What do you think should happen to the Gender Recognition Act (GRA)?

[TERFisTHEnewTREND]

Personally, I can't believe this act was ever passed! I know 2004 was a different time, but still!

I believe that the only way of moving past the gender madness in law is to revoke the GRA. "Gender" is about as useful as someone's favorite type of music, so it has no place on a legal document.

As for what should happen to those who already have a GRA... well, I think some of them are owed an apology by those who told them that this piece of paper would change their sex (which it doesn't).

What do others think?

There are tons of workarounds to this.

For example, official documents could have two sex markers.

Actual sex, and imaginary sex, if applicable.

Simple.

Because that is the right that exists under the Convention as interpreted by the Court.

You’ve still not read any of the case law, have you?

Perhaps we could replace the GRA with a new Act which permits the following sex markers on official documents:

F: Female (biologically)
M: Male (biologically)
X: Female (biologically) but wishes to be male
Y: Male (biologically) but wishes to be female.

The new Act would state that in all legislation, X is to be interpreted as F, and Y is to be interpreted as M. That would cover transsexualism, though not all the other gender labels, so one could similarly add:

Q: Female (biologically) but wishes to be neither male nor female
R: Male (biologically) but wishes to be neither male nor female

What case law have you read in coming to your conclusion?

I don't care about the case law, Janette.

If the case law is producing morally wrong results, it needs to be overturned.

Can you actually explain why you think some people need the right to falsify their official documents?

The blame for withdrawing from the ECHR will rest with whoever advocates for that outcome.

You claimed as a matter of fact that there are ‘tons of workarounds’.

The example you gave would not be permissible within the case law, for example. So it is not a workaround.

So, you then?

You're saying that that outcome will be necessary in order to repeal or substantially modify the GRA.

Most people in the UK no longer support the GRA even in its current form.

Because allowing people to falsify their official documents and gain access to places where they should not be allowed, harming others in the process, is actually a really bad idea that no sane person supports.

What are the other European Court of Human Rights judgments, subsequent to Goodwin, which specify the right to sex markers on official documents being recorded as the person’s opposite sex?

I’ve only ever seen UK Government documents / ACAS guidance etc refer to Goodwin.

I’d be interested in reading the later judgments if you can provide links to them or the names and dates of the judgments.

No. I’m not advocating withdrawal from the ECHR…

Case law is only ever one case away from being overturned, Janette.

But of course, if the court insists on interpreting the treaty in a way that was never intended by its original signatories in order to prioritise male people over female people, the treaty will not survive and it will be the fault of those judges themselves, and to a lesser extent you and other male supremacists who have insisted on reading things into it that simply aren't there.

Well you kind of are, if you're saying that withdrawing from it is the only way to get rid of this really bad and damaging law that most people don't support.

No. Only with you as you are anti women.

I don’t accept that misogyny.

It’s hard to say how I’ll feel if the EqA gets us all our stuff back - by that I mean single sex spaces, lack of indoctrination in schools and plain English devoid of gender mangling. Maybe it will be back to a few thousand men with certificates

Maybe it would be enough. I’d love to see it happen. I don’t accept your misogynistic take though

In capitals, so it is loud and clear:

IF YOU WANT THE ECHR TO SURVIVE AND THE UK AND OTHER COUNTRIES TO CONTINUE TO BE PARTIES TO IT, YOU ALL NEED TO STOP PRETENDING THAT IT GIVES PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO FALSIFY THEIR DOCUMENTS AND BE TREATED AS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEY ACTUALLY ARE.

This is the way the wind is blowing.

People have had enough.

Take heed, be more reasonable, accept that women have rights too, and preserve the treaty for its original purpose.

Or don't, continue down this path, and see what happens.

FAFO.

@PlanetJanette why don’t you refer me to the ECHR rulings that said domestic law has to change a trans persons sex marker upon request?

I have already asked you to because i can not find any such ruling

Most certainly the 2015 case makes no such assertion.

The GRA can be repealed without leaving the ECHR. If the UK stopped recording sex markers on official documents (birth certificate, passport and driving licence) then there would be nothing to change. There may be occasions where you need to produce documentation to prove your sex but I can't think of any off the top of my head. The EA would have to be amended as gender reassignment would be meaningless but there would be no need to refine the definition of sex as legal sex would disappear.

What conclusion? I am expressing doubt about your conclusion. It is no doubt obvious that I am not a lawyer, and I am not familiar with the case law that you are presenting as proof while failing to point to any specific ruling. I know better than to assume that one random person on Mumsnet is an utterly reliable source for the interpretation of the ECHR. I find it hard to believe that the ECtHR always consists only of lawyers who cannot understand that it is impossible to change sex, and that law must be based on verifiable reality not just the thoughts in someone’s head to have any validity.

Safeguarding needs sex and age to be recorded accurately and unambiguously.

Having two sexes or no sex recorded on official identification is a safeguarding risk. Children groups, providers of personal care and even sports need to know the truth to ensure saftey.

Men will abuse dual sex, no sex or the wrong sex recorded on official documents.

Are you aware that case law evolves in twenty years.

Ah, so case law evolves.

Because that is the right that exists under the Convention as interpreted by the Court.

Yet one interpretation stands forever.

Usual TRA evasive, blanket assertions, when asked repeatedly, fore citation, ignores

Yawns, <leaves the room>

I'm a lawyer. I understand all these things.

That's how I know that what you're saying is a steaming pile of doo doo.

I'm getting a bit sick and tired of NI threatening terrorism/ being used to threaten terrorism if women ever dare to question the gra.
Yes I would happily rewrite the gfa if it meant single sex spaces. It seems to be a dreadful fudge if the gfa means never change anything without permission from an eu court.

Regarding single sex spaces these are enshrined in hr law, the right to privacy and dignitiy, any woman who could get a case through to the echr would probably win.

That's how I know that what you're saying is a steaming pile of doo doo.

Could you put that in layperson terms pls

Yes but that can be solved by adding a gender identity box on all documents and records along side the person's biological sex.

No need for a grc or any medical process just write in any gender you want, but you can't change your sex nor would you get any access to the opposite sexs services, awards, sports or spaces.

I'd love to see the arguments against this solution as you get both self-id and all the recognition of your special gender feels but no extra rights nor can you hide your sex