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?

Yeah, nobody explained that the open border principle needs to apply to women's single sex spaces.

to push surgery

On that specific point, I think you're misinterpreting "procedure" as medical; I believe they mean "administrative".

to ensure that a few thousand people can’t change their birth certificate.

And why should those few thousand people be allowed to do this? Why do they get rights over and above every other citizen to falsify an official legal record?

The consequences of that few thousand being able to do so is causing harm, will continue to cause harm and is actively eroding the rights of another group.

All those Judges you mention, all male perchance?

Brexit was a lot more bloody incompatible with the GFA than saying no to entitled men is, Janette.

This is just desperate stuff. Truly desperate. Surely you MUST know you have lost the argument, right?

@Boomboom22

There’s nothing about surgery being a requirement. It’s the opposite of that. Enforced surgery would be a breach of human rights.

On age, however, the position seems to me to be completely insane.

Note that this is a Council of Europe report. It’s not the same as the European Convention on Human Rights. I need to look up how these different European bodies / treaties fit together. I used to understand it at one point but I’ve forgotten.

This argument is so odd.

I find myself wondering what your comparator here is for arguments for state approval of pretending someone is the opposite sex...

😂

Right now we've ruined peace in our time, what else can we set about destroying?

I hate toll roads. Can we get shot of them by asserting our rights?

Do you genuinely have no understanding of the history and fragility of Northern Ireland?

Maybe we should consider leaving the ECHR. We are supposedly a sovereign nation again now. I was an ardent remainer. Now I have begun to contemplate the errors in my thinking on that.

I would hazard a guess that the majority of the population of NI would be on the same page as the majority on this board when it comes to protecting immutable, observable, objective bodily sex as how we run law and society rather than subjective, invisible, intangible sexed souls.

Oh, just stop it.

Instead of banging this ridiculous drum, why don't you stop deflecting and explain to us all why you believe that people born with penises should have more rights than people born without penises.

I’m not sure what part of ECHR membership being an explicit requirement of the GFA (which EU membership was not) you don’t understand.

I am still an ardent remainer - although I accept that ship has sailed - but if there are any benefits whatsoever to Brexit, they should include no longer having to go along with this sort of insanity just because other countries are doing it.

If you have, or have ever had, a penis, you are a man. No debate.

I'm not sure what part of "the ECHR does not actually contain any rights for men to falsify their legal documents" you don't understand.

If remaining in the ECHR means we are bound by the insane decisions of judges who are just making it up as they go along, rather than complying with the actual treaty, we need to leave it, even if that means renegotiating the GFA, which is of course not nearly as difficult as you are making out.

I’m explaining the necessary and inevitable consequences of repealing the GRA.

By all means explain why you think my analysis is wrong. I’ve no desire to explain or argue my beliefs with you - I’m perfectly happy relying on legal fact.

Go on then - tell us how easy renegotiating the Good Friday Agreement would be to remove a core UK obligation.

What does that renegotiation look like? What issues are on the table?

Do you even understand why the ECHR was a requirement in the first place? Do you have any idea of the context of Ireland challenging the UK at the ECHR right now in this certainty that you can easily just strip out the ECHR requirement?

Whatever, if the current people are so fragile they would immediately resume the IRA then that's their problem.
No I and others are not responsible for history. No you cannot punish the descendants of people for their ancestors crimes.
You sound like you justify terrorism.

If you look at the case law (you should, the court has been bombarded since the 90s and by no stretch of the imagination were they all successful - also interesting how many cases were FTM ?seen as lower threat/easier sell?), the no-divorce seems to have been about countries where same sex marriage was illegal.

The ever-flexible trans gambit:

• Same sex marriage illegal: goes to court to have change of gender recognised so can marry same sex partner (screw gay and lesbian siblings, who cares about them)

• Same sex marriage illegal and gender change recognised so hetrosexual couple now gay: goes to court to argue that mandatory divorce is unfair because this couple should have special rulez (again, screw the not-specials who still can't get married)

• Same sex marriage becomes legal: go to court to make previous rulings a Trojan horse to compel transwidows to stay married.

I wonder if "TERFs will cause The Troubles V2.0" is a line being tested at Labour HQ.

I encourage them to roll it out nationwide 🍿

You can't explain or argue your beliefs because that would involve admitting that you believe the "rights" of people born with penises to falsify their legal documents (which is not to be found anywhere in the ECHR) trump the rights of women and girls to have their safety and dignity respected.

This Good Friday nonsense is just nonsensical raging against the dying of the light from an ideologue who knows that the tide has turned and there is nothing they can do about it.

If we managed to find a way of keeping the Irish border open despite leaving the EU, I am confident that we can find a way of not going to war with Ireland over whether a woman can have a penis or not.

Recognising that a fragile peace agreement is important to avoid people dying in the way they did before that agreement was reached is not ‘justifying’ terrorism.

But at least you’re admitting you don’t give a shit if Northern Ireland ends up back in the troubles. I mean sure, Northern Irish women might be backed to being bombed but I’m sure they’ll be glad when they realise that a trans man in Birmingham’s birth certificate still refers to him as female.

I understand all of those things, yes.

None of them are a good reason for remaining wedded to it if it is being used as a sword, rather than a shield, by men's rights activists to strip women and girls of their most basic rights.

By contrast ECHR membership is actually an obligation of the GFA.

Please could you tell me where, exactly the GFA states that membership of the ECHR is an obligation? I am aware of many references to provision of ECHR rights to residents of NI by the various layers of NI government but cannot find anywhere where membership is obligatory.

‘Go to war with Ireland’ exposes your deep deep ignorance of the issue.

Go on - I’m waiting for you to explain what this wonderful renegotiated Good Friday Agreement looks like, since you are so convinced it is easy.

Yes, this is what needs remembering when the T assert (as they frequently do) that they fought for LGB rights. They did nothing of the sort.

The requirement for access to the European Court of Human Rights means membership is a requirement.

Individuals in Northern Ireland will not have access to that Court if the UK withdrew from the ECHR.