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

Since the focus is on woman and girls what spaces do you beleive transmen should use?

this discussion has occurred across numerous threads now.

Many transmen understand that their presentation causes some other female's distress and choose not to retraumatise other females. I have seen these discussions take place on other social media platforms. Many of these transmen use the male toilets.

The fact is, this is NOT cut and dried and it is not a 'gotcha' at all. This is about the needs of females to feel safe in situations where they are vulnerable and to have that respected.

I was not referring to you boundaries

I was referring to my boundaries in the first place. As you well know.

They are to me, when it comes to males in my spaces I don't make any distinction

Stop twisting my words.

Many transmen understand that their presentation causes some other female's distress and choose not to retraumatise other females. I have seen these discussions take place on other social media platforms. Many of these transmen use the male toilets.

So transmen may use mens spaces but transwomen may not use womens spaces?

Why the double standard?

@BlueLipstickRocks

*Once again the conflation of transgender and transsexual.

They are not the same thing.

They are to me, when it comes to males in my spaces I don't make any distinction.*

And that is a disgusting thing to say.

You dont get to tell me the importance of defining the meaning of "woman" and the importance of preserving language whilst at the same time turning round and dismissing what I am and refusing to recognise transsexual is diffent to transgender.

It is hypocritical to expect me to do something you refuse to do yourself.

"dismissing what I am"

As you recognise yourself, you are a person of the male sex, and not a woman. She is not dismissing what you are; she is recognising, as you have, what you are not: female.

Why are you now denying something that you were fine with further up the thread? Is it because we said no?

You wish to draw distinctions between subcategories of male-sexed people. To be able to say that, to you, you are not the same as them.

We wish to draw distinctions between us and all males, including all the subgroups within that umbrella. While we may recognise that there are many different subcategories under the "male umbrella", some of which are more of an issue than others, we still want to exclude all males from female-only spaces, services and sports, as the law allows.

Stop twisting my words.

Thats what youve been doing to me repeatedly.

Your refusal to accept that transgender and transsexual are different yet insist on rigidly defining woman is disgusting and offensive to me.

Is it ok to say that a post op transsexual is the same as a cross dressing fetishist? All just men?

These two sentences are not the same question, are they? In some ways they are different, like any humans. But yes they are both biologically male adults.

Your refusal to accept that transgender and transsexual are different yet insist on rigidly defining woman is disgusting and offensive to me.

Not much I can do about that really. I define women as an adult of the female sex. It's as simple as that.

refusing to recognise transsexual is diffent to transgender.

And the Pope is different to my dh, yet neither of them have any place in women's spaces. Transexual males have something in common with transgender males, that they also have in common with the Pope and with my dh, which they do not have in common with me or with any other women.

Transgender has become an umbrella term which includes transsexual. If you do not like this, it is up to you to fight it. It is not up to us women. However you define yourself, if you are male you do not belong in women's or girls' spaces.

We wish to draw distinctions between us and all males, including all the subgroups within that umbrella. While we may recognise that there are many different subcategories under the "male umbrella", some of which are more of an issue than others, we still want to exclude all males from female-only spaces, services and sports, as the law allows.

Exactly. As I said, it's not personal. But I'm not comfortable with any male people in female spaces.

@BlueLipstickRocks

Many transmen understand that their presentation causes some other female's distress and choose not to retraumatise other females. I have seen these discussions take place on other social media platforms. Many of these transmen use the male toilets.

So transmen may use mens spaces but transwomen may not use womens spaces?

Why the double standard?

If you actually read my post, you would have already understood it.

Females who have suffered trauma may also be traumatised by females who have had testosterone and surgery and may cause those females to be distressed.

Is the fact you are willing to accept this as some kind of 'gotcha on double standards' to be taken as you not understanding these female's needs at all?

Why the double standard?

Do you have any idea why there's feminism, but not an equivalent for men?

Do you understand why womens spaces, sports, political movements exist and why men don't need the equivalent?

@BlueLipstickRocks

"And that is a disgusting thing to say.

No. My boundaries are not disgusting. I simply don't want males in female spaces. Any of them. It's not personal, it's just what I feel is appropriate."

I was not referring to you boundaries as you well know. I was referring to your refusal to accept that transgender and transsexual are not the same thing. This is grossly offensive.

Is it ok to say that a post op transsexual is the same as a cross dressing fetishist? All just men?

Nobody is saying that there are categorically no differences between them. There may well be.

We're saying that, to us, those differences are not relevant to the discussion of FEMALE-ONLY spaces.

We do not think that the differences between a post-op transsexual, and a cross-dressing fetishist are significant enough for women to lose female-only spaces. Just like we don't think the differences between gay/straight males are enough to allow gay males in. Nor do we think the differences between single/married males are significant enough to allow married males in. Nor do we think the differences between atheist/religious males are significant enough to allow religious males in. Because their own particular characteristics are not relevant, and do not take primacy, over their sex. Which is male. Which disqualifies them from female-only spaces/services/sports.

@BlueLipstickRocks

Stop twisting my words.

Thats what youve been doing to me repeatedly.

Your refusal to accept that transgender and transsexual are different yet insist on rigidly defining woman is disgusting and offensive to me.

It's disgusting and offensive to me that you think other people should be able to give my consent for me, against my wishes.

But, hey. We're all entitled to our own opinions.

Why are we arguing with blue lipstick. She is a fully medically transitioned transexual with a GRC which she obtained/went through due to severe gender dysphoria, she agrees that self id is a terrible idea and that trans women shouldn't compete in sports. She is rational and on our side. The law in its current and actual state already protects her right to access all single sex facilities based on her GRC (unless trans women have been specifically excluded for proportional reasons). She agrees with this and has no wish to access spaces where she has been specifically excluded for biological reasons. So toilets are really the only disputed territory, which she is entitled to access... legally..already.

Are we really arguing that she should loose something she already has?

Your refusal to accept that transgender and transsexual are different

To me, that is not something that I am interested in defining myself, I don't feel like I should be in that discussion. That is for you as a person with direct personal needs to address with the organisations that are making these definitions.

yet insist on rigidly defining woman is disgusting and offensive to me.

As a female, the definition of woman directly impacts me and my child, my sisters and my mother. The fact that MALES have sought to have an alternative definition recognised in law to suit the needs of MALES is of great concern to me.

I am only interested at the moment in maintaining and strengthening the rights that female's need due to the discrimination, for millennia, they have suffered due to their sexed body. There is direct negative impacts of those rights that have been put in place to protect female's needs (however they choose to present because even transmen have had, still do, and will in the future need these).

The needs of different groups of males needs to be addressed by them, but needs to be recognised as being separate to those of females. Those needs are unique and require their own protections. It is harmful to both groups to try to shoehorn protections until existing protections for females.

Because Blue thinks that women's boundaries should be decided for them by people who are male.

And that is the entire fundamental problem.

Blue is certainly not on women's side. Wants us to be able to have female-only provisions, so long as Blue can decide which males can access them, even if the females disagree.

@PearPickingPorky

Because Blue thinks that women's boundaries should be decided for them by people who are male.

And that is the entire fundamental problem.

Blue is certainly not on women's side. Wants us to be able to have female-only provisions, so long as Blue can decide which males can access them, even if the females disagree.

Sorry, this was to AdHominem

Because Blue thinks that women's boundaries should be decided for them by people who are male.

I said no such thing.

Blue is certainly not on women's side. Wants us to be able to have female-only provisions, so long as Blue can decide which males can access them, even if the females disagree.

Unnecessary and uncalled for.

A difference of opinion does not warrant a character assassination.

@BlueLipstickRocks

Because Blue thinks that women's boundaries should be decided for them by people who are male.

I said no such thing.

We have repeatedly said here that the possession of functioning male genitals is not the key factor for us when it comes to exclusion of males from female only spaces and services. The pertinent factor is being of the male biological sex.

You refuse to accept that boundary.

@BlueLipstickRocks

Blue is certainly not on women's side. Wants us to be able to have female-only provisions, so long as Blue can decide which males can access them, even if the females disagree.

Unnecessary and uncalled for.

A difference of opinion does not warrant a character assassination.

That is exactly what you said upthread.

You want female-only spaces to exist. But you think males who no longer have a penis should be allowed in. You have also said that women who don't mind sharing with males should override the objections of the women who do mind.

Late to this thread. Despite the disagreements I hope our trans MNers on this thread will continue to be open and discuss with honesty - I do think it's useful to hear your experiences and I do think the discussion about where we differentiate between fully surgically transitioned TW and those for whom TW is an invisible identity is pertinent to this thread where the op is talking about other gender identities that, agree with it or not, are "under the trans umbrella".

I would imagine the general public make a woolly distinction along those lines even if those of us who've been debating it for ages come to other conclusions.

As anyone who's ever read my past posts will know, I can't get on board with appearance being a defining factor in anyone's access to/ denial of certain rights. I just can't square that with equality no matter how it might disadvantage some. There needs to be a better way.

Is it ok to say that a post op transsexual is the same as a cross dressing fetishist? All just men?

Is there an easy way to tell the difference between them? Just by looking at them?

Why are we arguing with blue lipstick.

Because we don't all have the same opinion on this. I'm sick of having my consent presumed by others.