Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

What are your thoughts on Repeal the GRA?

126 replies

EasternStandard · 12/09/2023 13:35

I haven’t given it a huge amount of thought but a pp on another thread raised it, which I found interesting

How do you feel about it? Is it something that should be considered

OP posts:
ResisterRex · 12/09/2023 16:20

Otherwise a TiF would be able to inherit a peerage.

Which is why Haldane's "for all purposes" conclusion was so bizarre. It's patently not for all purposes, just the ones males want, thanks!

happydappy2 · 12/09/2023 16:21

Definitely repeal-we have already had Freddie McConnell obtaining a GRC as a man, then getting pregnant & giving birth. It just makes no sense and no politician can ever explain exactly how a man 'lives as a woman' prior to getting the GRC. Women are more than stereotypes FFS.

EasternStandard · 12/09/2023 16:22

Datun · 12/09/2023 16:12

Of course it should be repealed. How could a civilised and democratic society ever have enshrined the legal definition of a woman to be a concept available to any man. On their whim.

And as other people have said, they very carefully made sure it didn't apply to inheritance, a seat in the Lords or the priesthood.

Oh no, you can't have pesky women gaining any kind of advantage! That's only allowed for rapists, male chancers, perverts and sports cheats.

The sexism is breathtaking.

The only people who benefit from this law are men. You don't see women, with GRCs, clamouring to get into male prisons, do you? Or beating men at sport?

It's a horrible, misogynistic law. And should never have been allowed.

Women with GRCs know how unsafe and how disadvantaged they’d be in make sports and spaces

It is only women being hit hard by this, men do not care at all

What problem is there for them? None

OP posts:
dimorphism · 12/09/2023 16:24

ResisterRex · 12/09/2023 16:20

Otherwise a TiF would be able to inherit a peerage.

Which is why Haldane's "for all purposes" conclusion was so bizarre. It's patently not for all purposes, just the ones males want, thanks!

Doesn't the GRA break the law ( ea 2010) e.g the bit about peerages is direct discrimination surely?

KohlaParasaurus · 12/09/2023 16:28

Repeal. It is Orwellian.

PomegranateOfPersephone · 12/09/2023 16:43

Yes. Repeal the GRA.

I am not sure what the point of it is anyway since no one can ask to see it or even if you have one. It props up de facto self id as a result.

Farmageddon · 12/09/2023 16:47

PriOn1 · 12/09/2023 15:36

It should be repealed. They could probably include a grandfather clause though, for those who’ve already legally changed their sex markers on everything.

But why? Why should some people be allowed to cling on to a legal fiction and others not?

That seems to me just more along the lines of 'authentically trans', which just muddies the water. It leads to the question of who is authentic and who isn't - actually there is no litmus test, it's all self image.

So why should the law enable it?

nothingcomestonothing · 12/09/2023 17:44

Absolutely it should be repealed. It's bad law, which has had horrible consequences, and now we have equal marriage it's redundant in terms of it's original purpose.

Plus I can see some fudging going on, as the reality of self ID has become clearer to the general public, to differentiate between 'legal women' and transwomen. Wasn't the recent civil service document based on the assumption that transwomen with GRCs could be allowed to use women's facilities, while those who didn't have them could be excluded?

Quite aside from the practical impossibility of that, since no one is allowed to ask anyone if they have a GRC, for the purposes of safeguarding I couldn't give two shits if the transwoman in the women's toilets has a GRC or not, it makes no difference to the effect of that transwoman's presence on women.

I can see a future where many many more TW get GRCs (which the labour party is keen to make easier to do), in order to 'prove' that they are entitled to women's spaces, and a PR drive to position GRC-holding TW as harmless, committed, 'proper' TWs, to distance them from the likes of Isla Bryson.

Ingenieur · 12/09/2023 17:48

Yes, it should be repealed. It no longer serves a legitimate purpose, if it ever really did.

Everything to do with "presentation", so the sterotypes underpinning gender, can be covered by good old fashioned sex discrimination.

Tootsweets23 · 12/09/2023 17:48

Can someone explain the idea that the GRA was introduced because same sex marriage didn't exist? I get that if a many wanted to be considered a woman then his hetero marriage couldn't become a 'gay' marriage - but how was that even possible before the GRA? Were there documents a man could get changed before the GRA?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 12/09/2023 17:51

Yes. It's an outdated law intended to allow same sex marriage for people who identify as the opposite sex. They say it's "just admin". So not needed then.

nothingcomestonothing · 12/09/2023 17:54

Tootsweets23 · 12/09/2023 17:48

Can someone explain the idea that the GRA was introduced because same sex marriage didn't exist? I get that if a many wanted to be considered a woman then his hetero marriage couldn't become a 'gay' marriage - but how was that even possible before the GRA? Were there documents a man could get changed before the GRA?

It was mean to make life easier for old school transsexuals, a very small number of mostly men who had gender dysphoria and 'lived as women'. As gay marriage wasn't legal, they couldn't marry their male partner, be entitled to their partners pension etc. It was never about men who transitioned once married to women.

StopStartStop · 12/09/2023 17:59

Do it.

lordloveadog · 12/09/2023 18:04

It isn't a good idea to make laws that say things which aren't true. Humans don't change sex.

Datun · 12/09/2023 18:09

Ingenieur · 12/09/2023 17:48

Yes, it should be repealed. It no longer serves a legitimate purpose, if it ever really did.

Everything to do with "presentation", so the sterotypes underpinning gender, can be covered by good old fashioned sex discrimination.

Exactly. A man wants to wear a dress? Knock yourself out. Does that mean he's a woman. Of course it bloody doesn't.

I mean, seriously. How did ANY grown person, with normal thinking faculties, ever let this happen ????? 🙄🙄🙄

EwwSprouts · 12/09/2023 18:14

100% in favour of repeal. The idea that you can be compelled to lie under law is horrific.

EasternStandard · 12/09/2023 18:14

As pp said it’s grown into a monster

All the issues we have with indoctrination in schools, violent men threatening anyone who says no, male bodies in sports, men challenging us by entering female teen change rooms are down to this law

It doesn’t seem to get any airtime on why we are where we are

How the hell did these people think that changing sex which is impossible should have a legal certificate

No one asks people to explain why and if they feel responsible for this mess

OP posts:
GailBlancheViola · 12/09/2023 18:15

Definitely repeal. It should never have been brought in in the first place, it is certainly one of the most sexist and misogynist Laws ever to be put on the Statute Books.

Boiledbeetle · 12/09/2023 18:32

It should be repealed and it should never have been allowed to come into being in the first place.

Now I'm back up to the start to see how many agree!

Waitwhat23 · 12/09/2023 18:37

nothingcomestonothing · 12/09/2023 17:44

Absolutely it should be repealed. It's bad law, which has had horrible consequences, and now we have equal marriage it's redundant in terms of it's original purpose.

Plus I can see some fudging going on, as the reality of self ID has become clearer to the general public, to differentiate between 'legal women' and transwomen. Wasn't the recent civil service document based on the assumption that transwomen with GRCs could be allowed to use women's facilities, while those who didn't have them could be excluded?

Quite aside from the practical impossibility of that, since no one is allowed to ask anyone if they have a GRC, for the purposes of safeguarding I couldn't give two shits if the transwoman in the women's toilets has a GRC or not, it makes no difference to the effect of that transwoman's presence on women.

I can see a future where many many more TW get GRCs (which the labour party is keen to make easier to do), in order to 'prove' that they are entitled to women's spaces, and a PR drive to position GRC-holding TW as harmless, committed, 'proper' TWs, to distance them from the likes of Isla Bryson.

I think you've absolutely hit the nail on the head there.

CriticalCondition · 12/09/2023 18:44

It's not a legal fiction, it's a legal lie.

And as Helen Joyce said in that recent podcast, once you put a lie in the heart of your institutions it becomes a threat to civilization. The institutions fight to protect the lie, they no longer tell the truth and seek to silence those who do. Institutions with a safeguarding role like schools and social work regulators are then doing the direct opposite of safeguarding. They are actively damaging people, mostly women and children, and putting them in danger.

It must be repealed.

mumof3kids1987 · 12/09/2023 18:46

Yes absolutely... they have abused it so much that women can't even call themselves women anymore...

EasternStandard · 12/09/2023 18:47

CriticalCondition · 12/09/2023 18:44

It's not a legal fiction, it's a legal lie.

And as Helen Joyce said in that recent podcast, once you put a lie in the heart of your institutions it becomes a threat to civilization. The institutions fight to protect the lie, they no longer tell the truth and seek to silence those who do. Institutions with a safeguarding role like schools and social work regulators are then doing the direct opposite of safeguarding. They are actively damaging people, mostly women and children, and putting them in danger.

It must be repealed.

This!

It’s so obvious I don’t know how we’re here

Maybe because those institutions are doing so well at protecting the lie

OP posts:
Signalbox · 12/09/2023 18:49

It definitely should be repealed. It writes a lie into law and forces society to facilitate that lie. It's absurd. I can't see it ever happening though when the current trend in politics appears to be to make to process of obtaining a GRC to be as easy as possible.

Froodwithatowel · 12/09/2023 19:22

Bad law, badly made, for the wrong reasons, and it's been a disaster. It should be repealed ASAP.