Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Fairplay for Women to address Women & Equalities Select Committee hearing on GRA Reform on 21st April

147 replies

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 13/04/2021 20:34

Good.

OP posts:
AlwaysTawnyOwl · 22/04/2021 10:19

@Seethefairfromtheair

Can anyone help me? Why is the committee still gathering evidence? I thought the government had made their decisions on the gra?
The WEC is a Parliamentary (not government) scrutiny committe. Their job is to scrutinise government policy in this area and come up with recommendations which the government can implement or not. Many reports just gather dust. The extent of this enquiry though indicates a concerted attempt to change government policy. Caroline Noakes clearly has an agenda to push. But the EHRC did not submit a new response saying that due to new government priorities and their decision not to implement self id they didn't have time. I think this is significant Liz Truss is moving away from an emphasis on protected characteristics and towards social inequality. The LGBT committee has been disbanded. Caroline Noakes who lost the Tory whip for a bit is unpopular and has been demoted. Having such excellent input from women's organisations has been fantastic and the first time they have been included. But my best guess is that Liz Truss just wants the whole thing to go away and won't be willing to open up the hornets nest again particularly when this isn't going with her equality policy. I don't see Boris introducing himself with his preferred pronouns anytime soon.

And although Crispin Blunt is very vocal, its noticeable how thin the numbers are for his attempts to force change. This just isn't a government priority.

I do think Ann Sinnots JR on forcing the EHRC to make clear guidance on single sex spaces in accordance with the law and disseminate it to all organisations is very important.This is the reality of policy implementation that Sonewall have endlessly tried to muddle - 'getting 'ahead' of the law'. It needs to stop.

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 10:26

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 10:27

Sorry about the length of the above post...but wanted to include the full correspondence with Kim Johnson MP

ArabellaScott · 22/04/2021 10:30

Wow, excellent letter, Justhada. And her response is nothing of the sort. Preachy, evasive and patronising.

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 10:36

Wow, excellent letter, Justhada. And her response is nothing of the sort. Preachy, evasive and patronising

To be honest, I think she has copied and pasted a set response, with a few personalised additions. Note she didn't respond any further, I suspect because she was unable to without a script.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 22/04/2021 10:38

protections under the Equality Act, which ensure that trans people are not wrongfully excluded from single-sex spaces"

There are no "protections" for trans people in the Equality Act which grant them access to opposite sex spaces.

Datun · 22/04/2021 11:10

@Ereshkigalangcleg

protections under the Equality Act, which ensure that trans people are not wrongfully excluded from single-sex spaces"

There are no "protections" for trans people in the Equality Act which grant them access to opposite sex spaces.

Indeed. She's talking bollocks.

Two excellent letters Justhadathought. Notable by how reasonable they are, and how underpinned with logic and rational questions.

Her response is, clearly, ideologically driven, and full of holes. She can't respond to your second letter, because, of course, your requests are entirely reasonable and a refusal to accommodate them would look very bad.

Don't be discouraged. Other people would have read it too. Including numerous people on here.

yourhairiswinterfire · 22/04/2021 11:34

There are no "protections" for trans people in the Equality Act which grant them access to opposite sex spaces.

Exactly. When Crispin Blunt was trying to make secret deals which he was later forced to apologise for, one of the things he was trying to make happen:

women-only spaces and services should include all women, including trans women

sex-matters.org/posts/updates/crispin-blunt-mp-ordered-to-apologise-for-breach-of-parliamentary-rules-over-attempt-to-make-secret-deal-on-self-id/

Why waste time and energy trying to get that to happen if it's already not an issue?

Why are SW trying to remove the single sex exemptions if trans people aren't allowed to be excluded from opposite sex spaces anyway?

They talk bollocks. The single sex exemptions are a pesky barrier, thwarting their plans.

MichelleofzeResistance · 22/04/2021 12:51

women-only spaces and services should include all women, including trans women

Totally agree, Crispin. Women only spaces should include all women

And not exclude some from women's spaces, services and facilities and access to public life because of an ideological drive to prove to male people that you care enough.

You cannot 'include' male people in women only spaces without excluding some women. It cannot be done. You cannot square that circle. Which makes the stating of ideological positions like 'but we must include all women' and using words like 'inclusion' really rather.... silly.

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 13:51

I am having to re-post my correspondence with MP Kim Johnson, with one amendment, as my post was removed for being against the spirit.

I’m appalled by the comments made by J.K Rowling. I would hope that someone with such a large youth following would use her platform to promote acceptance and inclusivity! Trans rights are human rights. Shame on you @jk_rowling #TransLivesMatter

"Kim, you are now my MP, but you do not speak for me.Not once have you consulted women in your constituency on whether or not they feel happy with male bodied people in their intimate spaces. These spaces, services, and sporting categories are not yours to give away. You should be campaigning for 'third spaces' rather endorsing the active and aggressive colonisation of valued women's spaces"

"There need be no conflict of interest at all if you focussed your energy on gaining the provision of services and spaces for your trans constituents, in the way that other groups have been campaigning for many decades for theirs. There are very real & material differences in the specific needs of women and of transwomen ( who are now a very various group, including fully male bodied people who have absolutely no desire to fully 'transition' )".

"There are no civil rights that trans people do not already possess. All citizens of the U.K have equal rights in law. What you seem to be claiming is additional rights to everyone else; and also to prioritise these supposed rights above the established spaces and rights of other groups, namely women in this instance. Would you claim the same for people who claimed a trans-racial identity, I wonder? Particularly pertinent in this Time of BLM. I suspect not"

"TWAW is a statement and an article of faith, not a fact - and one which you have obviously been schooled in by campaign groups such as Stonewall and Mermaids. But you have no right to impose this ideology on anyone else" Furthermore, in so unquestioningly supporting trans ideology you are consigning a generation of gender non conforming children ( young girls/nascent lesbians, especially) to a lifetime of medical interference, and even radical surgery, simply because they do not conform to rigid gender stereotyping. I urge you to speak to some of the many de-transitioners who could share their stories with you. There are regular conferences and meetings all over the country, and indeed in this city, if you are democratically minded to attend. ( In non Covid times, naturally)".

"I also think you need to be open with your constituents in what is being proposed be taught to children in schools from as early as September, and that is that 'gender is assigned at birth' rather than the factually correct statement that 'sex is observed at birth'. The fact is that no matter how one 'identifies' one cannot change sex. Teaching this to young children can be nothing but confusing and damaging"

"Our children and grandchildren need to be free to express whoever they are outside of rigid gender stereotyping, whereby a girl who does not aspire to be a Disney princess can still be a girl, and need not have to identify as a boy. We really have gone back, and regressed, haven't we? And I speak as an ex teacher and as a mother of three and a grandmother"

"I really do suggest you read and consult more widely on this issue. There is a Local branch of Liverpool Resisters, to which you would be most welcome. Women who are your constituents, and most of whom have been life long Labour supporters, but who can no longer vote Labour, and who you certainly do not speak for"

"You also do not speak for some BAME communities, the women of which would be denied access to certain aspects of public life if males were imposed into their spaces. Have you consulted with any local women's groups at all? I think you'll find that most women outside of the Momentum bubble do not share your view. I know because I have spoken with them, myself, around the city, in changing rooms, in public toilets, on the street"

"Kim, you are here to represent all of your constituents, and not just to promote Momentum type identity politics. I look forward to your wider consultation with your constituents on this and many other issues"

Regards

Kim Johnson response

"Thank you for contacting me about reform to the Gender Recognition Act (GRA).I support reform of the GRA to introduce self-declaration for transgender people, and the full roll-out of LGBT+ inclusive education across our schools"I am further committed to eliminating remaining areas of discrimination in law, ensuring that LGBT+ people can live in safety and dignity"

"LGBT+ people still face widespread discrimination, and it is clear that we must do more to enhance their rights and protections.As you will be aware, in July 2017, the Government committed to consulting on reforming the GRA and launched its consultation in July 2018. This consultation closed in October 2018. The Government has yet to publish the findings or respond"

"In May 2020, the Government said it is planning to publish its “response this summer, subject to the Government's COVID-19 response”.As you will further be aware, in April 2020, the Women and Equalities Minister outlined three principles that the Government would be putting in place. It was stated that this includes: “the protection of single-sex spaces”, “making sure that transgender adults are free to live their lives as they wish without fear of persecution, whilst maintaining the proper checks and balances in the system” and “making sure that the under 18s are protected from decisions that they could make, that are irreversible in the future.”

"It is vital that there is no rowing back on trans rights. The Government must protect the rights of the trans community in its response to its consultation on the GRA, which has already been significantly delayed.Additionally, it is important that the Government does not interfere with protections under the Equality Act, which ensure that trans people are not wrongfully excluded from single-sex spaces"

"Furthermore, it must be ensured that LGBT+ people are not disproportionately affected by coronavirus, and that all communities are protected equally.I have received dozens of representations from my constituents on this issue, and you are the only one who has opposed the reforms to the GRA I understand that this is an issue which evokes strong feelings on both sides, and it needs to be discussed and addressed seriously. That is why I thought JK Rowling's mocking tone was inappropriate and offensive. It was very instructive that some of the actors who made their names in the Harry Potter series felt they had to come out in support of the transgender community and distance themselves from her words"

"I respect the fact that you are passionate about your viewpoint and thank you for taking the time to write to me on this important issue"

My further, unanswered, response

"There is no logical consistency in arguing that TWAW but then suggesting that single sex spaces, services and sports can be protected; because if anyone can self identify as a woman and TWAW, then 'single sex' no longer has any meaning. Are you suggesting, therefore, that you don't really believe that 'transwomen are women', that you are saying so just to " be kind"? Kindness is also required towards women and girls. Many teenage girls, for example, in schools that have converted the girls' toilets to unisex toilets, are avoiding drinking water during the day, because of the discomfort they feel about using mixed sex facilities. How is this fair? Girls who have worked hard and excelled are now losing out on medals and scholarships intended for them, to transwomen and girls. This is clearly not fair either"

"You have not addressed the fact that trans people have the same civil and legal rights as anyone else in the U.K - what you are seeking is additional rights, and what you are seeking is to enforce and impose into spaces, services and sports designed to cater for women and girls; which would undermine their needs for dignity, privacy and safety. Not all LGB organisations are in agreement with your position either, because they are deeply aware of the implications of trans ideology for many young lesbians and gay men"

"I suggest that the reason you have not received much correspondence on this issue, except from the very well resourced trans lobby, is that you have not consulted very widely at all with your constituents; nor has there been any open debate in parliament. Indeed, when 'A Woman's Place U.K' held consultations last year,in Westminster, only a handful of MPs even bothered to turn up, and then Angela Raynor declared them a 'hate group'.. I wonder whether you are open to meeting with representatives from WPUK in your constituency, or whether you would welcome an invitation to consult and discuss further on this issue? There are women from all walks of life and professions who meet to discuss this issue; regular conferences and so on, and you could meet with some of the growing numbers of young detransitioners; as well as with parents of trans children; and women married to AGP ( Autogynephillic) men, who now identify as transwomen"

"JKRowling's tone was not mocking at all. It was eloquent, reasoned and informed. Have you seen what women who speak out on this issue get subjected to? Even at the Labour party fringe in Brighton last year, a meeting set up to discuss this issue was subject to screaming abuse and the continued kicking of windows all throughout the meeting. And the Labour party did not condemn this. Indeed, meetings of professionals from around the country, having travelled to liverpool for meetings, have had venues cancel at the last minute due to malicious calls from trans activists; and so having to wander the city trying to locate suitable new venues at the very last minute"

"I met with your predecessor, Louise Ellman to discuss this issue, and she was both open and amenable. I hope you too decide that you'd like to consult more widely and to that end I invite you to meet with local women's groups - which I am happy to arrange"

"Until I determine that the Labour party is dedicated to listening to all of its party members and constituents, especially on this issue , which is to me the single biggest and most primal issue there is right now - then there is absolutely no chance I will be voting Labour again. And I say that as an ex Labour party member. This is an issue which is not going to go away, and there is no sense in just rebuffing people who have genuine concerns on many different levels. The job of politics is to face and deal with conflicts of interest, and this issue is certainly one of those"

Thecatonthemat · 22/04/2021 14:44

Great letters Justhad but it doesn’t appear your MP is listening at all. I see no defence of women’s rights and no attempt to understand why women think that the situation is unclear. No recognition that many women are impacted already.
Thank you again to Nic, Raquel and Judith for being so clear in the face of biased questions. It must have been hard not to rant.

Leafstamp · 22/04/2021 16:03

Amazing letters Just

I think Baroness Nicholson would be interested in seeing that correspondence.

Her contact details are here:

members.parliament.uk/member/1164/contact

Although, if it's still in use, the one here, might be better:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4068907-Baroness-Nicholson-forming-a-womens-group

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 17:20

I've had to turn it off. That panel is so depressingly stuck in their superior wokeness that they cannot give fair hearing to the issues with their beliefs

My feeling is that the panel was presenting/hiding behind efficient and brisk exteriors, partly because that had so little real awareness or knowledge, & certainly no independent research to hand. You could see in the eyes that they had no real clue or idea, and subsequent shallowness of questioning revealed this.

Hopefully they learned something, and will now actually go away and learn some more, and not think that they can, in future, volunteer for such a committee with so little preparation.

I think they tended to target Judith a little more with questions than the others for the simple reason because her speech was a little more faltering ( even if her mind was lucid), and they felt they could perhaps get something on her. They couldn't!

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 17:21

for the simple reason that her speech was a little faltering at times, and this perhaps made her come across as a little bit more vulnerable

WhereAreWeNow · 22/04/2021 17:41

@Justhadathought I agree they gave Judith a harder time than Nic and Raquel. She handled it v well but I don't think they were fair to her. I also thought they were very unsympathetic when she talked about her own experience as a user of a women only service for survivors. I would have expected at least a flicker of empathy or at least to thank her for sharing her personal experience.

Scepticaltank · 22/04/2021 18:14

There's been such a lot of smearing of Woman's Place its hard for them to get a fair hearing from people listening to that. When dozens of people misrepresent you and describe you as a liar and a bigot, they are not listening with an open mind.

Last night a clip of Judith was circulating, it has been edited down to try to make Judith look bad and for everyone to laugh at.

Judith had talked at length in answer to a question, giving explanations and analysis.

Nicola Richards responded by saying "so you are saying you don't have any evidence then".

Judith replied, "No I have just explained three things" etc...and repeated them.

This has been cut down on the video clip to this

Nicola Richards responded by saying "so you are saying you don't have any evidence then"

Judith replied, "No"

This is being circulated and ridiculed by people that boast about hating Women's Place and by association most of us here.

If all you can do is create fake news and lies the joke is on the fakers and liars, because, well you are fakers and liars.

Scepticaltank · 22/04/2021 18:35

mobile.twitter.com/WhatTheTrans/status/1385139069097631745

Here's a member of the Government Women's and Equalities Committee asking for "evidence" . The Committee member should know all this already. How many years has she been working on this?

She has no idea of how many people use a law or the operation of the policy she is trying to change.

She is trying to find fault with others and as a result displaying her own lack of knowledge.

Of course those that want it removed don't want her to know what is going on do they? They would prefer the Committee to be ignorant of it. They just want an excuse to hate a woman.

This MP cannot justify failing to inform herself from the actual source of data, the Gender Recognition Panel itself, when she is responsible for recommending changes. This MP is embarrassing in her ineptitude and worse, she's using her own ignorance to try to embarrass others.

I can't believe how low people sink, I would never be that inept and biased at work, and to do it on video is astonishing.

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 19:11

Last night a clip of Judith was circulating, it has been edited down to try to make Judith look bad and for everyone to laugh at

Judith was a more vulnerable target for a few reasons, and none of them to do with the validity of her experience; her thoughts; or her knowledge.

For some of the panel she probably came across as the archetypal 'middle class white feminist' that they long to dismiss, and who could be easily pigeon-holed as such. Secondly, her speech is not fluent, which can create an impression of lack of clarity or coherence if that is what you seek to find; thirdly she has more obvious personal vulnerability, no doubt borne out of her own experiences of abuse.

The panel felt more confident in themselves when directing their questions to her; and that is why they did it. Very transparently so.

Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 19:30

Nicola Richards responded by saying "so you are saying you don't have any evidence then

It was clear that Nicola Richards had not the faintest idea about what a trans widow is, nor what AGP is. Her insistence on statistics, which was really a cover for her floundering lack of awareness, revealed that she has no clue about the large numbers of older, married men who are now seeking to transition.

She was trying to insinuate that as many transmen may have transitioned, whilst in marriages, as transwomen. Judith kept mentioning equality laws around same sex marriage, because to her mind it is fairly obvious there is no female equivalent of the AGP in a heterosexual relationship; so she assumed that the MP was referring to women in same sex relationships who then transition to transmen.

These MPS came along for what they thought would be easy brownie points in the service of their parliamentary careers. The ignorance and the arrogance that comes with such moral certainty built on what are actually foundations of sand, is quite something to behold.

ANewCreation · 22/04/2021 20:23

Why are SW trying to remove the single sex exemptions if trans people aren't allowed to be excluded from opposite sex spaces anyway?

Superb point, yourhairiswinterfire
It's almost like SW know that they are not telling the truth...

Yet again it is infuriating that, while women are doing their homework often on top of their everyday lives, those who are paid to represent us have so little regard for the dignity, privacy and safety of 51% of their constituents or knowledge of what the issues facing us are.

Wanted to include this link from Karen Ingala Smith for completeness regarding Angela Crawley and noting the use of the word 'trans female" to presumably describe males in women only rescues. Although could be anyone's guess

kareningalasmith.com/2021/04/21/counting-dead-trans-people/?fbclid=IwAR3FtFmNL75vCUtYu6JFQ2vWu465W2bAjWNFTF5CKQipUoIyavikIYjdhSk

What will those who look back through Hansard make of this all?

Fantastic letters, Justhad btw

WhereAreWeNow · 22/04/2021 20:34

@Justhadathought I didn't think Judith's speech lacked fluency. I thought she was incredibly articulate. Both Raquel and Judith often took pauses to consider their answers but I don't think that's a bad thing. I think Kathleen Stock did when she was on too.
I agree that for whatever reason they saw her as an easier target.
And how shitty of TRAs to edit the footage to make it look like women said things that they didn't. Typical!

PurpleWh1teGreen · 22/04/2021 21:40

Does anyone know if it’s possible to read a transcript of the hearing? I’d be interested to have a read.

I Have enjoyed FPFW’s tweets.

Leafstamp · 22/04/2021 21:47

@PurpleWh1teGreen

Does anyone know if it’s possible to read a transcript of the hearing? I’d be interested to have a read.

I Have enjoyed FPFW’s tweets.

It will be published on the same link as the session in a week or two.
Justhadathought · 22/04/2021 22:04

I didn't think Judith's speech lacked fluency

i agree that Judith's thought processes and reasoning didn't lack fluency or clarity, but her tendency to stilted or interrupted speech patterns could have given that impression to an unsympathetic audience.

Look , I don't want to criticise Judith at all, she knows her stuff, but people will use any ammunition they can get - especially when they have little else to offer in response.

PurpleWh1teGreen · 22/04/2021 22:08

Thanks Leafstamp. That makes sense, I had had a look and drawn a blank. I’ll bookmark the thread to remind myself.