Page 14 | For Women Scotland lose case

PandorasMailbox · 2021-03-23T12:16:38+00:00

Absolutely gutted for them [sad] [[https://twitter.com/ForwomenScot/status/1374330580473630721]]

Ereshkigalangcleg · 17/04/2021 13:28

Vera Baird did a lot of good for female victims of crime and domestic violence sufferers who snapped and killed their abusers, but she's wrong on this.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 17/04/2021 13:32

For the princely sum of £29.99 we can all find out.

Preordering my copy as we speak!

I hope FWS and their legal team read this thread.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 17/04/2021 13:35

Remove the genuine occupational requirement (GOR) allowing some jobs to require applicants must be cisgender and replace it with a GOR allowing posts delivering trans-specific services to require applicants must be transgender

What clearer expression of having one's cake and eating it.

OldCrone · 17/04/2021 13:42

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I agree, but what it actually says is 'a woman and not a transsexual person', which also excludes transmen for the reasons in my previous post.

I think it's just clumsily drafted, because the wording in the other similar example where the needs of female rape survivors are considered is specific in only referring to an MTF trans person.

It can't exclude most FTM trans people on the grounds of sex as they are legally female.

But doesn't it exclude FtM trans people on the grounds of being transsexual?

I agree about the clumsy drafting, because it seems clear that it's there to exclude the same group as people as in the other clause which mentions male to female transsexuals.

As written, it excludes anyone who is not a woman and/or is transsexual.

R0wantrees · 17/04/2021 13:49

As written, it excludes anyone who is not a woman and/or is transsexual.

A female of any age would not be excluded should they wish to access female single sex excepted space/ services as they can simply decline to self identify as 'transsexual'.
Many women have mastectomies, hysterectomies and/or have facial hair.

EyesOpening · 17/04/2021 13:56

@TheShadowyFeminist

For the princely sum of £29.99 we can all find out.

I think I'll give it a miss, thanks.

I'll take that £29.99 and donate it to FWS's case

Ereshkigalangcleg · 17/04/2021 14:00

But doesn't it exclude FtM trans people on the grounds of being transsexual?

They may be transsexuals but unless they have a GRC they are legally female. I think it means MTF transsexuals and they just don't want to say they are male.

Gibbonsgibbonsgibbons · 17/04/2021 20:35

From Equality and Human Rights Commission
www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/our-statement-sex-and-gender-reassignment-legal-protections-and-language

“a trans woman who does not hold a GRC and is therefore legally male”

OldCrone · 17/04/2021 21:44

@R0wantrees

As written, it excludes anyone who is not a woman and/or is transsexual.

A female of any age would not be excluded should they wish to access female single sex excepted space/ services as they can simply decline to self identify as 'transsexual'.
Many women have mastectomies, hysterectomies and/or have facial hair.

Yes, you're right. A woman who identifies as a man could decide that she no longer wants to identify as a man and would then be eligible for a post which was for a woman who is not transsexual, since it appears that now, being transsexual or transgender is mostly about what one declares oneself to be rather than actual physical modifications to one's body. And even if someone has modified their body they haven't changed sex.

Thanks for the link to the Julia Long article. I somehow missed that last year. I agree with all of that. The language around this is a total mess. I often find that I spend ages trying to write a post to avoid using any pronouns (to comply with the special rules as I don't want to use wrong-sex pronouns). I do use the terms transwoman and transsexual because there don't seem to be concise alternatives to convey the same meaning which comply with the special rules.

There was a term that was used on here a lot a few years ago but which was banned when the special rules were brought in. It would be much easier if we could use this term.

Quoting from the MN special rules:

That said, it’s clear that most trans people find the use of pronouns or names that they or others have consciously rejected, to be hurtful and would therefore struggle to engage in a discussion with those who insist on using them. The same is true of the expression ‘Trans-Identified Male’ or ‘TIM’.

I sometimes use 'man who identifies as a woman' as an alternative, but 'transwoman' or 'transsexual' are much quicker to type.

R0wantrees · 17/04/2021 22:08

Thanks for the link to the Julia Long article. I somehow missed that last year. I agree with all of that. The language around this is a total mess.

I found not colluding with obfuscatory language easier than anticipated.

RobinMoiraWhite · 18/04/2021 00:13

@R0wantrees

There's a free podcast here:

R. White (assisted by James Morton) represented a former Jaguar-Landrover male employee (Taylor) who wished to wear stereotypical feminine clothes to work and was bullied by co-workers.

White explains that a key part of the Jaguar Landrover case rested on comment by Vera Baird about the nature of 'gender reassignment' from Hansard. (see screenshot)
It would be useful to know the context/date of this statement.

Thus claiming coverage for an occasional cross dressing engineer as 'gender fluid/non binary' to be included in protected characteristic 'gender reassignment'

Baird is a former Solicitor General now Victims' Commissioner.
Wiki
A Labour Party Member of Parliament for Redcar from 2001 to 2010, Baird was a government minister from 2006 to 2010 and the Solicitor General for England and Wales from 2007 to 2010. She served as the Police and Crime Commissioner for Northumbria Police from November 2012 to June 2019.

I am not a lawyer but remain shocked that well educated professionals would nod along with such nonsensical sentences as Baird's

She had the advantage of being the government minister piloting the Bill through the Commons at the time and so her statements as to the meaning of the Bill are an important source which carrys legal weight in interpreting it.

RobinMoiraWhite · 18/04/2021 00:25

[quote Scepticaltank]Robin will be sharing the wisdom

www.lawbriefpublishing.com/product/transgenderlaw/[/quote]
Thank you for the advert.

R0wantrees · 18/04/2021 08:18

She had the advantage of being the government minister piloting the Bill through the Commons at the time and so her statements as to the meaning of the Bill are an important source which carrys legal weight in interpreting it.

@RobinMoiraWhite could you please provide a more specific link to when Vera Baird made the comments quoted in Equality Act debates in Westminster please.

I would like to look at context.

WhatKatyDidNot · 18/04/2021 11:50

I think Robin's interpretation of EqA 2010 is wrong. Spurious, even.

But what difference would it make for feminists even if it was correct? Not much.

We're interested in what is good for women. Either our interpretation is correct and we campaign for EqA as is to be properly enforced or Robin's interpretation is correct and we campaign for it to be changed so that is actually protective of women.

Let's not go up a blind alley of semantics.

We just want what is best for women.

OldCrone · 18/04/2021 12:54

@R0wantrees

She had the advantage of being the government minister piloting the Bill through the Commons at the time and so her statements as to the meaning of the Bill are an important source which carrys legal weight in interpreting it.

@RobinMoiraWhite could you please provide a more specific link to when Vera Baird made the comments quoted in Equality Act debates in Westminster please.

I would like to look at context.

I thought I'd have a look for these comments in Hansard while waiting for Robin to come back. I haven't managed to find them yet.

Here's a link to the full judgment in the case where these were mentioned.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5fc8d559d3bf7f7f5c134ad3/Ms_R_Taylor_v_Jaguar_Land_Rover_Limited_-1304471.2018-_Reasons.pdf

The Hansard extracts are mentioned in paragraphs 170-178, but there is no date reference to help us find them.

Scepticaltank · 18/04/2021 16:20

Thank you for the advert.

If the killer content is that words don't mean what anyone thinks they mean then there is already tons of that blah all over the place. 30 quid for old news is steep.

CatherinaJTV · 18/04/2021 17:17

@PearPickingPorky

Women in Scotland are fucked. We have no rights or protections left, they've removed them all by stealth.

We have the Forensic Medical Services Bill saying we can request (but not have) a female examiner after a rape. But that is it. That's it! And that had to be fought to the death for.

to be fair, this is mainly because there aren't enough female examiners.

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 18/04/2021 18:24

Yes, Catherina that is my understanding - the number of female examiners has increased but there needs to be more. I think most of the women involved in the campaign understood this (although, offensively, Sandy Brindley of RCS suggested they did not) but knew that accurate language was important going forward. As this groups of survivors so movingly wrote, they knew it wasn't a guarantee, but it gave them the right to ask. It's also true that a new university course designed for FME was not using schedule 9 and that campaigners hoped this might encourage them to do so. forwomen.scot/10/12/2020/dear-msps-from-survivors/#more-3058

Scepticaltank · 19/04/2021 02:55

I just went through this tonight with my young late 20s niece, explaining how some Scottish politicians consider it bigoted to want a female examiner and not a male with an identity.

She was repelled by the fact that women's boundaries are so unacceptable by men. She studied oral history of the sterilising of indigenous women in Peru instigated by a male (Japan born) for her masters degree.

www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-34855804

RedDogsBeg · 19/04/2021 16:02

[quote Alicethroughtheblackmirror]Yes, Catherina that is my understanding - the number of female examiners has increased but there needs to be more. I think most of the women involved in the campaign understood this (although, offensively, Sandy Brindley of RCS suggested they did not) but knew that accurate language was important going forward. As this groups of survivors so movingly wrote, they knew it wasn't a guarantee, but it gave them the right to ask. It's also true that a new university course designed for FME was not using schedule 9 and that campaigners hoped this might encourage them to do so. forwomen.scot/10/12/2020/dear-msps-from-survivors/#more-3058[/quote]
That is an excellent letter, it's appalling that it had to be written.

ANewCreation · 19/04/2021 18:46

Eventually found the committee stage that is relied on so heavily in the judgement, @OldCrone @R0wantrees

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmpublic/equality/090611/pm/90611s03.htm

Thursday 11June 2009
Committee stage 6th sitting

Tiny little continue button at the bottom to scroll through the session to find the columns the judgement refers to ie 168-176.

Lots to unpack here including Lynne "Don't vote for us" Featherstone who was hoping to change the protected characteristic from Gender Reassignment to Gender Identity 😳 and a very curious bit of discussion about whether Dame Edna Everage would be covered by the legislation.

I think it is helpful to set this against Baroness Thornton bringing the bill to the Lords speaking 6 months later in January 2010, explaining who the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (clause 7) was, by then, designed to protect.

There is a definite switch between the positions expressed at committee stage and later in the Lords and it would, I believe, have been a very useful Hansard-based counter argument in the gender fluid case where a male using a male name presented 'as a woman' a couple of days a week. Also relevant to EI in 'boy mode' and 'girl mode'.

"The point I was making is that that is the range of things that could happen for a transsexual person.

However, Clause 7 does not cover transvestites or others who choose temporarily to adopt the appearance of the opposite gender.

While we do not condone anyone being treated badly because of the way in which they present themselves, it would not be appropriate to provide people who present themselves temporarily as of a gender other than their birth gender with the same protection against discrimination that is available to a person with gender dysphoria, who is somebody who has been assigned one gender at birth, but believes that they are of another gender. That is the point—it is what happens to that person that the Bill attempts to address."

View the Hansard contribution by Baroness Thornton on Monday 11 January 2010

hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2010-01-11/debates/10011139000077/EqualityBill?highlight=transvestites#contribution-10011149000003

OldCrone · 19/04/2021 19:23

Thank you @ANewCreation. I searched Hansard for the Equality Bill debates and found nothing with the right column numbers, and also searched for some of the phrases in the quoted extracts and found nothing. I'll read this later.

R0wantrees · 19/04/2021 21:20

Many thanks ANewCreation, I am always cautious when short quotes are used without context provided.

While we do not condone anyone being treated badly because of the way in which they present themselves, it would not be appropriate to provide people who present themselves temporarily as of a gender other than their birth gender with the same protection against discrimination that is available to a person with gender dysphoria, who is somebody who has been assigned one gender at birth, but believes that they are of another gender. That is the point—it is what happens to that person that the Bill attempts to address."

This appears at first glance somewhat at odds with the argument that White and Morton were seeking to make.

RobinMoiraWhite · 20/04/2021 09:56

[quote ANewCreation]Eventually found the committee stage that is relied on so heavily in the judgement, @OldCrone @R0wantrees