ScotGov Gender Reform Bill - tomorrow

[Hagiography]

Professor Sharon Cowan, Professor of Feminist and Queer Legal Studies, University of Edinburgh School of Law

Naomi Cunningham, Barrister, Outer Temple Chambers and Chair, Sex Matters

Karon Monaghan QC, Barrister, Matrix Chambers

David Parker, Lead Clinician, National Gender Identity Clinical Network for Scotland

www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-equalities-human-rights-and-civil-justice-committee/meetings/2022/ehrcjs62218/agenda

Will be screened live.

My last comment for a while, as I don't want to dominate this thread. I can't help but wonder how the Equality Act 2006 provision RMW cites about "Sevice providers should be aware that where a transsexual person is visually and for all practical purposes indistinguishable from a non-transsexual person of that gender, they should normally be treated according to their acquired gender unless there are good reasons for not doing so (para 13.59, part [missing - sic])" might usefully be adjudicated. Not least, for example, in her own particular case.

This is what fascinates me, @TheBiologyStupid. Presumably that quote about "indistinguishable" has been tested? Or is it an assumption by TW that people can actually pass?

I know it's practically a trope, but, I can tell. Even in the dark with a person behind me, I know if it's a male or a female that's walking behind me. TBH, I can tell people's sex when they pop up on MN to berate us to join in threads on here.

I'm not convinced that anyone passes - but whoever wrote that legal passage must think that some do.

You'd think there would be some sort of experiment to test it out before that got written into law?

Hyphenation is the least of the issues with that document, frankly.

It's quite hard to parse - seems a bodged together piece of work consisting of poorly constructed sentences, misinformation, and wild assertions, peppered with poorly judged phrases.

(Who writes 'oh dear oh dear' in a submission to the Scottish parliament?! This isnt flipping Twitter.)

Anyway. I do agree with White's apparent main point, which is that guidance is unclear.

It always will be while we operate under the nonsensical suggestion that we can both preserve single sex spaces and pretend people can change sex.

Its one or the other. Either everything is mixed sex and sex no longer is recorded, counted or accounted for; or we work as a society on the understanding that there are two sexes and those sexes have different requirements in some instances.

The EHRC has to address the tension between the EA and the GRA. It has to be spelled out clearly and succinctly how these legislations interact and how rights can be balanced.

Hyphenation is the least of the issues with that document, frankly.
…
(Who writes 'oh dear oh dear' in a submission to the Scottish parliament?! This isnt flipping Twitter.)

The sloppy hyphenation does, however, illustrate previously expressed concerns about attention to detail and it's not as if that hasn't been brought to RMW's notice on previous occasions.

www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2021/09/02/a-practical-guide/

Imagine being so inconceivably proud of something that you're willing to post it on both Steph's Place and to the Scots consultation.

www.stephsplace.uk/ehrc-single-sex-space-guidance-a-reply-from-robin-moira-white-old-square-chambers.cfm

(I posted more nuanced accounts of AE action up thread.)

Not sure whether this is the right place to post this very illuminating thread about the nature of some of the people opposed to women's rights in Scotland but can't find a better one:

twitter.com/historywoman/status/1538116782120108032

Tomorrow's meeting of the Committee will be broadcast live from 9.30

www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-equalities-human-rights-and-civil-justice-committee/meetings/2022/ehrcjs62219/agenda

Witnesses

Professor Alice Sullivan, Head of Research, UCL Social Research Institute

Robin White, Barrister, Old Square Chambers

Victor Madrigal-Borloz, United Nations Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

Ian Duddy, Chair, Scottish Human Rights Commission

Barbara Bolton, Head of Legal and Policy, Scottish Human Rights Commission

Cathy Asante, Legal Officer, Scottish Human Rights Commission

Dr Sandra Duffy, Lecturer in Law, University of Bristol School of Law

Dr Peter Dunne, Senior Lecturer, University of Bristol School of Law

Dr Chris Dietz, Lecturer in Law and Social Justice, University of Leeds

www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/equalities-human-rights-and-civil-justice-committee-june-21-2022

Here we go again.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

More buck passing .

'I'm sure the NHS has policies to deal with this' (conflicts of rights)

and more dismissal of women from religious groups whose faith precludes them from sharing spaces with opposite sex people.

The general feeling seems to be these are a minority of women and therefore 'not significant'.

Funny how the tiny, small, minute population of transgender people takes precedence because they are so few in number, yet women of faith are 'not significant' because presumably they are few in number.

Unless there's another reason.

It's astonishing how the powers that be are united in dismissing women's concerns.

UN rep says religious rights are limited by the rights of others.

No mention that rights relating to trans people's demands are likewise limited by the rights of others.

UN, coincidentally:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-61826551

'Claims of sexual abuse and corruption at the United Nations should urgently be investigated by an independent panel, an ex-senior UN member has said.'

EHRC and SHRC do not seem to be on good terms.

SHRC Barbara Bolton much pissed off that the EHRC position has changed.

Doesn't understand their new position.

I do agree that the EHRC has to come out much more clearly and strongly.

''wait and see' isn't an appropriate human rights response' - Bolton

Odd, as I have had the impression that is exactly the response many Scotgov bods recommend.

Rape Crisis have been trans inclusive for 15 years and do not believe women are self excluding, says Barbara Bolton.

How the fuck would they know, Barbara? Whom have they asked?

Now we're onto various young English academics. I think I'll have a cup of tea instead.

And who even knew Rape Crisis was "trans inclusive" meaning that they allow transwomen into the women's groups, as well as providing third spaces?

Who would even think about it until they go along and find a transwoman in the women's group, and how often does that happen? I wouldn't have known myself if it wasn't for Sarah's Sussex Rape Survivor's challenge.

Nobody complained because nobody knew.

I missed the beginnig of the session, catching up now.

There's a general suggestion taht a GRC doesn't make much difference. So - what is all this fuss for? Either it matters and they are important documents, or all trans people 'self ID' already and it doesn't matter, in which case, why bother with the mechanism, review, reform? In what circumstances is a GRC actually useful?

One instance that comes to mind is if one goes to prison - a holder of a GRC will go to the estate according to that 'gender', as I understand it. No?

What are the other situations where a GRC actually has any impact?

So - what is all this fuss for?

I think the fuss is not so much over the change in the law as such. It's because there was a consulation and a committee. The committee is about the only time where we get to see the debate and find out about the issues which go beyond the specific change in the law.

And the online consultation was the only time where we - the great unwashed Scottish public - were asked what we do want instead of being told what we should want. The Scottish government now know that this is a controversial and not very popular change to the law.

I don't understand what Cathy Asante was saying about prisoners because what I got from an earlier committee meeting was that a GRC did make a big difference. Someone with a GRC had to be risk assessed as if they were that gender and treated as if they were that gender. So a transwoman with a GRC wouldn't be sent to a male prison because no female prisoner is ever sent to a male prison.

And that was why there was an argument by someone on the GC side (sorry I forget who) to change the rules so that risk assessment of prisoners would be sex based and having a GRC would make no difference to the risk assessment. It doesn't work that way now.

Just finished watching the first section with Alice and Robin. Really glad Alice was able to set out clearly the importance of accurate data collection and was so dismissive of some groups data collection credentials. Robin implied she had both sex and gender recorded on her NHS record, it may be obliquely as she had opted in/out of sex based screening but it does show why accurate record keeping is important for NHS Records.

Robin clearly doesn’t want crimes to be recorded by sex, I wonder why!

Being realistic, I think self ID will eventually be made law. For me the importance of these discussions is what else is part of that law e.g. accurate data collection of sex and gender, accurate tracking of those who medically transition in any way I.e. medication (hormones), surgery as well as those who present with no medical intervention, the number of detransitioners, ages etc. These types of accurate statistics will cast light on claims made by both sides of the argument.

I also believe recording both sex and gender identity (if you have one) can be useful for victims of crime, perpetrators of crime, equal pay/sex pay gap, provision of services etc. Again analysis can show if male/female patterns of offending are impacted by gender identity.

Being realistic, I think self ID will eventually be made law.

In Scotland, undoubtedly. This whole consultation is a wee performance. We know what the result will be.

What worries me is that the obliteration of sex is going to harm many women and children, and nobody cares. These people will not listen, they are incapable of listen ing, listen to them say Rape Crisis says nobody has self excluded when I know of at least two women who say they have done so. Pam Gosal spelled out that many women are scared to report issues. Rape Crisis would call self excluding women bigots.

Who would have thought that Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre would have a trans identifying man as CEO... perhaps that’s why women are self excluding from the service? 🤔

Bear in mind the man ( who only spoke to say who he was & when he started the job which was Monday ) from SHRC was appointed by the convener & deputy convener of this committee. 🤬

Alice was wonderful, Robin was “ me, me, me, I’ve had all the operations don’t you know” The second 3 were appalling, the over confident, over excited man & the irish woman were particularly 💩.