UK not polarised over trans equality

[SlouchingTowardsBethlehemAgain]

The British public are not bitterly polarised over trans equality, according to new research, which found a majority agreed schools should talk to pupils about transgender issues and that one in four knows a trans person personally.
Thought to be the most in-depth UK study to date of public attitudes to what has become a notoriously toxic discourse in politics and on social media, the report from More in Common identifies a radically different attitude among ordinary people, who approach issues of gender identity from a position of compassion and fairness, often informed by their own relationships with trans people. www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jun/16/britons-not-bitterly-polarised-over-trans-equality-research-finds

Do the people surveyed understand the true nature of what's going on - diminishing Women's rights, silencing women, destroying womens sports, drugging children - or was it a vague "let's be kind - do you agree" sort of survey?

I don't think it's right that people who have undergone medical transition and gone to all the trouble of getting a GRC should have the same rights as people who merely self ID.

It's more complicated than that. Having a GRC is a matter of secrecy and in most circumstances you're not allowed to disclose if someone else has a GRC, nor to ask if someone has a GRC, nor insist that someone tells you if they have a GRC in order to access a service (like a toilet or a women-only group).

So either you have to say everyone can self-id their way into anything, or you have to say there are sex-based rights that people of the other sex can't be given, whether they have a GRC or not.

@FemaleAndLearning @TeenPlusCat Yep that gen-z category 18-24 (6 years) also had lower birth rates than other categories. So it's being given top billing in a comparison with more populous categories. A verbal and visual distortion of the statistics. It might have been better to represent their findings with a good old fashioned Florence Nightingale style polar area diagram, as The Lady with the Lamp's method would have given more illumination.

Having a GRC is a matter of secrecy and in most circumstances you're not allowed to disclose if someone else has a GRC, nor to ask if someone has a GRC, nor insist that someone tells you if they have a GRC in order to access a service (like a toilet or a women-only group).

Then in other words, a GRC is totally useless as a way of gatekeeping who should be allowed into women's single-sex spaces. Totally pointless.

Hmm, yes what purpose does a GRC actually serve then?

I don't know how meaningful these surveys are unless the researcher shows clearly they defined their terms upfront and the participants understood.

Everyone asked whether they believe TWAW/M should be told whether they are agreeing to that statement in light of people who fully transition with a GRC or people who just change pronouns and maybe a bit of clothing.

Then there's the people who still get confused and think TW refers to female transitioners and vice versa.

I know 6 people who identify as trans, but then I'm quite posh, which fits with transition being very middle class in the UK. All the trans people I know are either older male Oxbridge graduates or younger female children of Oxbridge graduates. Really quite striking.

Then in other words, a GRC is totally useless as a way of gatekeeping who should be allowed into women's single-sex spaces. Totally pointless.

Yes, that's not really what a GRC is supposed to be for. It entitles you to change your birth certificate, marriage certificate and pension and benefits. Whcih is why there are claims that it's just a trivial bureacratic change. But in practice it also seems to do more.

Having a GRC does affect rights in some spaces such as prisons, at least according to representations to the Scottish Equalities Human Rights and Civil Justice Commitee which is looking into reform of the existing UK act. Its very worth having a listen to the committees - they're recorded and transcribed, and they are very clear, detailed explorations of many issues with many viewpoints and all polite and respectful. ( Most recent and Archive ) Like an anti-Twitter!

(Actually I am not sure if the current act is UK-wide or if there are already Scotland-specific bits)

Well most people think a transwoman is a post surgery depenised male making every effort to live 'as a woman' having suffered and continuing to suffer gender dysphoria. Thus is not a survey asking a truly reoresentative range of the population an unbiased question presented with all the facts.

That is not entirely true. The GRC is not a total matter of secrecy and can be disclosed for several necessarey purposes - such as in a police investigation. That overrides anyone not wanting to disclose. Quite rightly.

So for example in that awful rape of a woman by a trans person in a hospital last year they could indeed have esatablished if the patient had a GRC or not. Which I am almost sure that they did not in this case. But the decision not to find out for certain was incorrect. If they did have one then that could be disclosed to the police so it was simply chosen by them to not to pursue that option here or they were afraid to ask most likely given the way trans activists behave.

The person with a GRC can also tell anyone if you ask them and I cannot see any good reason why they would not if it mattered in the circumstances of any dispute. Being obstructive is the last thing we are seeking. We regard the GRC as a bond of trust with society. Not some ticket to do anthing we want.

If that person chooses to lie or declines to say then that is a problem they create and if it is assumed they do not have one by default then they have no reasonable comeback. The Equality Act advises people the can do that and it is perfectly reasonable to do so.

Those with a GRC are not like the trans activists out there. We are not looking for trouble or to cause a scene. If anyone challeged we would either tell the truth and / or just go elsewhere. The last thing we are aiming for is to be noticed.

Whereas that seems almost the only thing transgender activists are out to do.

Also not all of the 5000 have altered birth certificates as this requires taking extra steps but cannot be done without a GRC - so there are probably only about 4000 or so who have one in the UK and about a quarter of these are women who have changed their birth certificate.

Again here the original record is not removed and the link is retained to birth identity and whilst not made public it can be accessed for legitimate reasons. Including police investigations.

That is my understanding.

Mmm!

The vitriol in one side = burn in a grease fire

And on the other = we want single sex spaces to remain single sex

Shocking levels of mutual hatred, oh my!

Useful analysis

sex-matters.org/posts/updates/response-to-more-in-common/

and

twitter.com/SCynic1/status/1537423494069293057

TWAW is the polarizing issue, especially as a 'no' will get you labeled a bigot.

The GRC is not a total matter of secrecy

Not total secrecy, no, but a very high level.

and can be disclosed for several necessary purposes - such as in a police investigation.

Yes, for a small number of limited purposes. But a police investigation only happens after the fact. My point was more that a GRC isn't any use for deciding who does and doesn't belong in most women-only spaces.

So for example in that awful rape of a woman by a trans person in a hospital last year they could indeed have esatablished if the patient had a GRC or not. Which I am almost sure that they did not in this case.

I am not sure why you are bringing this up? In the House of Lords Baroness Nicholson blamed it on Annexe B of the NHS guidance on same-sex accommodation, not on GRCs. The question was not whether the (accused) rapist had a GRC but firstly, why a patient in the women's ward had an intact male body and secondly, why it tooks months for the hospital to acknowledge to the police that such a patient was there.

My ds is dating a transman, my dd is in class with a girl who id's as a boy and uses he/him pronouns and have changed their names etc, and there is a boy I have seen in her school who is gender non-conforming (wearing a skirt instead of trousers). No idea if they consider themselves trans or just want to be gender non-conforming but that's just in my tiny world. So it wouldn't surprise me tbh.

A trans boy? I’m assuming their at school still.

They’re

A boy who is wearing what is currently considered part of the uniform for girls. As I said I have no idea if they consider themselves trans or simply gender nonconformist.

did anyone else hear radio 4 covering this at the end of PM this evening. No balance whatsoever. Awful. But, hey, it's the BBC, why am I surprised?

The one in four people knowing someone who is trans or they think is does not surprise me.

The debate is more nuanced, I agree. It seems to me the views about competitive sport, medical situations and women's changing rooms are probably very different from what personal pronoun or name someone uses.

1 in the family
1 in friendship circle
1 in work

If 1 or 2 in 100 claim transgender which seems to be latest figure , yes people could be expected to know a few

Yes, a very soft and unbalanced interview by Evan Davis as per usual.

Who was he interviewing? Someone from the survey? He said that more than 50% of those surveyed agreed that TWAW and TMAM, which misrepresents the report (according the helpful sex matters analysis), also when talking about transwoman in women's sports, said something gloriously confusing like. "people are not so sure about females who are transgender participating in women's sports".

Not sure how to copy a link so you can "listen again", but on at about 5.50pm.