J K Rowling has heroically stood up for women. The Government must find the courage to reform the law
... the guidance on non-crime hate incidents changed to specifically protect the expression of sex realist views. Indeed, the cases of <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/KGcOk/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/12/21/free-speech-victory-ex-officer-harry-miller-hate-incident-tweet/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Miller v College of Policing and <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/KGcOk/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/10/maya-forstater-woman-lost-job-claiming-people-cannot-change/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Forstater v CGD Europe upheld this principle. a high threshold was required to warrant the recording of a non-crime hate incident with personal data, the test being whether there is a real risk of significant harm to individuals and/or that there is a real risk a future criminal offence may be committed.
But the reason why there is so much confusion on everything, from which pronoun to use to how to support gender-questioning children in schools, is that the law is unclear. And that is why no amount of guidance, whether on non-crime hate incidents or for schools, will fix the problem. It is why we need to change the Equality Act.
The root problem is that the meaning of “sex” in the Equality Act is currently contested, especially when read with the Gender Recognition Act. Where someone has changed their sex in the eyes of the law by acquiring a Gender Recognition Certificate, which does not necessarily require surgical alteration, they do not suddenly become entitled to all the rights that come with their acquired sex.
But the Equality Act protects both gender reassignment, broadly interpreted, and sex. That’s why when it comes to using single sex spaces, access to sports and the protection of children in schools, there is a level of confusion about where the line is drawn and where a trans woman is, for all intents and purposes, still to be treated as a biological man. That’s why we need to clarify the Equality Act to ensure that sex means biological sex, as proposed by Liz Truss.
Fundamentally, we cannot legislate for what people may “feel”. It cannot be right that those who self-identify as a different gender must always expect the rest of us to change our speech or behaviour to accommodate their feelings. Otherwise, where does it stop? What’s to prevent me declaring myself a different race, age or nationality, simply based on my feelings?
The logical endpoint of this debate is a breakdown of truth and justice, and it’s why we must support heroines like J K Rowling in this fight. From more than 100 years ago, Millicent Fawcett’s rallying cry of “courage calls to courage everywhere” applies now more than ever.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/13/fix-equality-act-restore-sanity-to-trans-debate/
Before the usual suspects leap in about we are all too stupid to realise the Conservatives are just saying this to win out votes, and it is wrong to share articles like this, all I can say if when a politician from Labour, Green or which ever party writes such an article I would happily share.
So just to repeat, the problem isn't that the tories are saying this, but that Labour isn't. Although you could argue that they dont say anything because the usual suspects help them by implying GC feminism is a right wing analysis which is "proved" as only right wingers speaking publicly about it.
Can also be read at https://archive.ph/KGcOk
(Just to add that the author of this article has in my opinion played a really deliberate and negative role in raising the temperature over issues of racism, etc.. in the UK. Although I suspect some political purists would say I shouldn't even acknowledge them let alone share their writing.)