Government says it is too complex to make changes to the GRA to include non binary

[stumbledin]

As set out in the response to the Gender Recognition Act consultation, there are no plans to make changes to the 2004 Act.

Following a considerable amount of consultation with the public and representative organisations, the Government decided that the current provisions within the GRA allow for those that wish to legally change their sex to do so fairly.

The 2018 GRA consultation did not bring forward any proposals to extend the GRA to provide legal recognition to a third, or non-binary, gender. The Government noted that there were complex practical consequences for other areas of the law, service provision and public life if provision were to be made for non-binary gender recognition in the GRA.

In UK law individuals are considered to be the sex that is registered on their birth certificate – either male or female. The GRA provides a means for transgender people to change the sex on their birth certificate, but there is currently no provision for those who do not identify as male or female.

This Government wants everybody in the UK to feel safe and confident to be themselves.

We are committed to tackling all forms of homophobic, biphobic and transphobic hate crime, and are working with the Home Office on the cross-Government Hate Crime Action Plan. The Government has asked the Law Commission to review the current hate crime legislation, which includes exploring whether homophobic, biphobic and transphobic hate crime should be considered an aggravated offence. We will also take an assessment of local support for hate crime victims and improve reporting and recording of LGBT hate crimes through supporting additional police training.

Following Parliamentary approval on 8th October 2020, voluntary questions on sexual orientation and gender identity were included in the 2021 Census for England and Wales which took place on Sunday 21 March 2021. Final data on sexual orientation and gender identity from the 2021 Census for England and Wales will likely be available from 2023, with initial Census findings planned for publication in March 2022 (timelines subject to change as work progresses). This will help to provide more robust population size estimates for England and Wales than are currently available.

This Government is committed to supporting all LGBT people, tackling discrimination and improving the lives of all citizens.

Cabinet Office
------

This is in response to a petition that I will not link to for fear this thread will get banished to the wastelands of the petition section.

But there is a news story here. uk.news.yahoo.com/non-binary-legal-recognition-too-153914753.html

I would be very wary as it's very unusual to have toilets at tube stations and I'd worry they'd take the easy, money saving option of closing them.

I did complain once when they were single sex. When 3 women were waiting for ages- I was heavily pg and desperate. We were all looking at each other like fgs and knocked etc.

After ages a man came out, smirked at us and sauntered off, leaving the most terrible stink.

He was a driver and so yes I complained in the station.

Empress thank you

I actually recommend people buy Pressing Matters vols 1 and 2 if they can bear to give Christine Burns a few quid (£3.99 for each volume on kindle)

The books are so information rich - and obviously we can't type out the whole two books - and they are chock full of links to even more information rich sources, including a lot of archived material that is otherwise difficult to find.

For anybody wondering how we got where we are now without anybody noticing, these volumes are an extremely valuable resource.

I really think that blues idea that surgery should be a requirement to be fully considered a woman for everything is a bad idea.

I agree. I also think we need to appreciate that what the older male transioner wants might put pressure on the younger, mainly female transitioner.

There was a post further up about the criteria for an GRC not having been changed and while that is strictly speaking true, there was a regular poster here about 8 or so years ago who was going through the process. That person said that it had been the case that although not technically required in the legislation, it was necessary in practice to have had surgery to evidence their commitment to the transition. It was changing at that time to a position where surgery was not required, partly because of the serious and unpleasant nature of the surgery. When the GRA was passed, I believe the general viewpoint was that if someone was willing to go so far as to get surgery, that would be a deterrent for casual, bad faith chancers. Now that is no longer the case, it does undermine the balancing up that was done when the GRA was passed.

It reminds me of a talk I went to a few years ago when a TRA lawyer was arguing that women had no reason to be concerned about safety because the stigma of men taking on a feminine appearance was so strong that no man would do it unless it was "genuine". I wanted to make a point that if women's safety depends on men being stigmatised for presenting as women, surely we would need to maintain that stigma. I don't want people to be stigmatised for how they look but there is a serious flaw in saying X won't happen because of Y deterrent while also arguing for dismantling the Y deterrent.

Empress thank you

I actually recommend people buy Pressing Matters vols 1 and 2 if they can bear to give Christine Burns a few quid (£3.99 for each volume on kindle)

I think I might, actually. And thank you for providing the screenshots

Now it is becoming clearer that any inch will be stretched to a mile, I think women are becoming more comfortable in saying "you know what, I was never okay with this".

Absolutely.

Males in women's prisons. Males taking women's medals and awards. Males in rape shelters. Males in women's hospital wards and changing rooms. And on and on.

And yet people keep babbling on about toilets to make women seem trivial and petty as NiceGerbil says. (Single-sex toilets are not a trivial matter by the way.)

Women's spaces are not some automatic prize for males who jump through an arbitrary set of hoops.

It is deeply unethical anyway for governments to mandate surgical procedures so individuals can access certain spaces or rights.

I wanted to make a point that if women's safety depends on men being stigmatised for presenting as women, surely we would need to maintain that stigma. I don't want people to be stigmatised for how they look but there is a serious flaw in saying X won't happen because of Y deterrent while also arguing for dismantling the Y deterrent.

Very good point. It's so obvious once it's pointed out.

It reminds me of a talk I went to a few years ago when a TRA lawyer was arguing that women had no reason to be concerned about safety because the stigma of men taking on a feminine appearance was so strong that no man would do it unless it was "genuine".

That is such a telling statement isn't it? It shows just how much contempt women are held in by men that it is considered a stigma for a man to have a feminine appearance, it couldn't be any clearer how women are considered so much lesser and that is the core reason for the mess we are in with the GRA.

My history post has been reinstated

Thanks MNHQ!

@LangClegsInSpace

My history post has been reinstated

Thanks MNHQ!

Great! Thanks MNHQ!

Fantastic, well done @MNHQ