GRA Reform - Scotland

[BuffysBigSister]

www.parliament.scot/-/media/files/legislation/bills/s6-bills/gender-recognition-reform-scotland-bill/introduced/bill-as-introduced.pdf

Some light reading for those who are interested

@Mistressiggi just type Scottish Parliament Tv in to google and click on the SP TV option

The day sturgeon abandoned women

Thanks, Theyellowone, I found it. Wish I hadn't

A mixture of flannelling, evasiveness and completely contradictory statements from the Minister in response to the questions. When in doubt just make a vague positive comment about 'trans people' that sounds kind, ignore any incisive questions on the impact on women, or make a patronising statement about needing to 'reassure' any women who have 'fears'

The GRUnit said detransitioners would have just as straightforward a route to reverse a GRC as they will have to get once in the first place. However, there’s no mention of this in the proposed bill. There’s just a bit about the penalties for making a false declaration and having the GRC revoked.

Very disappointing (for many reasons, but especially that as the issue was raised with the GRUnit)

A trans woman at work has spoken about this saying that is not going to put anybody at risk in "single sex" spaces. That trans people are already using these spaces along and are not a threat nor are they undermining any women's rights.

Before coming across these boards I would have probably taken that at face value and agreed. But now I know more and I just can't. I'm sure that this person believes that, but how can they speak for the people who are a threat and will use this to undermine and threaten women's rights. I feel helpless in all of this. And genuinely scared for the future.

Robison gives the impression that she doesn't actually understand the bill and it's implications.

A trans woman at work has spoken about this saying that is not going to put anybody at risk in "single sex" spaces. That trans people are already using these spaces along and are not a threat nor are they undermining any women's rights

Sorry , fat thumbs.

It's not just about transwomen, it's about all men who can now easily be granted permission to enter women's spaces.

And it's not just about risks in terms of physical assualt etc, it's also about boundaries, privacy, dignity, women forced to self exclude.

I wonder how on earth they could penalise someone with a fine or prison for making a 'false declaration' to get a GRC, if we supposedly have to accept that people are who they say they are now. What would be the evidence for it being false? That was just one of the many bits that didn't make any sense.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

A trans woman at work has spoken about this saying that is not going to put anybody at risk in "single sex" spaces. That trans people are already using these spaces along and are not a threat nor are they undermining any women's rights

Women recognise that they are at risk by any random men wandering into a loo or changing area, claiming self ID status and therefore ‘entitled’ to be there for whatever reason.

The ‘trans woman at work’ should know this.

@BessieBraddockAliasThorne

I wonder how on earth they could penalise someone with a fine or prison for making a 'false declaration' to get a GRC, if we supposedly have to accept that people are who they say they are now. What would be the evidence for it being false? That was just one of the many bits that didn't make any sense.

People currently flout that rule anyway. All these transmen who choose pregnancy aren't exactly living as their acquired gender...

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Sorry , fat thumbs.

It's not just about transwomen, it's about all men who can now easily be granted permission to enter women's spaces.

And it's not just about risks in terms of physical assualt etc, it's also about boundaries, privacy, dignity, women forced to self exclude.

Yes I understand that, not sure if my post came across that way. I am sure the person stating that does not intend anyone harm, but that's not the issue.

Hang on - going back to the toilet thing; I understand that the Equality Act DOES make it legal to exclude men from single-sex spaces regardless of how they identify AND that this includes where combined services would be less effective and also where a person may reasonably object to the presence of someone of the opposite sex. Changing rooms are listed as an example of a reasonable exception where sex discrimination is permitted. Under gender reassignment it specifically lists excluding transwomen from a women's sexual assault counselling group as lawful. Excluding transwomen from women's spaces is entirely lawful. Therefore surely to ignore that legal separation must be unlawful? Assuming we use the law as it is written down and not as it exists in Stonewall's proposals.
I really hope the EHRC spells this out with crayons and in words that TRAs can understand.

They will also opt for the most self-serving, bad faith interpretation possible, in my experience.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Robison gives the impression that she doesn't actually understand the bill and it's implications.

I think that was what caused the stuttering.

The words were coming out of her mouth and she knew that they were going to bite her on her ass.

Times:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e055e316-9b0f-11ec-8194-a993851c15ba?shareToken=89ed4d177344a0ac37dea350efdc21b1

Does that mean that it will be illegal to detransition? If you detransition will you be deemed to have falsely acquired s GRC?

@BessieBraddockAliasThorne

I wonder how on earth they could penalise someone with a fine or prison for making a 'false declaration' to get a GRC, if we supposedly have to accept that people are who they say they are now. What would be the evidence for it being false? That was just one of the many bits that didn't make any sense.

Well they could investigate bad faith attempts for gender ID change - for example if it could be proven that there was a history of communications indicating someone has gone down that route to try to make a political point rather than out of a considered feeling that they are trans. So they could explore social media posts etc to gain evidence on that etc.

@Ruinedwalks

Does that mean that it will be illegal to detransition? If you detransition will you be deemed to have falsely acquired s GRC?

The GRUnit have said both verbally and in writing that detransitioners will have as straightforward a process to reverse their GRC as they did to obtain it.

However, this has not come through in the Bill…

twitter.com/bayswatersg/status/1499371735703080962?s=21

Well they could investigate bad faith attempts for gender ID change - for example if it could be proven that there was a history of communications indicating someone has gone down that route to try to make a political point rather than out of a considered feeling that they are trans. So they could explore social media posts etc to gain evidence on that etc.

Are you talking about Freddy McConnell?

Just to add: Freddy got a GRC, immediately took steps to become pregnant via IVF (this is not living as a man because men can't be pregnant), then made a documentary about this and has continued to write about wanting to change the law so that Freddy can be named as 'father' on the child's birth certificate (a political point).

I thought you had to keep ‘being the gender’ to regain your GRC? Otherwise, why bother?

@KittenKong

I thought you had to keep ‘being the gender’ to regain your GRC? Otherwise, why bother?

Yes, it's not clear why anyone bothers to get a GRC. What's the point of it? Apparently (according to TRAs) it has no effect on access to single-sex spaces, so what is the point of it?

@oldcrone is this someone who has spoken about obtaining a GRC certificate despite knowing that would not be an accurate reflection of their gender ID?

If they don't fall into that category then I'm not speaking about them, no.