UK Government confirms it will block Scottish GRR

[IwantToRetire]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64288757

He's actually being a bit more balanced than I expected. I listen to his show every day and generally strongly disagree with him on this subject but at least he is (more than once) acknowledging the concerns of women about predators abusing the system.

Having said that, he's just dismissed polls showing clear opposition and saying that people can take it up with their MSPs at the next election if it's so important to them.

Dammit, should be
and [he] SAID that people can take it up with their MSPs

Which is exactly why JKR put her private money into Beiras Place. No gov funding, so they can keep out who they damn well need to.
The howls of outrage from the TRAs tells you everything you need to know about the chances any organisation has at keeping their funding AND their ability to exclude on biological sex basis. It's so fucking obvious.

We're back to funding our single sex spaces ourselves, ladies.
Second class citizens indeed. Feels grrrrreat.

The howls of outrage from the TRAs tells you everything you need to know about the chances any organisation has at keeping their funding AND their ability to exclude on biological sex basis. It's so fucking obvious.

it is. And it needs addressing.

Which is exactly why JKR put her private money into Beiras Place. No gov funding, so they can keep out who they damn well need to.

Except Beira's Place still needs to adhere to equality law. So if the law says they must admit trans women with a GRC, then they will have to do that.

But while I'm grateful for people's explanations, I'm still not entirely clear whether it's possible to exclude trans women with a GRC from a single-sex space. I think it is, but I'm not sure.

Qere told we CAN exclude, but that often means the funding is withdrawn.
As far as I know, Beiras Place is a private business, not a charity, so they can exclude whoever they want.
I run my own business. I declined to make adult nappies for a male who told me it was for "scat play". Actually, I'm afraid my first instinct was to laugh out loud, he slammed the phone down on me and that was that. But I could not be forced to make anything for him. I'd like to see someone try....its my business. I'll sew what I fucking well want to.

I think Beira's place is ok because it's permitted to exclude even GRC holders from a service where appropriate.

As it is a service to the public which might be affected by a person of the opposite sex being present then the exemptions do apply and they can lawfully exclude someone with a GRC with the appropriate justification.

However, this provision is of no help if your funding providers withdraw funding if you are not transinclusive. Hence the need for private funding.

I think Beira's Place have said that all the other centres are trans-inclusive so they will refer any transwoman to them. They do accept transmen though, on the grounds that they are biologically female.

As others have said, this is forcing the issue into mainstream discussion.

What I really want to hear is a journalist doing their job and grilling Sturgeon, or a TRA, forcing them to explain why the proposed law excludes first born daughers becoming legally men and inheriting dukedoms, whilst allowing convicted sex offenders to become legally women.

The exemption for aristocrats shows they "know" a transman isn't really a man. I want to hear an explanation of how that is legally consistent. Obviously we all know why this exemption exists, but I want to hear their responses.

PennysRevenge

Full frontal attack...Poor word choice Nicola. Poor! She make care about pronouns, but she certainly doesn’t care about possessive pronouns — “it’s”, tsk, tsk.

Damn your eyes! I was going to point that out!

Anyway, it's very good news to see this result, it'll drag the festering pile of maggots out into the open. In recent months, reportage on the subject has begun to shift, with even the Guardian acknowledging that it's not as simple as the first made out.

I hope that people who were of the opinion that it's just to help a few tortured souls, will see it for what it actually is, a charter for extremists and abusers.

What I really want to hear is a journalist doing their job and grilling Sturgeon, or a TRA, forcing them to explain why the proposed law excludes first born daughers becoming legally men and inheriting dukedoms, whilst allowing convicted sex offenders to become legally women.

Well said @Beowulfa Also I think private members' clubs such as The Garrick in London can, and do, exclude women from becoming members. But transwomen who joined as men can remain members; transmen cannot join. So I think Beira's Place is safe as it's private and private clubs can include or exclude whoever they wish.

As others here have said I very much welcome this intervention. It forces it out into the open. Now we get the debate we've been told for years we cannot have. Now it has to be discussed. Now no one can duck the issue. We have sunlight we wanted. For many of us that's pretty much all we wanted because once people realise what self ID actually means they understand why we fear it.

I hope that people who were of the opinion that it's just to help a few tortured souls, will see it for what it actually is, a charter for extremists and abusers.

'Sactly @SinnerBoy

Being debated in Parliament right now.

Conversion therapy. Gvt to publish draft legislating on news just

So whilst Alistair Jack is dropping the GRR Bill thing the government sneak out draft legislation on conversion therapy to include everyone!

LIve in parliament right noooo!

www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-64294059

On funding of DV shelters and such, have they not got a legal case for discrimination, if they are forced to accept trans identifying males? Under the exemptions in the Equality Act?

Jack says 'we do not believe there are sufficient safeguards for women and children'

This is really wonderful sunlight. Vigorous and lively debate on the risks presented by sex change laws.

On my side of the Atlantic, there are court cases about whether a baker can decline to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples if they claim it violates their religious beliefs. The law isn't totally clear on that but there isn't a lot of sympathy for them from the non-evangelical.

They're talking about sex based rights in the HoC!!!!

Please can we not go over again that the Single Sex Exemptions do allow you to exclude men AND men with a GRC that says "for all other purposes" they are female.

The main problem over this has been failure of groups who could implement it, implementing it and funders who try to pressurise groups not to use it, and those who have fallen for the Stonewall training lie about SSE including men with GRC.

In fact both the Scottish Parliament and pro trans groups have emphasised that this right to SSE still exist so why is everyone going on about the challenge to the EA.

However, I will admit (maybe because it does not impinge on me - blush) I had overlooked / not taken into account the lowering of the age in Scotland to 16 and how that might impact on schools.

So there are two parts to this, the existing failure of the SSE to work in practice because of attempts to infringe on women's rights, but now the impact of one group of people being able to get a GRC through self identity as from 16, and another group of people able to get a GRC at 18, but only after a longer process.

So as posted late last night the lack of equality in the UK as a whole is between those wanting GRCs. So does the Scottish GRR challenge the UK GRA.

Bur if anything comes out of this mess, let us at least get not just politicians, but the general public, funders and those running support groups such as the monstrous Survivors Network in Brighton not only acknowledge but implement the SSE. The EA even puts forward as an example of why women need single sex services is that a woman who has been raped would not be comfortable with a trans woman in a support group.

So whilst I think many politicians are using this issue for other reasons, we should remember that how this challenge even came up was because of how sucess the trans campaign has been, even to the extent that those who you would have thought would want to have and use SSE, chose not to. It is that public shift in attitude (away from women's sex based rights) that create the sense that this was not an issue.

Ideally all group involved in campaigning for women's sex based rights should maybe do a joint campaign just focusing on why women not just need but are entitled to them, not just for survivors of male violence, but schools, sports, prisons.

Marvellous, isn't it? Repeatedly referring to that specific element. Rosie Duffield giving support from the Labour benches. Most heartening all in all.

It's amazing, bignose! Vigorous and heated debate!

Please can we not go over again that the Single Sex Exemptions do allow you to exclude men AND men with a GRC that says "for all other purposes" they are female.

OP, we have a male running a Rape Crisis centre in Scotland. This point is very far from clear.