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?

Of course I would "care if the troubles restarted".

I just fundamentally object to you using that as a threat against women who dare to say that they also have human rights.

If we cannot maintain the Good Friday Agreement in its current form without remaining under the jurisdiction of an undemocratic, unaccountable, supranational court populated by judges who appear not to understand that they need to actually apply the treaty as it was entered into by the member states rather than doing whatever the fuck Stonewall or their international equivalents are lobbying them to do, then something has to change.

Yes, the Good Friday Agreement is important. But it is neither immutable, nor more important than the human rights of 51% of the population.

It's actually disgusting that you are attempting to use this as a stick to beat women with.

What the hell is wrong with you?

If it weren't so grim it would be quite hilarious that someone with a vivid enough imagination to believe in the female penis doesn't have enough left over to contemplate the possibility of laws and systems being changed if they are being misused and are no longer fit for purpose.

I think everything in your first paragraph is nonsense but don’t think any of it is incompatible with the ECHR.

Because I asked you for the links to the European Court of Human Rights judgments which provide for legal recognition of “sex markers” in official documents (rather than recognition of gender or gender identity), which you claimed existed.

You didn’t provide the links so I searched for information on the relevant European Court of Human Rights case law. That Council of Europe report provides an overview of that case law.

The developments in case law since Goodwin are summarised in that graphic.

Nonsense?

Why? That’s crazy tbh

Do you think women should never get single sex spaces, children should be indoctrinated and people forced to use pronouns - what happens if they don’t?

Oh and language mangled by gender so it’s inaccessible

What bizarre things to want. Are you male?

The purpose is to divert the women on this thread away from talking to each other about how women’s right to dignity and privacy from the opposite sex when in a state of undress can be protected in UK legislation.

If women can be drawn into an off topic debate about something else entirely, then that’s X amount of time which hasn’t been* *spent on researching the UK and International legal framework and coming up with ideas.

I hope this thread is full of lurkers who are as aghast as I am at the depths ideologues like Janette will sink to in order to discourage women from asserting their own human rights.

I hope it’s full of lurkers inspired to read up on the ECHR rights which protect women eg the prohibition of degrading treatment, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, prohibition of discrimination in the protection of these rights….

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/human-rights-the-uks-international-human-rights-obligations

The substantive rights and freedoms contained in the Convention are:

• Article 2: the right to life
• Article 3: the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
• Article 4: the prohibition of slavery and forced labour
• Article 5: the right to liberty and security
• Article 6: the right to a fair trial
• Article 7: the prohibition of retrospective criminal penalties
• Article 8: the right to private and family life
• Article 9: the freedom of thought, conscience and religion
• Article 10: the freedom of expression
• Article 11: the freedom of assembly and association
• Article 12: the right to marry
• Article 13: the right to an effective national remedy for breach of these rights
• Article 14: the prohibition of discrimination in the protection of these rights

@EasternStandard are you male?

Don’t even have to see or sniff them, to tell, mansplaining is such a give away 😂

People should also read the European Convention on Human Rights.

None of the rights that have been discussed in this thread, none of the rights that TRAs claim legitimise the GRA, are absolute. All these rights are subject to limitations for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Pretending that people can change sex endangers the health, the morals, and the rights and freedoms of others.

Yeah well it appears some of the actual judges need to read the bloody convention.

The convention is not worth the paper it is written on if the judges are going to ignore what is actually written on it.

Hey folks potential new recruit just posted on main board go draw in and be gentle

What a lively thread! Most informative and @MargotBamborough you are on fire 🔥 today!

crikey

I turn my back for 5 minutes and you lot are restarting the Troubles by wanting to deny some chaps their lady certificates

it's all go isn't it?

I enjoyed the ECtHR definition of gender identity provided above and would love to know what dress, speech and mannerisms correspond with the male and female sexes.

You are referring to:

2. The British Government will complete incorporation into Northern Ireland law of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), with direct access to the courts, and remedies for breach of the Convention, including power for the courts to overrule Assembly legislation on grounds of inconsistency.

You are obviously correct that withdrawal would remove access to the ECtHR and it is a reasonable inference that this withdrawal would be a breach. So what would this mean in practice? UK won't withdraw from the GFA. Will ROI? Will UK and ROI seek a reasonable work-around? Could there be a new Supreme Court of Human Rights for NI with 2 judges from UK and 2 from ROI who apply the current ECtHR case law?

That would mean that the GRA couldn't be repealed for NI because the new court would strike it out. So maybe other solutions need to be explored. Back to not recording sex markers on official documents to render the GRA redundant?

It's a great thread, I died at this:

PS - you forgot your clown shoes. 🤡

And tw currently affect articles 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11 (remember lesbian gatherings are discrimination against tw), 13 and 14 by their use of single sex toilets, changing spaces and sports. But guess women are not worthy of universal human rights?

Tbh if NI want to reunion with Ireland over this I'm fine with that. Can't see many NI people being super pro trans though? More traditional religion generally no? Isn't that why we keep being threatened with no peace?

I think the definition of “transgender” is even more intriguing.

”persons who have a gender identity (which, lest we forget, includes “other expressions of gender including dress, speech, and mannerisms”) different from predominant social expectations based on their sex assigned at birth”

So a girl liking football (prior to the London olympics anyway) could be “an expression of gender different from predominant social expectations” thus making her transgender. Until she moved to the US - where liking football would make her gender-conforming, and no longer transgender.

Women who don’t cover their hair moving to a country where it’s required of women would go from being gender-conforming to transgender by virtue of changing countries.

Or women who don’t shave their armpits would go from being transgender in the UK to no longer transgender if they moved to Germany.

Kill it with fire.

Yep. Plus that sounds incredibly regressive to me

The thing many posters don’t seem to get is that the Good Friday Agreement is not just an agreement between the UK and Ireland. It is a multiparty agreement.

The ECHR provisions were included because there was no confidence among nationalists and Catholics that human rights abuses would be addressed by UK courts applying solely UK legislation. An important part of the balance in the Agreement from a nationalist perspective is also that there is a common floor in rights protection across Ireland and Northern Ireland.

There is simply no way that there is any agreement among the parties to the GFA to just remove those obligations and no incentives for nationalist parties to agree to do so. When the agreement was struck, it was carefully balanced - for nationalists the ‘losses’ were recognition of NI within the UK and the principle of consent and the ‘wins’ were the mechanism for a unity referendum and rights protections.

The idea that you can just dip in and surgically amend the Agreement suggests lack of understanding of Northern Ireland and the peace process. Unpick the rights provisions of the GFA and the other provisions also start to unravel. Why would nationalists feel compelled to adhere still to the principle of consent if another important element is removed? If the support for the principle of consent is eroded what does that mean for unionist support for power sharing and the border poll mechanism?

The earlier claim by a poster that this isn’t brain surgery, and the comment by another of ‘whatever’ at the prospect of all of this unravelling are just stunningly ignorant and cavalier.

Please please just educate yourself on Northern Ireland.

The risk is not that there is increased support for Irish unity because of some love for the Gender Recognition Act.

The risk is that the entire peace process unravels if one of the key chapters of the Agreement - is hollowed out by the UK withdrawing from the ECHR, unravelling the very delicate balance contained within the Agreement.

Well then the obvious response to that is that if all these other parties care so very much about the Good Friday Agreement, they should take extra special care to make sure that the UK's continued participation in it is not made conditional on our acceptance of the idea that the completely imaginary "rights" of a few very special penis people to lie abut their identities trump the very real human rights of the entire female sex.

These ECtHR judges need to stay in their goddamn lane and stop inventing and trying to enforce treaty obligations that the member states never signed up to.

Putting the onus on NI parties to change the jurisprudence of the ECHR in order to maintain the Good Friday Agreement is yet another ridiculous comment from you.

Whats more, it’s not about whether the parties care about the Good Friday Agreement. It is about whether the UK cares about it. There are elements within both the DUP and Sinn Fein that would not be averse to the GFA unravelling. The point is that the UK as a whole should not be as cavalier as you are with the peace process.

I’ve not seen anyone actively welcome the opposite of the things I listed in pp so I’m guessing male TRA