Womens and Equalities report on GRA to be published tomorrow 21 Dec

[Imnobody4]

twitter.com/Commonswomequ/status/1472915228392398855?t=fm9kVI9s31fOBPCnBSNYqg&s=19

Our report into the Reform of the Gender Recognition Act is being published tomorrow. Take a look at the work we have done relating to this inquiry over the past year: t.co/uOlY23nhuN t.co/l123I2UQyQ

Still haven't published my evidence. Is this usual? Sneaking it out befote Xmas - suspicious or what?

I think the legacay of the gender critical movement's allegiance with the right could create a horrifying future for the next generations of women and I understand why so many young women have deep concerns about it.

I think the genderist movement’s failure to engage with the valid concerns of feminists that changing the definition of woman from a bodily reality to a state of mind means denying the reality of female voices and experiences is already creating a horrifying future for the next generations of women, and I understand why so many women of all ages have deep concerns about it.

Ironically it is the genderist movement’s refusal to acknowledge that being female bodied in a sexist society is significant that is forcing the issue into the arms of the right.

What the left should be doing is acknowledging that trans people and female people suffer from gender constructs, sometimes in the same way and sometimes not, and supporting open conversations about how to accommodate both trans and female needs. Simply acknowledge that we are different, and we can start to work together.

But as long as the only position the left will accept from female people is “deny your reality, subjugate your voice, allow males to define what you are”, it’s entirely reasonable that many female people will decide preserving their voice and right to speak their own reality is more important than alignment with a “left” that treats them as nothing more than raw materials for males’ mental constructs.

to corrupt and hijack feminism and steer it towards the right.

It seems to me you're looking at this issue through an American cultural and political lens that doesn't help you understand the legal, cultural and political situation in most European countries. Certainly not the situation in the UK.

Is feminism only feminism if it is leftwing, barleybadminton? And what kind of left? Left-libertarian? Keynesian? Socialist? Communist? Stalinist? Anarchist? The left wrought a history filled with atrocities, too, in case you've forgotten.

And politics across Europe is diverse. Leftwing in one country can be to the right of rightwing in another. For decades, European representative democracies have seen leftwing policies pursued alongside rightwing ones by coalition governments.

And then there's the tendency to hide behind easily adopted leftwing policies that require no effort and cost the government nothing while far more serious issues are never tackled. Malta for instance has horrifically misogynistic laws about abortion, but it embraced self-id with abandon (together with cronyism and some of the worst political corruption). Is Malta leftwing?

Viewed from here, the Democratic Party of the US doesn't even qualify as centre-left, so what exactly are you referring to as "the right"?

And is it your view that women from culturally conservative backgrounds, or women from a centre-right to right wing political affiliation aren't interested in or entitled to women's rights to privacy, dignity or safety? To single-sex hospital wards or carers, to women's sports, to changing rooms or rape crisis counselling? Domestic violence shelters?

The reason why the UK public is increasingly aware and increasingly angry about the political implications of the doctrine of gender identity is because the needs of women for single-sex provisions, sports or spaces have nothing whatsoever to do with our political affiliations. They arise from our biology. And whether they are rightwing or leftwing or anywhere in between, all women share that biology.

@Blibbyblobby

I think the legacay of the gender critical movement's allegiance with the right could create a horrifying future for the next generations of women and I understand why so many young women have deep concerns about it.

I think the genderist movement’s failure to engage with the valid concerns of feminists that changing the definition of woman from a bodily reality to a state of mind means denying the reality of female voices and experiences is already creating a horrifying future for the next generations of women, and I understand why so many women of all ages have deep concerns about it.

Ironically it is the genderist movement’s refusal to acknowledge that being female bodied in a sexist society is significant that is forcing the issue into the arms of the right.

What the left should be doing is acknowledging that trans people and female people suffer from gender constructs, sometimes in the same way and sometimes not, and supporting open conversations about how to accommodate both trans and female needs. Simply acknowledge that we are different, and we can start to work together.

But as long as the only position the left will accept from female people is “deny your reality, subjugate your voice, allow males to define what you are”, it’s entirely reasonable that many female people will decide preserving their voice and right to speak their own reality is more important than alignment with a “left” that treats them as nothing more than raw materials for males’ mental constructs.

Thank you for putting this so eloquently. I agree with every word.

So the Government has sixty days to reply to the recommendations in the report. What is likely to be the response?

Liz Truss & Kemi Badenoch are unlikely to accept that much but I do hope they come back with really excellent arguments and I hope its Kemi Badenoch who attends the committee to give a response - too much to ask but I can dream. I hope they will suggest the removal of the GRA because of the conflicts it's causing - ooooohhh

Kemi Badenoch really understands the conflicts being discussed.

And there are many Police and Crime Commissioners looking on at this who know what biological sex is and what it means.

Hasn't the government already indicated clearly that they don't intend to bring in self-id?
Even the language of the reporting, "the govt should stop delaying self-id", is coercive. They've already looked at this and said no!

It reminds me of whenever DD asks to see an inappropriate movie/show and I say no, and then she spends the next month going on about it and me to have another rethink. I fucking said no! Move on!

having done the GRA report with a high focus on TQ best interests, what is obviously now required is a female equalities and conflicts inquiry, which looks at female best interests. And will need to be led and staffed by those who do not regard female services, resources and needs as something to be politically stuffed under the rug

This.

@barleybadminton

And which females do you think are not being considered?

I think any attempt to police public spaces on the basis of birth sex will be a nightmare for gender nonconforming women, intersex women and trans men (as well as trans women), and ultimately will only end up socially reinforcing gender norms. And I think the relaxed attitude many in the gender critical movement have to working with the conservative right is helping to entrench patriarchal structures and allow often vile misogynists like Rod Liddle and Alex Salmond, or deeply reactionary politicians like Truss, to corrupt and hijack feminism and steer it towards the right. I think the legacay of the gender critical movement's allegiance with the right could create a horrifying future for the next generations of women and I understand why so many young women have deep concerns about it.

Of course, how could we be so silly.

All those gender non conforming women who don't need cervical smears. And all those transmen and, er, gender non conforming women clamouring to get into male prisons, and beating men at sport. 🙄

Good lord.

Or are you, as I suspect, merely thinking about what toilets to access and where to get undressed?

@barleybadminton

And which females do you think are not being considered?

I think any attempt to police public spaces on the basis of birth sex will be a nightmare for gender nonconforming women, intersex women and trans men (as well as trans women), and ultimately will only end up socially reinforcing gender norms. And I think the relaxed attitude many in the gender critical movement have to working with the conservative right is helping to entrench patriarchal structures and allow often vile misogynists like Rod Liddle and Alex Salmond, or deeply reactionary politicians like Truss, to corrupt and hijack feminism and steer it towards the right. I think the legacay of the gender critical movement's allegiance with the right could create a horrifying future for the next generations of women and I understand why so many young women have deep concerns about it.

Good grief.

There is not a lot of point scolding people about 'policing public spaces' and how that's a nightmare for TQ people, when you have not the faintest concern about policing the 99% of people who are not TQ, who are perfectly happy with single sex spaces, and the large percentage of females who cannot access anything at all and just go without services or resources altogether. When you care about no one else and their needs and interests, why do you expect them to put yours first? No. I respect that you believe all this, but I really don't, and am not willing to see female people treated like this so that a very small percentage of TQ people can have exactly what they want without regard for others.

Have third spaces. Have fourth fifth and sixth spaces. Gold plate them if you want. But single sex spaces for females must continue to be provided alongside whatever additions TQ people need. TQ people are no less and no more important than anyone else, and other people have rights too. That compromise and tolerance for others is utterly unacceptable to you is your problem.

And I think the relaxed attitude many in the gender critical movement have to working with the conservative right is helping to entrench patriarchal structures

This is ‘more tired than ever was’ trope.

How the purity spirals only work one direction in your brain must be a mystery? Oh look… some other people think water is wet.

The constant refrain of ‘right wing’ or ‘conservative right’ is going the way of ‘wrong body’ rhetoric and calling people transphobic for pointing out conflicts between womens rights and the rights for trans people.

Shall we start to list all the prominent trans activists and their quotes? Shall we go back further to the proponents of the theories that are set on this destabilisation and their personal beliefs and motivations.

Shall we start with the twitter dialogue where two prominent twitter trans people mocked women’s toilet habits and sounds? One of those is often posted on this board as an appeal to authority by other activists after all.

Attack the facts. Leave the tiresome ‘look at your allies’ and how they contribute/damage the movement tactic behind.

You may as well be using the ‘there’s a squirrel’ tactic.

These are some excellent questions posed to the WESC, which really expose the nonsense behind it all.

twitter.com/Obsolesence/status/1473268302105522177

And I would add the astute observation on here that if you acknowledge that concept of a man 'living as a woman' as a set of sexist stereotypes, how can you simultaneously make legislation dependent upon it??

I really hope the government reply won't just say that we consider the matter closed for the time being. That means that at any time in future a more captured government could bring it all back in and refer to these select committee recommendations. It becomes a useful bargaining chip.

Can anyone imagine on what parallel universe there would be a committee called say Disabled and ESC? I can't even begin to envisage the pile-on that would follow say, a group of fully able-bodied people demanding the 'right' to be their 'authentic disabled selves' based on their feelings that they were born in a disabled body and insisted that it's axiomatic that all societal institutions grant them full access to any and all provisions hitherto reserved for the disabled. What MP would dream of engaging with such a group? What MP would even give them the time of day to listen to the wannabe disabled persons' demands for equality and inclusion e.g. to take disabled parking spaces at will, to be welcome to compete in disabled sports and fraudulently to take disabled peoples' jobs, even where the law specifically reserves such jobs for disabled people? (yes Mridhl Wadhwa and Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre, looking at ya)
I could go on and on and make similar comparisons to other protected characteristics eg race. It is all frankly unimaginable. Yet here we are with 51%+ of our population fighting for our identity and our language. Our society has decided that women's rights and women's language must be policed and subjugated. The show goes on.

And women cannot have their rights alongside provision for others around their personal beliefs.

No. All must be sacrificed to a tiny percentage of male people. With a whole lot of last-days rhetoric that would do justice to any extreme end religious movement if females say 'there is room for everyone to have the provisions they want^ . With a little bit of tolerance. Unless the provision you actually want is not for better inclusion but to see female people subordinated and excluded. In which case, the short answer is on your bike.

I think any attempt to police public spaces on the basis of birth sex…

Yeah shouldn’t do this new policing birth sex thingy, very radical and out there as we’ve never ever done this before wow what an idea!!!

Oh wait 🤔

@DowningStreetParty

I really hope the government reply won't just say that we consider the matter closed for the time being. That means that at any time in future a more captured government could bring it all back in and refer to these select committee recommendations. It becomes a useful bargaining chip.

Same. The entire report from WESC is so full of holes and such nonsense, that it absolutely needs dissecting. And I hope the government does it.

Or asks all the questions as in the link above, and says come back to us when you've answered all those.

I can’t see this report having any response but ‘thanks for your efforts chaps we’ll bear it in mind’ and a quiet filing in the bin. Because:-

1/ Liz & Kemi don’t believe in self id
2/ Given that Liz was severely criticized in the report to back down looks weak. And as a leadership hopeful she won’t want that
3/ Liz is wildly popular with Tory members. She won’t want to jeopardize that. And Tory members don’t support self id
4/ I think Liz and Boris want to leave this behind while they concentrate on other things of more appeal to Tory voters
5/ Large parts of the report are contradictory and would not survive Parliamentary debate. For example to prevent fraud it suggests a legal redress for anyone who had ‘no intention of living in the acquired gender’. It also says that the requirement to ‘live in the acquired gender’ for two years to get a GRC should be abolished because ‘there is no clear, accepted or agreed definition of what living like a man or woman is’. The authors don’t seem to have spotted that you cannot have legal sanctions against someone not ‘living in the acquired gender’ when you yourself agree that there is no accepted definition of what ‘living in the acquired gender’ is.
6/ whilst insisting that being trans isn’t a mental illness the report devotes a full chapter on treatment for transgender people. Why the NHS should spend any money at all on treating a non illness isn’t explained
7/ The report defines sex as ‘assigned at birth by a medical practitioner’. They appear not to have heard of amniocentesis or sex selective abortion, or even basic facts about sex being set at conception. This is laughably absurd at best, shameful that such nonsense is repeated in an official government document at worst.
8/ The report passed by 3 votes to 2. It was not agreed to unanimously.

And I could go on. Suffice to say that any half way decent lawyer would get it laughed out of court.

And here’s an excellent take by discrimination lawyer Peter Daly:-

twitter.com/peter_daly/status/1473285332967776266?s=21

Thank you AlwaysTawnyOwl & Datun for those illuminating twitter threads. It still amazes me that a select committee can publish something that is legally, scientifically and intellectually incoherent / dishonest. I know that proponents of the ideology argue in this way but I always have this naive hope that our legislators will fact check and proof read what they produce.

I read that the report only passed by three votes to two, so looked it up.

For (All Labour)

Kim Johnson

Kate Osborne

Bell Ribeiro-Addy

Against (All Tory)

Philip Davies

Jackie Doyle-Price

So where were the rest?

For transparency I know nothing about the process. Do the backbench Tories on the Committee expect the report to be ignored when it gets to the Commons so decided to keep their heads below the parapet. Or are they aware that their voters might not be thrilled to be represented but someone supporting this.

It’s strange to me too that there are so few people there. Voting could surely be done by Zoom? But I wonder if they think it prudent to distance themselves from it? And releasing just before Christmas- hoping it will be overlooked?

It seems to me you're looking at this issue through an American cultural and political lens that doesn't help you understand the legal, cultural and political situation in most European countries. Certainly not the situation in the UK.

Not at all, although the US situation is relevant. Patriarchal institutions such as the Daily Mail and the Tory Party have proved devastating for women and the Gender Critical collusion with the right is already having an impact - look at Kiera Bell, now an out and out anti-vaxxer - threatening to attack Gillick competence in the courts backed by evangelical lawyers and supported by Pose Parker. Or the support for Truss who appears to have abandoned gender pay gap reporting to silence from gender critical feminists, some of whom appear to fawn over her. And it won't be the last attack on women's workplace rights if Truss gets her way.

Or the situation in the US where gender critical feminists are looking the other way whilst those on the right they have been collaborating with against trans people are beginning to dismantle reproductive healthcare and legal access to abortion.

Gender critical feminism is already harming women, and young feminists seem to have recognised that. There is a backlash taking place against women's and LGBT rights across the world and that is likely to be the defining struggle for the next generation of feminists. And I'm afraid Judith Butler was right, gender critical feminists will not be part of that struggle. Or at least there is no sign of them being part of it so far, in fact in many cases people are collaborating with the enemy. And that is dangerous, because if an attack on trans people comes it will not be from a radical feminist or even gender critical government but a reactionary right government and they will not stop at trans women. The legacy of the gender critical movement's participation with the conservative right could mean a horrifying future for young women and if that happens feminists of later generations are not likely to look back on it with anything but horror and contempt.

A tribal analysis to politics?

Lets decide who is goo and who is bad, then blame the bad guys.

Gender critical is very much in the eye of the beholder

So I usually don’t pay attention to sweeping generalisations because I don’t think gender critical means the same thing to everyone

Plus I’m fairly sure that I’m considered to be gender critical by those who have absolutely no idea what my actual views are