Women's and Equalities - inquiry into the Reform of the Gender Recognition Act

[Leafstamp]

Live now for anyone interested:

www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/6436ad0d-508d-4208-97da-a39a913a254c

[Leafstamp]

@ChattyLion

Mermaids do want legal gender recognition for kids: mermaidsuk.org.uk/mermaids-manifesto-for-gra-reform/

I think the consent issues are potentially extremely concerning in what they are calling for here:

System of recognition for Children and Young People
‘A self-determination model should be available to anyone 16 years and over. A system should also be in place so that children and young people have access to legal gender recognition. Mermaids sees this as a system of consent from those with parental responsibility, as well as a process in place for children and young people without supportive households.’

Note: the new parlance for ‘self-ID’ is ‘self-determination’

Extremely concerning indeed.

And it will be the most vulnerable children who come off worst - eg those with parents who are are potentially vulnerable themselves due to poor education/socio-economic status.

[RobinMoiraWhite]

@Changemusthappen

Mmm - GRA questions - you gave everyone too long to respond and our flooding by trans people was spotted....

Nope. Researchers said not.

[Tibtom]

Apparently in theory you can be fined or imprisoned for being in contempt (lying) to a select committee. Hasn't happened for a couple hundred years but maybe time to revive that law?

[LangClegsInSpace]

I don't think Cat can have read the guidance very carefully

www.gov.uk/government/publications/apply-for-a-gender-recognition-certificate-form-t450

[AnneListersHat]

Robin The Government received 40,500 responses via the Stonewall form, which accounted for 39% of submissions.

[Leafstamp]

Sex-Matters.org have said the following in response to Cat and Nancy et al:

...There were several similarly jaw-dropping mis-statements in the Women and Equality Select Committee session, and we will be working with others to develop a full fact-checking document once the transcript comes out.

Hooray for them.

Please do join up here: sex-matters.org/

[Scepticaltank]

The jaw dropping Cat moment for me was when we got told that Cat, on transitioning, became the most senior female pilot and was therefore invited to represent women in the company on the diversity board to explain why only 5% of women were pilots. Cat was a middle aged male at the time.

This casual sexism just appals me.

[RobinMoiraWhite]

@AnneListersHat

Robin The Government received 40,500 responses via the Stonewall form, which accounted for 39% of submissions.

So what. That's how they got my response. It was just a form, No one helped me fill it in or suggest what I should say. It should be obvious from what you have seen me say in public or on these threads that no-one tells me what to say.

[Scepticaltank]

There's a useful breakdown of the count of template responses in the consultation results document. I've picked out a key question here. It is on page 113.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/919890/Analysis_of_responses_Gender_Recognition_Act.pdf

Quote
18.1 Question 15 – quantitative analysis
Question 15: Do you think that the operation of the communal accommodation exception in relation to gender reassignment in the Equality Act 2010 will be affected by changing the Gender Recognition Act?

Please give reasons for your answer.

Respondents 102,820 total, 47,260 to this question.
Overall, 46% of consultation respondents provided an answer to this question, with 69.2% of these saying that the operation of the communal accommodation exception would be affected by changing the GRA, and 30.8% saying that it would not.

There was some variation in terms of location, with respondents in Northern Ireland most likely (86.3%) to say that the exception would be affected, compared to 72.7% of respondents in England who said this (see Annex Table B39). On page 168. (note that 17,000 submissions were not identified as UK)

Responses to this question varied significantly depending on the source through which they were submitted. While those responding though official government channels were more or less evenly split (with 50.2% saying the exception would be affected, and
49.8% saying it would not), 100% of those responding via the Fair Play for Women template said that it would be affected, which had a significant impact on the overall pattern of responses. In contrast, most (83.8%) of the Stonewall respondents said that the exception would not be affected, but the low response rate for this question (1.1%) meant that this group did not have a large impact on the overall percentage (see Annex Table B40). As this question was not included in the Level Up form, no responses to this question were received through this route.
There was some variation between individual and organisational responses, with individuals much more likely (69.5%) to suggest that the exception would be affected than those responding on behalf of organisations (33.9%)

Unquote

I am interested in why this question was ignored by Stonewall submitters. Only 440 of them answered it, out of 40,500 Stonewall submissions. Level Up didn't even include it.

I get the impression that the social media campaign which insisted there was no impact on single sex exemptions worked in practice to make them focus on ticking that question (q13, page 98) but ignoring this one, therefore giving it NO consideration at all, and the only conclusion I can draw from that almost half the total respondents actually couldn't care less what women are saying about communal accommodation, not even enough to answer the question.
You get a much truer answer here about the consultation findings because of this, you can see the influence of coached answers on people by comparing it with the question on operation of single sex exemptions.

The data shows quite clearly what women have been saying all along, that there is a complete refusal to even properly consider the impact by Stonewall.

Liz Truss was right to take the view she did. Nearly 60,000 people via Stonewall and LevelUp etc (see non binary recognition question) were simply facilitated to tick a box saying, "yes, free certificates for all with whatever we want on them".

Fascinating.

[LangClegsInSpace]

The transcript is up at last

committees.parliament.uk/event/4042/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/

[gardenbird48]

Interesting Sceptical (and thanks for the link LangCleg.

If I'm reading that question/response correctly, is the extremely low response down to the fact that they (Stonewall et al) claim that trans people already use the toilets of their choice so by this argument are claiming that it represents no actual change?

This seems to be quite a firmly held line, with some activists on here suggesting that the reason for no data that proves that tw are excessively endangered by using the men's facilities is because literally none do?

In other news, there is a new Government consultation to look at 'organisations which drive violence or criminality and cause disruption to people's lives and social cohesion'.

Guess who Mimmybirthingbod and friends are nominating???



yes, that's right - Mumsnet.

[highame]

Given our HoL support, I think they wont get very far .

Do they specify FWR board otherwise there'll be an awful lot of angry mums who wont like that at all

[Scepticaltank]

If I'm reading that question/response correctly, is the extremely low response down to the fact that they (Stonewall et al) claim that trans people already use the toilets of their choice so by this argument are claiming that it represents no actual change

My point is that this is a sub category of the overall single sex exemption question. The low response is indicative of the excessive facilitation of unaffected people to answer the big ticket question. That they didn't bother to properly engage with this very similar question (only 1.1% did) is evidence of superficial engagement with the consultation.

A massively higher proportion, approx 60,000, wanted free non binary certificates. I could laugh but I won't. (I am)

[Scepticaltank]

Guess who Mimmybirthingbod and friends are nominating???

Well, that will go as well as her transphobia case against a transsexual, won't it?

[Scepticaltank]

It is really important to say that we do not advocate for the removal of the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. When the Equality Act was first introduced, Stonewall did.

Nancy, you really should read the 2016 Maria Miller enquiry when this exact thing happened, fully 6 years after the 2010 Act. Or has that gone down the memory hole?

The bar set in the Equality Act, which is that trans women and trans men—although it is mostly used around trans women—access to women’s spaces should only be restricted as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, is very high. There has to be a very specific set of reasons to exclude trans women from single-sex spaces. Although we dearly wish that no single-sex spaces wished to exclude trans women, trans men or non-binary people, we also recognise that, for the minority of spaces that want to, it is probably not a particularly safe service for those trans people to access.

So only worried about female safety when it's a trans man. How contradictory Nancy.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

The bar set in the Equality Act, which is that trans women and trans menalthough it is mostly used around trans womenaccess to women’s spaces should only be restricted as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, is very high. There has to be a very specific set of reasons to exclude trans women from single-sex spaces.

She is completely talking out of her arse. That's not in the legislation.

[Leafstamp]

Thanks @Scepticaltank for that information. Very telling.

I saw you know who’s nomination of mumsnet on Twitter too. Pathetic.

[Manderleyagain]

Thanks sceptical for the figures.

I'm reading that question/response correctly, is the extremely low response down to the fact that they (Stonewall et al) claim that trans people already use the toilets of their choice so by this argument are claiming that it represents no actual change

I would have thought if they thought about it in that much detail they would answer with that. It suggests to me that the campaign for self id was successful in discouraging people who were onside from thinking through these details. They were discouraged from thinking 'if we change this over here, what unintended consequence might we see over there? #nodebate and later quite shallow soundbites saying things like 'trans ppl know better than you what gender they are', 'it's just an admin change, no one asks for a birth cert on the door', and answering any question about the conflict of rights/needs with 'trans women are women' meant that those who mainly listened to that were able to answer the overarching questions with the principle, but didn't even begin to think about those more detailed questions.

[Manderleyagain]

The discrepancy between the high proportion of UK based respondents thought it would alter the exception, and the overall percentages once the Americans etc had been mixed in is astounding.

[Leafstamp]

As a little aside, this made me smile:

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_on_assigning_sex_at#incoming-1748298

Someone has requested information on how midwives are trained to assign sex at birth.

Genius!

They are yet to reply (within the required timeframe) in spite of the fact that the information sought relates to evidence provided at the same inquiry we are discussing on this thread!

[R0wantrees]

And it will be the most vulnerable children who come off worst - eg those with parents who are are potentially vulnerable themselves due to poor education/socio-economic status.

The most vulnerable children are those who are Looked After and have been subjected to abuse, trauma and/or neglect. Statutory services are required to affirm and follow policies heavily influenced by TRAs.

thread www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3324578-Vunerabilities-of-Looked-After-Children-Social-Work-CP-restricted-by-affirmation-requirement-Trans-Youth-in-Care-Toolkit

[FlyPassed]

@Leafstamp that has cheered me right up! I CANNOT WAIT to see how they wriggle out of that one.

I wonder what other genius level FOIs we could do... Is a new thread in order...?

[highame]

I have a new word for you - Factose intolerant which applies to so many in the TRA camp. Not a derail, just hoping to amuse

[Leafstamp]

Factose intolerant

And yes, @FlyPassed there must be more genius FoIs to be done!!

I need these chuckles to keep my sanity in amongst the madness!