For Women Scotland have lost their appeal

[ArthurbellaScott]

https://forwomen.scot/01/11/2023/court-decision-reclaiming-motion/

The court rules that in some cases, men with a GRC are women.

This is part of a response to Alessandra tweet.

"It's crucial to approach such discussions with empathy, understanding, and a commitment to upholding the rights and dignity of all individuals. While legal frameworks provide a foundation, societal acceptance and understanding are equally vital."

And thats the issue. Politicians can implement any law, but without 'societal acceptance' it will fail. What they are trying to do is force society to accept men as women and even lesbians because that what the law says rather create a law that society accepts and wants in the first place.

But, if society accepted men as women, the law wouldn't be needed.

Daft politicians thought they could introduce a law that no one knew about and that everyone would follow without question.

It's depressingly inept for someone in a position of authority and responsibility and frankly not acceptable to be judging on this without being able to follow very basic and central arguments. Surely the appeal will win on these grounds alone?

How can Lady Dorrian not be aware of the lesbian only events which have been intimidated by bepenised individuals and the accusations of sexual racism if lesbians don't suck dick (etc). The 'cotton ceiling'? Has she bothered to read about Allison Bailey's case at all, where the extreme lesbophobia of TRAs was laid out quite clearly.

Surely the appeal will win on these grounds alone?

A judged could make erroneous judgements but still end up with the same decision as if they had made correct judgements so an appeal would not be won purely because they were unable to follow an argument.

To me, it seems that if this judgement is correct then the EA must be amended as it discriminates against females and thus breaches the European Convention on Human Rights.

As far as I can gather, the judge's job is to interpret the law and work out how it was intended to be applied. She's not really supposed to make comment or judgement on how good the law itself is.

Which is why she has made contradictory statements in the past - it's reflecting the snafu of the EA itself, especially in conjunction with the GRA.

And it's also why this now gets passed back to Westminster/Scottish government. It's their job to fix legislation, not the court's.

Just my understanding, and IANAL.

I still don't understand how a judge could think that the meaning of sex was intended to be legal sex rather than biological sex, given the single sex exemptions which allow even people who have changed their legal sex to be treated differently.

I don't think she is saying it is. I think she is saying it is both, or one or the other, depending on circumstance.

Which accords with her earlier judgement, which claimed sex was both biological and legal, or one or the other, at different points in her judgement.

Jesus wept.

For fucks sake! The time, money, and brainpower expended on this shit is un-fucking-forgivable.

The law must be re-written.

It's like some macabre game that people can play until the end of time, interpreting it this way, and then that way, depending on who's talking and what day it is.

It's ridiculous, utterly shameful.

Re-write the fucking law so it makes sense for what you're trying to achieve!!!

Once it's perfectly clear that some bright spark with an agenda is exploiting the law to achieve the exact opposite of what you had intended, it's time to use your authority.

Otherwise, what's it bloody for??

The trouble is, i dont think politicians know what they intended, or even what they want. Or cant say it aloud.

They cant say anything about this without mentioning that trans people are among the most marginalised in society. If thats what they want to sort, how can a piece of paper and confusing sex and gender help?

I guess this is what happens when laws aren't properly thought through and terms aren't properly defined. This can't be what parliament intended and yet here we are. And everyone too cowardly to fix it.

The thing we need to stop doing now is quibbling, and start finding out how laws are repealed.

What is the process to repeal this clusterfuck of a law?

Good idea

Just to point out that it will take a hell of a lot of hard work, time, political will and money to repeal the GRC.

Yes, it will.

But how much has already been wasted on trying to sort this shitshow out?

I think the days of "we are not calling for the GRA to be scrapped" must be history now. Even for those women who used to hold that position it must have become clear how harmful the GRA is for women and girls even in its current form.

Any campaign aimed at preventing policies of "updating" the GRA should now also simultaneously call for the Act to be repealed. And any suggested adjustment to this law that would make it even slightly easier for men to become "legally" women can only be seen as harmful to women and a step towards self ID.

What would your preference be?

I'd imagine it would be a lot easier to get the statutory instrument to clarify that biological sex is sex, and it's different from gender. Make it clear that gender is not meaningful in any sense of the word, can't be used for documentation, legally, etc.

But people can have a GRC. Just ensure that it means what it actually means - they can alter their clothing, hair, or have plastic surgery.

The Tories already took a step towards that when they reduced the fee to a fiver. So meant activists couldn't bang on about how terribly difficult and expensive it is.

Keep going. Give them away for free, with a weekly shop. Make it meaningless.

So long as 'sex' is what is used on NHS records, birth certs, license, passport, etc.

Spoiler: they were already allowed to do those things before the GRA.

Prisons were already placing men who'd had the 'sex change' surgery in the women's estate many years before the GRA was passed (it's mentioned in the ECHR ruling on Goodwin v UK). Repealing the GRA won't be sufficient, there need to be laws introduced that explicitly protect single-sex spaces.

I guess you don't really need legislation in place and a special certificate from the government stating you are something you are not unless it also entitles you to do something that you wouldn't otherwise be entitled to do. If it confers no special rights (like changing your BC) you might as well just print the certificate off the internet.

Spoiler: they were already allowed to do those things before the GRA.

Exactly. No legislation required.

A bit more analysis from Michael Foran...

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1720049981338390814.html

Very good point.