Angela Rayner in the Guardian

[Justme56]

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2024/mar/23/angela-rayner-roots-rough-edges-ready-for-power

‘We have biological women and we have trans women. And they’re both women: one is a biological woman through sex and one is a trans woman who has transitioned. Most of the public can get that.’

This.

I was wondering about this Sausage
What does a corrected birth certificate look like? For example a transwoman with GRC? Does their BC now only say sex female, and is there any referance on the BC to the original sex being male

Yep. And this could be our deputy PM. Someone who resorts to branding more than half the population (if the last election is anything to go by) “scum” because she hasn’t the vocabulary or brainpower to come up with an intelligent argument.

Scary times.

It's the dehumanising. It is indicative of tribalism and bigotry.

The only information that I have which may help are these 2 things from Naomi Cunningham (Barrister) and Michael Foran (Law lecturer).

I forgot to attach. Obviously everything depends on context so shouting you’re a man in the workplace would likely be seen as harassment as would shouting you are a terf. But my understanding is that it’s more about treating someone as if they are a woman when it comes to the law, rather than forcing people to believe they are one - if that makes sense.

Thankyou for those legal opinions JustMe56 I think that’s useful for everyone to remember

JFC,not this nitwit again.

That's interesting. So it does mean that state organisations, like hospitals and prisons, have to treat tw as women?
And non-state organisations are a grey area, so they use their discretion?
I'm trying to unpick this.

Thank you - this is what I have understood the GRC to confer. A "legal fiction" which prevents anyone for being discriminated against because of their preferred "gender" - it doesn't say that the law now declares a man a woman, nor a woman a man, in every sense.

Like much other legislation concerning the trans debate and protected characteristics of individuals, it has been deliberately manipulated and misinterpreted to be what TRAs want it it be, rather than what it legally is, for so long, and to such an extent, that the lie has now, in many people's minds ,become the truth.

(Much like such common fallacies as that a shoal of piranha will skeletonise a cow in 3 minutes - no matter how big the cow or how small the shoal. 3 minutes it is.)

IIRC the law around the GRC also makes exceptions for areas where women need protection, dignity or privacy - so men, no matter how they identify, can be refused access to women's changing rooms, toilets, etc, because these are areas where women are vulnerable and require privacy and dignity.

It looks like she’ll have more say soon and those views impact policy. You’ll likely be thinking this more often.

Starmer’s take the public with you hide behind lawyerly nonsense and Rayner