The Observer view on the EHRC decision

[EdinburghFeminist]

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

There's an article in today's Sunday Telegraph under the headline Public 'worried' trans and women's rights are at odds. It's about Baroness Falkner's appearance on the Today show.

I'm not keen on the Telegraph but I've been living with my mum for nearly two years now and she has a subscription. There's an article about trans/women's rights at least every other day atm. The Telegraph knows it's an issue of interest to its readership.

@PearPickingPorky

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.

Like your local GP is going to be allowed to say no anyway!

I wrote out a huge response to this but then thought all I really wanted to say to The Observer was 'Thank you'.

Thank you.

Good piece, with a little dig at former EHRC chair David Isaac. If the Observer could do a bit of investigative journalism into how DI got the gig, his connections with Stonewall and various government depts for whom he did legal work, and the mess that was made to the EHRC under his watch, that would be grand.

The guardian are fighting back with this www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/30/activists-warn-against-loophole-in-uk-ban-on-conversion-practices

Very Scotland heavy…..

Following the report I linked to on page 10 of the Sunday Telegraph there's another in the Comment section under the headline Rowling deserves our thanks, not this cancellation.

More and more sunlight shining through.

That's a clearly laid out article. If Scotland go ahead, when the inevitable problems arise, they will have nowhere to hide.

Great article, and an outline of where I hope we'll eventually end up. I still do care about the rights of trans and gender non-conforming people. Especially the original group of transsexuals who the GRC was aiming to help. But I care about the rights of women and young people too. I'm sure it is not beyond us as a society to ensure that we protect both.

The EHRC is right that these reforms have implications for sex-based rights that have not been considered. There is not yet enough case law to fully understand how the Equality Act and the Gender Recognition Act intersect, but enabling people to change their legal sex through self-ID could in practice have significant consequences for the threshold at which it is lawful to exclude those who are biologically male from female-only spaces, on sex discrimination and equal pay cases, and on data collection.

because reforming the Gender Recognition Act will affect another protected characteristic, sex, it is critically important that any proposals to reform it in the UK are informed by proper consultation with all those affected. That has not happened in Scotland. Instead, Nicola Sturgeon has simply denied such a conflict exists.

Did I just read that in the Observer? Have I not properly woken up?

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

I like this as it points out that trans people already have the same bloody rights as everyone else in the UK.

It is not a fundamental human right for males, regardless of presentation or feelings, to access anything female only, which are protected on the basis of sex.

It's a want. Not a right.

The Spectator has 2 article's 1 on the ehrc advice and another basically saying that asking about men in women's prisons isn't transphobic (will link later am out and on phone now)

Obviously people's focus will be on the clash between trans rights and women's rights (which is obvious on the basis of the site that we are on) and incredibly valid, as on a local level I have seen problems.

But one major fear I have is the number of people who would be sent down this irreversible path of treatment without anyone once questioning whether it is the right path to take.

I am almost certain that the NHS will be faced with a massive lawsuit in a couple of decades of all the people who received this treatment because no one once said "no". Keira Bell is only the tip of the iceberg.

Well expressed and very hopeful article!

No one wants to see TQ+ people discriminated against or without access needed resources. It's just equally important that female people have equal access to their needed resources, some of those are sex based, and female access and inclusion cannot be provided without them.

This does mean, in practice, that if those female only needs and resources are not going to be respected by TQ+ people as equally necessary and valid as their own needs and resources, that they must be gatekept by law. And this will involve the word 'no'. This is not 'hate' against anyone, this is inclusion and equality.

We cannot have large numbers of females left without resources or access or inclusion in women's spaces because males didn't want them to have it.

We cannot have large numbers of females left without resources or access or inclusion in women's spaces because males didn't want them to have it.

Yep. A male's feelings that he is a woman don't trump a woman's feelings that a male is a male.

I love Sonia Sodha, she's argued her corner steadfastly and coherently at The Observer. She's done a fantastic job.

@nauticant

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.

That's also the first thing I thought when I saw that line.

I’m stunned. A relative emailed me a link to this article today. A relative who basically accused me of bigotry a couple of years ago when I attempted to discuss women’s rights issues within the Labour Party with him. And now he’s feeling outraged at the attempts to silence women speaking up on these issues. Thank you to The Observer for publishing this today.

ahahaha, am I a bad person for wanting to enjoy the tantrums because of this?

I am, I am a bad person.

@Beamur

That's a clearly laid out article. If Scotland go ahead, when the inevitable problems arise, they will have nowhere to hide.

Yes, its quite a warning from Westminister.

Well you can do that, but we wont protect you from the lawsuits.

If Scotland go ahead, when the inevitable problems arise, they will have nowhere to hide.

Yes, fine, just as a woman in Scotland really not looking forward to being the sacrificial lamb in this object lesson.

No, you're quite right there ArabellaScott this is deeply unfair on Scottish women.

Not just unfair, downright dangerous.