of peer reviewed papers referenced in Google Scholar where "Hormonal sex", "Genetic sex" and "Chromosomal sex" are referred to by biologists. What are they referring to if not "biological sex" here?

I maintain biological sex is a set of characteristics, not one characteristic. I think I've done a pretty good job of demonstrating biologists in peer review refer to many characteristics of biological sex, not one.

I may be missing something but I still don't see anything that suggests sex is anything other than binary reproductive biology

I think I've done a pretty good job of demonstrating biologists in peer review refer to many characteristics of biological sex, not one. But nothing that speaks to what any of it means!

BigotryisBad the link you provided, which is guidance rather than law, states in its reccomendations that single sex spaces which exclude transpeople are both legal, and recommended.

Quote below:
"In very restricted circumstances it is lawful for an organisation to provide a different service or to refuse the service to someone who is undergoing, intends to undergo or has undergone gender reassignment"

What restricted circumstances means is up for discussion, but again thats an issue for lawyers to earn a fortune debating.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

So no advantage for running / endurance in trans women, interesting eh? No, because endurance sports are the area that women excel in! Because biology!

With the possibility that strength related sports, weightlifting etc, might need longer time on HRT to remove advantage Possibility? Possibility? now you are being silly!

From the paper you linked ...

"It is possible that trans women competing in sports may retain strength advantages over cisgender women, even after 3 years of hormone therapy."

@Winesalot

Hence we say sex is a spectrum, as humans can and do have hormonal, genetic, chromosomal sex characteristics that don't match their assignment at birth, or their identity. Humans are amazingly diverse.

Ummm no, I don’t think it has been proven that sex is a spectrum. There is plenty of pseudo science theories but no one yet has proven that sex is a spectrum.

You keep bringing people’s medical conditions in as evidence to your beliefs.

People can be reliably sexed using a combination of criteria. But the basic premise that has as reliable today as it was 100.000 years ago is that human sex is binary. It requires a small gamete and a large gamete to produce another human.

There has always been variations of human bodies but always based around the production (whether successfully produced or not) of either small gametes or large gametes. That is what sex is all about.

There are NO third gametes.

And please share what values are then used to place people along the spectrum? Who is more female than another female? What makes this so? What do you call those in the very middle?

Or are there many just variations of a female and a male body?

Absolutely. I've just realised that as a woman with PCOS with high testosterone levels, I may be not the woman I thought I was! Oh dear.

Yes? And what do you think that means?

From the paper you linked ... And it was a nonpay walled shorter version of the one you had linked to! I didn't choose it!

Maintain away.

I’m curious. How do you think you and everyone on the planet got here if sex is in the eye of the beholder?

No.. I'm Curios

And I am off to bed!

Good night all!

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

bigotryisbad Did you not follow the transgender prison policy Judicial Review today?

A key plank is that the EA2010 allows for the exclusion of someone from a single sex space even if they hold a GRC in certain circumstances. There is no absolute right for a transgender person to be in every single sex space.

Also note that the protections under the act only relate to Gender Reassignment so the 5000 or so people who hold a GRC. Gender identity is not protected nor is gender. Sex is the other relevant protected characteristic which is why the MOJ are also facing a claim of indirect sex discrimination.

1. I literally set out the exemption in full. Claiming that a part heard case in which the Equality Act seems unlikely to apply over-rules the statute law isn't a thing.

Also note that the protections under the act only relate to Gender Reassignment so the 5000 or so people who hold a GRC. Gender identity is not protected nor is gender. Sex is the other relevant protected characteristic which is why the MOJ are also facing a claim of indirect sex discrimination.

1. That is not the case. The test in the Equality Act is different from the Gender Recognition Act. I quoted the Equality Act section 7 in full as that's the relevant test.

The Gender Recognition act requires a person to have been living I their acquired gender for two years before applying. Its obvious that access to spaces can't rely on obtaining a GRC that requires you to have been accessing those spaces for two years already!