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

The women who don't mind do not get to give consent for the women who do. That is not how consent works.

But the woman who do mind get to decide over the women who dont?

Thats not how it works either.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

You made an argument, I disagreed.

As pointed out to you, your reversal doesn't work. You can't get my consent by proxy from women who agree with you. That's not how it works.

"These women are all happy to give their money to X cause, therefore all women should have to give their money to X cause. If they say no, take their money anyway. In fact, don't even ask them, just take it. They might not even notice".

Doesn't really work, does it.

@BlueLipstickRocks

The women who don't mind do not get to give consent for the women who do. That is not how consent works.

But the woman who do mind get to decide over the women who dont?

Thats not how it works either.

It does work that way when it's a FEMALE ONLY PROVISION.

Some women don't get to say "I don't need males kept away, so I'm going to let some in".

But the woman who do mind get to decide over the women who dont?

Thats not how it works either.

Why not? How are these women being free with their boundaries being disadvantaged by some male people having to use different facilities? They have no right to be free with mine.

Your argument doesn't work in reverse, and no amount of doubling down makes it do so.

*Who is "they" ? It is some women.

It is MANY women.*

It isnt the majority.

A recent government survey indicated overall acceptance to post op and refusal of pre op.

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/07/16/where-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

Some women don't get to say "I don't need males kept away, so I'm going to let some in".

Exactly!

It isnt the majority.

So? That's a weighted poll of a couple of thousand people. It is still many women, like I said!

The women who don't mind do not get to give consent for the women who do. That is not how consent works.

This is entirely relevant.

I do not know one woman who consented to this. This has been discussed now for a number of years. It seems that in general, those males with a GRC have felt entitled to continue to use the female toilets and ignore the growing voices.

Those people have been caught out with no plans for the future. How about instead, tackling male violence that means it is dangerous to use the male toilets? How about sitting down with Stonewall and stating, actually let's listen to women and campaign that female toilets and unisex toilets be created? Stonewall is a very powerful lobby group that covers 25% of employees iirc, one word from Stonewall and this would NEVER have become the issue it is.

One word from Stonewall and many of these issues could be quickly resolved.

It is truly not up to females to be the human shields or support humans of males.

Well said.

@BlueLipstickRocks

Out of consideration for the sex those spaces are intended for, who do not consent to any members of the opposite sex being present because they feel it is a violation of their privacy and dignity.

Who is "they" ? It is some women. There is no single position here representative of all women.

Some men object to women in the workplace beleiving they should be housewives. Should women stay at home because of the chauvanistic and sexist position of some men?

Where should be respect for women end? Should I resign from my job in a female dominated industry? Should I refuse my Oestrogen patches in case a woman needs them? Should I stop attending my mammograms in case a woman is uncomfortable?

Your analogies do not work.

There is no legal requirement for women to stay at home and be housewives, so no, sexist men do not get to enforce their beliefs on women without their consent.

Why would you resign from your job just because it's a "female dominated industry"? Are men allowed to work there too?

Men can also get mammograms, so why would you not attend one if you need one? Males going for a mammogram is very different to (what would be the correct scenario here for comparison) telling a woman to come to a clinic for a mammogram and the HCP will be a female, and then the HCP not being female. In that scenario, the woman was told she would have a female HCP touching her uncovered breasts, which is a significant factor in whether women will choose to go for the mammogram or not. Therefore, they may only consent to be there because they were told it was a female HCP. Therefore, if it was a male HCP, the woman did not consent to that.

Consent is quite important to women, you know.

I don't think you know what consent is, BlueLipstickRocks.

I don't think you know what consent is, BlueLipstickRocks.

Uncalled for.

It isnt the majority.

I would not be counting on that. If I was a group in this situation, I would be actually making very strong campaign moves right now.

If you have not noticed, the more this topic gets discussed between women, the more the past prevalence to accept any male into the female toilets is disappearing. Because they realise that they were never asked and are actually uncomfortable with it. Particularly in this porn era.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It isnt the majority.

So? That's a weighted poll of a couple of thousand people. It is still many women, like I said!

Lots of women wouldn't mind sharing with a male who was gay.

Lots of women wouldn't mind sharing with a male who was 10.

Lots of women wouldn't mind sharing with a male who happily married and would never hurt a fly.

Lots of individual males are lovely and safe and wouldn't do any harm to a woman. We don't let them in though. We do do exclusion of males on the basis of an individual male's particular characteristics, it's a blanket rule for all males. The nice harmless ones get kept away too.

@BlueLipstickRocks

I don't think you know what consent is, BlueLipstickRocks.

Uncalled for.

Well, you're demonstrating here that you don't.

You are saying "some women don't mind, so I should be able to do it to all women even if they don't want it".

Which is a very clear demonstration that you think women's consent is optional.

*Well, you're demonstrating here that you don't.

You are saying "some women don't mind, so I should be able to do it to all women even if they don't want it".

Which is a very clear demonstration that you think women's consent is optional.*

I am doing no such thing.

I simply disagree with the notion that the second one person says no that becomes a no for everyone within that class.

You are saying "some women don't mind, so I should be able to do it to all women even if they don't want it".

Which is exactly what the likes of Stonewall say, about all people under the trans umbrella having access. It's not hard to see why women like us are very weary of being told what we do and don't consent to, surely?

Which is exactly what the likes of Stonewall say, about all people under the trans umbrella having access. It's not hard to see why women like us are very weary of being told what we do and don't consent to, surely?

Stonewall do not speak for me. They never have. I'm a victim of Stonewall as much as anyone else. I am almightily pissed at the way Stonewall have hijacked transsexualism to cater for a very different agenda.

You didnt consent to Stonewall. Neither did I.

BlueLipstick, I'm sure there are plenty of post-op transsexuals who are fine with those transitioners without a grc using women's facilities.

Plenty of women and post-op transsexuals are okay with transgender people in women's sports.

Who gets to draw the line?

@BlueLipstickRocks

*Well, you're demonstrating here that you don't.

You are saying "some women don't mind, so I should be able to do it to all women even if they don't want it".

Which is a very clear demonstration that you think women's consent is optional.*

I am doing no such thing.

I simply disagree with the notion that the second one person says no that becomes a no for everyone within that class.

Again, you're ignoring that we are specifically referring here to female-only provisions. Not life in general.

There is already a rule of "No" in place, because it is a single-sex space/service/sport.

You think that a female person who doesn't mind should be able to end that single-sex provision for the whole class of females, because that particular female doesn't mind a particular male. Even when other females, for whom that provision is for, do mind.

I simply disagree with the notion that the second one person says no that becomes a no for everyone within that class.

It's not "one person", how dismissive and arrogant. It's about a third of all women who strongly object and also the ones who haven't given their consent because they don't know what they think, or didn't understand the question. That's literally millions of women.

So yes, it's a no.

You didnt consent to Stonewall. Neither did I.

Great, but that wasn't the point.

I simply disagree with the notion that the second one person says no that becomes a no for everyone within that class.

But that’s how single sex spaces work - or should do. They’re to protect females as a class from males as a class.

And there will always be arguments made for exceptions, always attempts to erode our boundaries. We know that.

Fionne Orlander’s tweeted about using men’s toilets with no problem.

You think that a female person who doesn't mind should be able to end that single-sex provision for the whole class of females, because that particular female doesn't mind a particular male. Even when other females, for whom that provision is for, do mind.

Exactly. It's not a reasonable expectation.

It's not "one person"confused, how dismissive and arrogant.

Must we resort to name calling?

Please re-read what I said.

I said "the notion that".

And no, it isnt a third of women according to EHRC.