re an earlier comment about Lady Haldane ruling. Her ruling changed nothing merely confirmed what the existing legal framework is. That a GRC legally (actually impossible) makes you the opposite sex for certain purposes. But over riding that is the EA that clearly states where deemed necessary single sex services can be provided and in those instances anyone with a GRC is treated as being the sex they were born.
So even if Scotland adopts new self identification route to GRC it is still subject to the EA. Unless Scotland somehow says we are opting out of this UK law.
Our problem is as much about those, including women's groups who have decided they dont wont to use the single sex excemption, or for ideological reasons are misrepresenting the EA to say that the excemptions dont mean sex, when they do.
And as we found out with Edinburgh RC even if you complain to the regulators that they misadvertised a post as being women only under the EA nobody does anything.
We need to ask why so few organisations, including health providers, do not make use of the single sex excemption. Even if the EA was reworded to make it clear that single sex means biological sex, if institutions, sports bodies, health providers and so called women's groups dont care to use it, the existence or not of a GRC is not the problem.
It is the failure of society as a whole to respect women, including women.
If a rape crisis centre that says it works on feminist principles can advertise a post like this and claim it is protected by the EA is it any wonder that politicians think they can get away with attacking women's sex based rights. www.sarsas.org.uk/opportunities/trans-non-binary-intersex-and-gender-variant-group-lead-facilitator/