GRA Reform, Legal Self Declaration, has no effect on access to spaces

[ool0n]

I'm wondering given the recent convincing defeat of gender critical ideology in the high court vs EHRC - if the Mumsnet gender critical people finally accept the fact that having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces?

People on the other side of the debate like myself have been explaining to GC people on Twitter for years that having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces so their objection to GRA reform is/was unfounded. I/we based this on -

1. English government legal analysis that stated having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces
2. Scottish government legal analysis ... ditto ...
3. The EA 2010 and GA 2004 text
4. The practical impossibility that a BC (Not an ID document) could be of any use in deciding access

now we have

1. Gender critical crowdfunded challenge to EHRC guidance that says having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces. Comprehensively lost, not even passed the very low bar to even be considered for a Judicial Review.

Given this is the case will gender critical people be reevaluating their assertion "Self ID", as in GRA Reform, must be opposed as it effects access to spaces? Trans people have always been able to "Self ID", in the colloquial sense, into men's and women's spaces. So making it easier for trans people to change their birth certificates only helps them, has no effect on GC feminists, and/or cisgender women and spaces.

(I also wonder if there'll be any introspection as to why an obviously incorrect interpretation of the law was able to become so prevalent in gender critical circles. Maybe listen to groups outside of GC circles a bit more?)

Also, are you seriously asking if women will please stop objection to any and all males demanding access to womens spaces? Are you really expecting us to say 'of course any male bodied person is now welcome in womens spaces and sports as long as they declare or we think they will declare their pronouns are she/her?

This.

You know, I have trans colleagues. No problem, and I have rarely been concerned about which loo they use.

But the current transactivism makes me far more noticing of their behaviour, and far less inclined to be "kind" generally towards transpeople. It's a TRA own goal in respect of many otherwise tolerant & kind women.

Isn't it revealing that on a feminist board, of a website populated largely by women, where the women frequently gather in order to protect the rights of fellow women who have been raped, beaten, imprisoned, or are undressed, or vulnerable in hospital, their empathy, when faced with a woman who has suffered, is automatically construed as 'performative'?!

Blisteringly informative is the phrase that crosses my mind.

Blisteringly informative is the phrase that crosses my mind

And the fascinating typo! Which rendered an intended-to-be-sarcastic comment into a literal truth: that poster isn't emphasising/empathising except when they perform it.

It's a TRA own goal in respect of many otherwise tolerant & kind women.

This assumes trans activists are more motivated to make life better for trans people than they are to find excuses to post abuse of women online. I suspect the virulent trans activists are not that bothered about such own goals.

@Fernlake

Isn't it revealing that on a feminist board, of a website populated largely by women, where the women frequently gather in order to protect the rights of fellow women who have been raped, beaten, imprisoned, or are undressed, or vulnerable in hospital, their empathy, when faced with a woman who has suffered, is automatically construed as 'performative'?!

Blisteringly informative is the phrase that crosses my mind.

Mentioning male violence is weaponising our experience, obvs

@nauticant

It's a TRA own goal in respect of many otherwise tolerant & kind women.

This assumes trans activists are more motivated to make life better for trans people than they are to find excuses to post abuse of women online. I suspect the virulent trans activists are not that bothered about such own goals.

I occasionally read out TRA comments directed to women to my husband, just so he knows because we have a daughter. And he recently laughed out loud at one of them and said: "That's just a dude getting his kicks trolling woman".

I had to point out that a/ it was not fucking funny and b/ 'getting his kicks' is more correctly understood as 'enjoying abusing women'.

Mentioning male violence is weaponising our experience, obvs

It's breathtaking.

I've teared up listening to the experience of some women.

It's so exposing. That the empathy shown to fellow women who are in the exact situation that we are trying to remedy, is seen as performance.

It's empathy for women that is driving this entire bus.

Trans women are sick of having every word hyper analysed and twisted to mean something else.

There is no other way to construe you telling a woman on here who has disclosed abuse that the empathy she is receiving is performative.

If you didn't mean that, say so.

Well, fine, spoonrider, if it weren't for the fact that so many of the TRAs have turned out to be problematic.

Who are the level headed, thoughtful, compassionate TRAs? Point me to any?

Read yourself back.

Respect is earned and your posts here have done nothing to persuade many posters that you even want to understand why you are getting the reaction you are.

If you did you wouldn't have posted that bit about respect!

How about a bit of basic respect and credit? Or does that only work one way?

I have only notice this in one direction - respect for transwomen. For example women do not tend to go on trans web pages to crow about how they can abuse spaces and organisations set aside for transpeople (even though GC 2omen come under the trans umbrella)

I have never once heard any trans woman say "choke on my cock" or similar in real life.

But would you ever hear that? Isn't that a little like a white person claiming to have never heard a racist remark?

And I think you're wrong about whether they are really trans or not. They certainly DO identify as such.

I agree that the 'you're not a real woman' can be hurtful to trans women' and I hadn't ever heard women saying this until recent years.

But there have been many points in this thread where you have acknowledged your different experience because you were not born a woman.

You perhaps need to appreciate there's a 'new kind of trans in town', that would never ever acknowledge any of the things you said: that views their boy-child experience as being a 'girl' experience; that sees a penis as a part of a female body; that thinks if they weaponise their penis it isn't misogyny because they identify as a woman.

And perhaps you need to understand that if you're a woman on the receiving end of that kind of abuse, it is pretty much indistinguishable from male hate and violence. And worse, that it isn't even recognised as hateful.

In that context, the response 'you're not a woman', is very understandable and probably very necessary.

The man will be dressed like a man. He'll look like a man. He'll be acting like a man.

I've lived on this earth for 51 years and have literally no idea what 'acting like a man' means. In my experience there are as many ways to 'act' as there are people doing the acting.

I am annoyed that you think I didn't perform empathy" becomes "anyone who expresses empathy is performing it

Even the attempted rebuttal conflates showing empathy with performing it.

No, they generally try to bring court cases to make life harder for trans people.

Is that the purpose of the court cases? Try using that empathy you're assuring us you possess.