Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The Observer view on the EHRC decision

56 replies

EdinburghFeminist · 30/01/2022 08:12

Haven’t seen a thread on this yet….
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/30/observer-view-ehrc-decision-scotland-gender-recognition-reforms?fbclid=IwAR0oy-e6TLftMUNp9XiCMd4hPqiBR0SdsGmLiG6qbRAFT5dqN6dGJvHmDoo

OP posts:
ChubbyNinja · 30/01/2022 08:21

Wow

JustSpeculation · 30/01/2022 08:21

Very wow!

334bu · 30/01/2022 08:22

Thank you for that link. A very fair article .

JustSpeculation · 30/01/2022 08:31

It is not uncommon for people’s fundamental rights to come into conflict.

This very first sentence from the article. This is surely a massive step forward.

DoubleTweenQueen · 30/01/2022 08:32

Good. Some rational thought coming back in to frame.

NotBadConsidering · 30/01/2022 08:42

The Observer has always been a lot fairer - by which I mean apply proper standards of journalism to the issue Hmm - than its sister paper The Guardian. Most of the stories about Keira Bell and the scandals at GIDS have been published on a Sunday. I would love to be a fly on the wall there, watching the propagandists spew that their Sunday splitters colleagues won’t play the game. Must eat them up inside.

NotBadConsidering · 30/01/2022 08:44

Italics fail there. I could get a job at The Guardian, but not The Observer.

nauticant · 30/01/2022 08:51

As I was reading the article I thought "the US employees of the Guardian are going to lose their minds over this", and then I saw this:

Both trans rights and women’s sex-based rights should be robustly defended. It should be a source of pride that the UK was one of the first countries to enshrine legal protection against discrimination for trans people in 1999; no such federal protection exists in the US.

It looks like the writer(s) is/are also expecting that response.

Iwishihadariver · 30/01/2022 08:52

Leading UK newspaper prints opinion piece which is sensible, fair, factually correct and likely representative of the average person. Cue lots of comments as to how amazing that is. It surely is strange times!

pantsforteaagain · 30/01/2022 08:56

This is brilliant. Feels like a real shift in the discourse. Huge thanks and shout out to everyone who has put their head above the parapet to keep insisting on the sex-based rights.

JustcameoutGC · 30/01/2022 08:57

That is a really balanced and fair article. Yes, there is a clash of rights. No, women have not been listened to. And no, women expressing concerns are not horrific bigots and transphobes.

So, that is the Mail, Observer and Times all speaking up for women. Quite a cross section.

PearPickingPorky · 30/01/2022 09:05

Sonia Sodha is such a brilliant and strong-minded woman. She's one of the main reasons the Observer has been able to hold a fair line on this topic, despite her Guardian "colleagues" publicly denouncing her online and trying to get her fired.

BettyFilous · 30/01/2022 09:07

One of the very left wing/Marxist papers (Morning Star?) has published on this topic in support of women’s sex-based rights too. This is absolutely not a left wing/right wing issue in the UK, it crosses party divides.

WarriorN · 30/01/2022 09:10

Excellent!

I looked through the app though knowing there would be something b/c Sonia is great, and missed that completely.... 🤔

BraveBananaBadge · 30/01/2022 09:16

This is great - says a lot that with so much going on in UK politics and beyond this week that someone (Sonia?) managed to successfully argue for this as the subject for the leader.

JustcameoutGC · 30/01/2022 09:19

That's not just Sonia tho. That is an editorial view, which means this the the Observer stance on this issue. Fab to see.

Original poster
EdinburghFeminist · 30/01/2022 09:20

@JustSpeculation

It is not uncommon for people’s fundamental rights to come into conflict.

This very first sentence from the article. This is surely a massive step forward.

Yes I thought it was very interesting to see an acknowledgment that rights are like pie so early on! Very heartened by this piece today.
OP posts:
Gosports · 30/01/2022 09:29

Can someone help me understand (maybe it’s too early on a Sunday morning and I’m not fully with it), but if you can change your sex on your passport at will…surely that IS self-id?

malloo · 30/01/2022 09:44

Was just coming on here to post this, cheered me up today. A calm, clear and balanced piece.

Gottasinggottadance · 30/01/2022 09:55

Such a reasonable article. Am in Scotland and I feel pretty depressed by the whole situation, but this does give me a glimmer of hope.

BettyFilous · 30/01/2022 09:56

@Gosports

Can someone help me understand (maybe it’s too early on a Sunday morning and I’m not fully with it), but if you can change your sex on your passport at will…surely that IS self-id?
I agree. I don’t think it should be allowed without a GRC. If the GRA is ever repealed, these kind of administrative processes would need attention.
OldCrone · 30/01/2022 09:56

@Gosports

Can someone help me understand (maybe it’s too early on a Sunday morning and I’m not fully with it), but if you can change your sex on your passport at will…surely that IS self-id?
You can change the sex on your passport without a GRC, but if you don't have one, you need a letter from a doctor to say you've 'changed gender' to make this change, so it's not just self ID.
PearPickingPorky · 30/01/2022 10:00

And of course there are online GPs who will provide you with a letter to say you've changed your gender very easily. As we found out from the Lolsuit King.

Gosports · 30/01/2022 10:20

Seems far too easy to do then. And presumably passport data is used for all sorts of things which would lead to skewed statistics.

Goatsaregreat · 30/01/2022 10:22

Good to think that the Starmers, Nandys, Lammys of the world are finally getting to read a bit of truth over their cornflakes on a Sunday morning.