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?)

I find gender critical people like to use the term "gaslighting" a lot, this isn't it, but it is certainly not true. You cited one person in Canada. When asked for stats that show Canadian women are suffering from self ID, introduced there 5+ years ago, you provided nothing. There are no stats.

I gave you one example. There are plenty more but you just can't be wrong can you?

There are plenty of stats but you just dismiss them and introduce your own nonsense figures.

And it's pretty sick of you that when examples have been given you dismiss them as you want to see bigger increases in assaults before you see the problem. We know that male violence is a problem, we know that unisex spaces are a problem. We can predict the rest. Personally I think it is cruel and unethical to remove safeguarding and see what happens. How many lives have to be blighted before you concede there might be a problem? How many rapes are enough?

Ool0n, what do you think about sex crimes committed by trans women being recorded as crimes committed by females? Especially when those crimes are rape (committed by people with penises)?

What do you think about Barbie Kardashian being put in a women's prison? When he had explicitly stated he wanted to harm women?

@Blue I think only 'stats' matter, not individual examples and experience. And there are, of course, no power issues at all inherent in what stats get collected so we can completely trust all stats. If they happen to be at odds with a large number of personal experiences, that is because people are bigots. I think it's quite clear really.

@RufustheBadgeringReindeer

Why can't any of you provide a single statistic that demonstrates this "disaster" then

I’m basically just here for bernard

😘

He hasn’t answered then?

Do you need special help understanding the question @ool0n? Rufus broke it down quite nicely I thought, she’s much more patient than me (it’s all that having to root for lichen in the winter months)

How can I help you to comprehend and answer?

@Minezatea

Sex does not equal gender by the definition you are using so can you try again to answer the question re: why women might prefer single-sex toilets and other spaces?

Given that you try to be a feminist ally, I also would be interested to know how you think we can protect women from the on-going issues such as poorer outcomes in many healthcare situations because of the disproportionate research conducted on male bodies, if we change the definition of women to include male-bodied people? You seem very keen on data, which is great as long as we also recognise the gaps in that data (e.g. what women think and want) and don't draw strong conclusions before filling the gaps. Can you tell me how we can get good data which reports the experience of people experiencing sex-based oppression (females) if we have changed the concept of 'female' away from the characteristics which lead to sex-based oppression?

Single sex toilets don't exist, right? Why can't any of you answer this simple question. I believe I am characterising your view correctly - that any space that lets in trans people is "mixed sex" - but you won't clarify. If that is the case, and I believe it is, then they don't exist in the UK. They've never existed and women use single gender spaces, not single sex.

Healthcare, I believe the WHO do great work on reproductive inequalities, in balancing out the differences in care. They're trans inclusive... www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48448804
Amnesty do a great job on issues like period poverty, they're trans inclusive.... www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2019/05/five-activists-breaking-taboos-around-menstruation/
The Royal College of Obstret and Gyn do great work, I was recently reading a paper of theirs on healthcare disparities for WoC. They're trans inclusive...
www.rcog.org.uk/en/careers-training/specialty-training-curriculum/core-curriculum/current/cip13/

Once again there's a claim - being trans inclusive will hurt X - even a cursory examination of the evidence shows that not to be the case at all. Unless you can show where these organisations are hurting all women by being trans inclusive?

@BlueLipstickRocks

I find gender critical people like to use the term "gaslighting" a lot, this isn't it, but it is certainly not true. You cited one person in Canada. When asked for stats that show Canadian women are suffering from self ID, introduced there 5+ years ago, you provided nothing. There are no stats.

I gave you one example. There are plenty more but you just can't be wrong can you?

There are plenty of stats but you just dismiss them and introduce your own nonsense figures.

Anecdotes are not statistics, you claim it will be a "disaster" for women, specifically it's claimed in terms of giving predatory men a free reign to assault women. So why are there no stats showing this to be the case once self ID is put in place in a country. Don't you think this is a major problem for your ideology?

Why can't any of you answer this simple question

I just agreed in front of god and all the angels that there is no such thing as single sex spaces

I agree completely and utterly with you on this...you are absolutely right

Can you answer bernards question now please and thank you

Blimey

For the purposes of trying to make this a safe enough space for you to answer a blooming question several of us have agreed with your premise that single sex spaces aren’t a thing

Let’s pretend for now that you’ve won that one in the hopes we can get you to move on

Now....can you think of why some women might prefer single sex toilets?

@lonel

And it's pretty sick of you that when examples have been given you dismiss them as you want to see bigger increases in assaults before you see the problem. We know that male violence is a problem, we know that unisex spaces are a problem. We can predict the rest. Personally I think it is cruel and unethical to remove safeguarding and see what happens. How many lives have to be blighted before you concede there might be a problem? How many rapes are enough?

No we don't know unisex spaces are an issue, not that they have anything to do with self ID. You can have self ID and get rid of unisex spaces if you want.

The GC view is the very poor "data" from Andrew Gilligan showed issues in unisex changing rooms in the UK - 100 odd instances of voyerism and assault in them in the UK - but he never provided the actual data. It was never properly analysed or peer reviewed.

Whereas real science, peer reviewed from the US, showed trans inclusive spaces don't result in an increase in assault. In fact there was a drop in this study
link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13178-018-0335-z

Amnesty do a great job on issues like period poverty, they're trans inclusive....
They also called for the disenfranchisement of women who believe sex exists....so progressive.

As an aside, the toilets and showers in the post natal ward I was on after giving birth were most certainly single sex. For the use of the women who had given birth only. Men, partners and visitors were to use the ones outside the ward. If any man had used them the midwives would have had them removed.

As for this thing about male cleaners being in the toilets.... places that use male cleaners put up clear signage to that effect. Why do they do that, I wonder?

You've got to wonder why chummy can't answer a pretty simple question haven't you Rufus ?

Let's try to start you off @ool0n

repeat after me

'I imagine some women might prefer single sex toilets because...'

and then you say something right there

You can have self ID and get rid of unisex spaces if you want.
How?
(Funny how you always ask for data but it's never quite the right data, isn't it. It's like those men who say that they would love to discuss whether women should have any rights but we're just a little too shrill, a little too demanding).

[quote jellyfrizz]It doesn't make you wonder at all why there are no stats showing decreased outcomes for women in Argentina, which passed its self ID law over 10 years ago?

Things certainly haven't improved:
www.pri.org/stories/2019-07-12/these-argentine-women-fight-against-justice-system-written-men-men[/quote]
Argentina is far from perfect for women, no place is. But why did implementing self ID not make it worse? Why can't you or anyone else provide stats that show it got worse?

In fact I'm told by GC men and women that self ID will make it impossible for "biological women" to organise for their rights. But Argentina got a massive win in making abortion legal, mostly affects cis women. Ireland too. All after they put in place self ID laws for trans people. Seems to completely contradict what I'm told by GC men and women.

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

You've got to wonder why chummy can't answer a pretty simple question haven't you Rufus ?

Let's try to start you off @ool0n

repeat after me

'I imagine some women might prefer single sex toilets because...'

and then you say something right there

Happy to put an offline bet on for this bernard

Im feeling pretty confident we won’t get an answer to your question or the ‘man walking into the ladies while daughter is there’ question

stats stats, yawn blah

let's do something fun!

let's try to empathise with others!

why might women prefer to use single sex toilets @ool0n?

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

stats stats, yawn blah

let's do something fun!

let's try to empathise with others!

why might women prefer to use single sex toilets @ool0n?

Single sex toilets don't exist, right? Why can't any of you answer this simple question. I believe I am characterising your view correctly - that any space that lets in trans people is "mixed sex" - but you won't clarify. If that is the case, and I believe it is, then they don't exist in the UK. They've never existed and women use single gender spaces, not single sex.

I don't think you are actually asking a question? As much as I can interpret one I think that male-bodied people in female spaces makes it mixed sex. Like most women, I don't have a gender identity, so they certainly can't be single-gender spaces. So now can you answer the question you were asked about why people might WANT single-sex spaces, even accepting that what many women have wanted for a long time may sometimes have been breached.

*Healthcare, I believe the WHO do great work on reproductive inequalities, in balancing out the differences in care. They're trans inclusive... www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48448804
Amnesty do a great job on issues like period poverty, they're trans inclusive.... www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2019/05/five-activists-breaking-taboos-around-menstruation/
The Royal College of Obstret and Gyn do great work, I was recently reading a paper of theirs on healthcare disparities for WoC. They're trans inclusive...
www.rcog.org.uk/en/careers-training/specialty-training-curriculum/core-curriculum/current/cip13/

Once again there's a claim - being trans inclusive will hurt X - even a cursory examination of the evidence shows that not to be the case at all. Unless you can show where these organisations are hurting all women by being trans inclusive?*

Can you explain to me how we can get data showing how things affect biological females if we have no way of recording who is a biological female? Your links do not answer that.