Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The history of the Gender Recognition actand Labour's role

1000 replies

AdamRyan · 22/04/2024 15:08

There have been lots of threads recently about Labour's position on gender and their role in the GRA. A poster on another thread made a slightly off topic point that I thought deserved a thread of its own. Please scroll on past or hide this thread if you aren't interested in discussing further!

Thanks to @bigcoatlady....

The Gender Recognition Act 2004 only allows people to apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate if they have two written reports by medical professionals confirming that they have lived in their affirmed gender for two years as well as evidence of any medical treatment they have undergone. There is no requirement for a GRC to be issued that the applicant has undergone surgery, the reason for this is the original bill introduced by Labour restricted GRCs only to those who had received surgery and this was removed in the Lords by Tory peers uncomfortable with the requirement that 'men' undergo surgical removal of the penis.

That much is ancient history. Less than 5000 people in the UK have a GRC.

In 2015 the Home Office launched a proposal to remove the costly and time-consuming medical assessment of applications for gender recognition in favour of self-ID. This was a Tory proposal from a Tory government. They have since reversed their position on it but it was never a Labour proposal.

The Equality Act 2010 has always made it possible to exclude trans women from women only competitive sports (s.195), women only services (sch 3), all women shortlists(s104(7)), communal accommodation (sch23), women only associations (sch16) and job requirements (sch 9).

As a result employers who want to recruit a woman but not a transwoman to a role such as 'rape crisis counsellor' have always been able to do so. If a rape crisis service wanted to offer rape crisis group therapy ONLY to women and not trans women they are entirely permitted to do so. If a domestic violence refuge (and I have chaired the board of trustees of a housing charity which offers refuge services for many years) wants to only accommodate women and not trans women it can do so.

Services such as Survivors Network are choosing to include transwomen in their service for whatever reasons but there is no legal obligation on them to do this.

Even had the Tory proposals to permit self-ID gone ahead it was never proposed that the law be changed further to reduce the protection for women only spaces in the Equality Act.

You can call that a gender ideology scandal if you like but its pretty tame.

There is another scandal. During those fifteen years, those of us who have been scrabbling to fund frontline services have been hard hit by austerity. In the city my charity operates in the women-led charities which delivered refuge services went to the wall in the first round of austerity. By 2015 we had no DV refuges at all. Our Rape Crisis nearly went bust and is currently closed to new referrals. We are not a women only provider but we started to offer specialist accommodation for women at risk of homelessness 8 yrs ago because of the massive demand. Women leaving violent partners were becoming street homeless and ending up in hostels surrounded by aggressive mean with drug issues due to the shortage of safe accommodation.

Two years ago the govt did create a statutory duty on councils to urgently accommodate households leaving DV BUT by then it was too bloody late, the good charities had already sold up their properties and moved on. The sector has been ripped apart by the last fifteen years

This is a bigger scandal than the GRA.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
20
Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:48

lifeturnsonadime · 22/04/2024 20:45

I mean if society/ a government told trans women that they were male, revoked the GRC so we didn't have the ridiculous notion of the female penis and actually prioritised women we could go back to the good old days where young women weren't told that they don't have the right to call out predatory males in women's toilets in case they are trans.

It's not too difficult to do that. You just don't want to because women are less important to you than trans women when it comes to toilets and I suspect because your beloved labour party think women can have a penis and you are going along with it because Labour = good.

What is going back to victorian times is putting some women on a urinary leash.

Excellent post.

Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:48

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:46

Are we saying girls shouldn't wear trousers?
Is that what feminism has got to?

What on earth are you talking about for goodness sake? 🙄

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:49

AdamRyan · 22/04/2024 20:43

I got a massive talking to about "not believing women" when I challenged a poster saying there was a child identifying as a cat at school and eating from a bowl like a cat.

I also got a talking to when i said I didn't believe that schools were "transing children" without the parents knowledge.

Those scenarios are still both far less believable to me than a scenario where a woman gets mistaken for a man. Or where NGC people are mistaken for the opposite sex.

What happened to "believe women"?

I've never told anyone to believe anyone.

I believe people if I think they are telling the truth or have no reason to doubt them, regardless of what anatomy they have.

Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:50

I also got a talking to when i said I didn't believe that schools were "transing children" without the parents knowledge

You don't believe that this has happened in schools? Seriously?!

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:50

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:46

Are we saying girls shouldn't wear trousers?
Is that what feminism has got to?

No. HTH.

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:50

Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:48

What on earth are you talking about for goodness sake? 🙄

Simple question, should girls be allowed to wear trousers?

Follow up question. Should girls with short hair be allowed to wear trousers?

I ask because there was a poster earlier who seemed to be suggesting that answer to both was no.

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:51

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:49

I've never told anyone to believe anyone.

I believe people if I think they are telling the truth or have no reason to doubt them, regardless of what anatomy they have.

So you believe me, Pointy and any other poster who comments on their own life experiences?

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:53

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:50

Simple question, should girls be allowed to wear trousers?

Follow up question. Should girls with short hair be allowed to wear trousers?

I ask because there was a poster earlier who seemed to be suggesting that answer to both was no.

Reading comprehension is clearly not your strong point, huh? Go back and read it again.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:53

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:51

So you believe me, Pointy and any other poster who comments on their own life experiences?

No, because I have a good reason not to.

lifeturnsonadime · 22/04/2024 20:54

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:50

Simple question, should girls be allowed to wear trousers?

Follow up question. Should girls with short hair be allowed to wear trousers?

I ask because there was a poster earlier who seemed to be suggesting that answer to both was no.

I mean this is just ridiculous. Otter didn't say that at all.

It is the presence of males in women's toilets that has resulted in some women being questioned if they look like they might be male.

No one is suggesting women can't wear what they want we are asking males to stay out.

What you are doing is victim blaming. Women who want dignity and privacy have been put in a difficult position. If some women are wrongly questioned it is the fault of the males who are imposing on our spaces. Nothing more nothing less.

Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:55

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:50

Simple question, should girls be allowed to wear trousers?

Follow up question. Should girls with short hair be allowed to wear trousers?

I ask because there was a poster earlier who seemed to be suggesting that answer to both was no.

Good lord. Try again.

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:55

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:53

No, because I have a good reason not to.

Given I don't think our paths have crossed before, may I ask what that good reason is that you think I am lying?

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:56

lifeturnsonadime · 22/04/2024 20:54

I mean this is just ridiculous. Otter didn't say that at all.

It is the presence of males in women's toilets that has resulted in some women being questioned if they look like they might be male.

No one is suggesting women can't wear what they want we are asking males to stay out.

What you are doing is victim blaming. Women who want dignity and privacy have been put in a difficult position. If some women are wrongly questioned it is the fault of the males who are imposing on our spaces. Nothing more nothing less.

If you read the post @Otter2 explicitly said that a woman needs to do more than just having short hair and wearing trousers before there's any risk of her being mistaken for a man.

And somehow this was interpreted as "Otter thinks women shouldn't wear trousers".

lifeturnsonadime · 22/04/2024 20:56

Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:50

I also got a talking to when i said I didn't believe that schools were "transing children" without the parents knowledge

You don't believe that this has happened in schools? Seriously?!

TRAs clearly aren't interested in the Cass report because it doesn't suit their activism.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:56

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:55

Given I don't think our paths have crossed before, may I ask what that good reason is that you think I am lying?

The reason is that people with this particular agenda lie about this particular thing all the time.

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:57

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:56

If you read the post @Otter2 explicitly said that a woman needs to do more than just having short hair and wearing trousers before there's any risk of her being mistaken for a man.

And somehow this was interpreted as "Otter thinks women shouldn't wear trousers".

Back in the real world, I know women when wearing trousers or other clothers, with short hair or long, who have been mistaken for men.

Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:58

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:57

Back in the real world, I know women when wearing trousers or other clothers, with short hair or long, who have been mistaken for men.

I am sorry but you are being completely ridiculous now. Laughable in fact.

lifeturnsonadime · 22/04/2024 20:58

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:57

Back in the real world, I know women when wearing trousers or other clothers, with short hair or long, who have been mistaken for men.

And?
My daughter was mistaken for being a boy for years pre-puberty when she thought she was a boy.

Now she doesn't think that anymore.

Why are you using this to support men being in women's single sex spaces?

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:58

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:56

The reason is that people with this particular agenda lie about this particular thing all the time.

Given I have no agenda, and am telling the truth, I hope you will be kind enough to apologise.

Perhaps also to others on this thread who you have decided are lying without any evidence.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/04/2024 20:58

JessS1990 · 22/04/2024 20:58

Given I have no agenda, and am telling the truth, I hope you will be kind enough to apologise.

Perhaps also to others on this thread who you have decided are lying without any evidence.

Everyone has an agenda. You are no exception.

Otter2 · 22/04/2024 20:59

This is a really silly derail by a TRA with an agenda. Why do they do this?

Karensalright · 22/04/2024 20:59

Back to OP re the origin of the GRA as I understand it, International law caused this piece of legislation to bring the UK in line with the Convention on Human Rights. I do believe that Japan had a caveat to gender recognition that required surgery which was deemed unlawful by international courts which influenced the way the GRA was worded.

In other words not a party political thing.

Tories nor labour can do anything about that, as it stands.

So that is not a consideration for me when voting.

Underthinker · 22/04/2024 20:59

The vast majority of people are recognised as their correct sex the vast majority of the time. No human is infallible, some people have poor eyesight or poor judgement.

But sex CAN be proven as it is an immutable characteristic of every human (and mamnal).
Gender identity on the other hand is not falsifiable in the same way. Its not a fixed material characteristic amd exists only in the minds of SOME people. There is no way of proving or disproving someones gender identity, so before people start citing one person they met once who they weren't certain about, maybe consider all the people for whom you have no clue about their gender identity or whether they even have one, and think about which of sex or GI is a flawed basis for determining access to spaces.

AdamRyan · 22/04/2024 20:59

lifeturnsonadime · 22/04/2024 20:45

I mean if society/ a government told trans women that they were male, revoked the GRC so we didn't have the ridiculous notion of the female penis and actually prioritised women we could go back to the good old days where young women weren't told that they don't have the right to call out predatory males in women's toilets in case they are trans.

It's not too difficult to do that. You just don't want to because women are less important to you than trans women when it comes to toilets and I suspect because your beloved labour party think women can have a penis and you are going along with it because Labour = good.

What is going back to victorian times is putting some women on a urinary leash.

Yes. Let's go back to the good old days.
Would those be the days where marital rape was legal?
Or the ones where you needed your husbands permission to get a bank account?
Or the ones where women weren't allowed in the pub alone?
Maybe the ones where they had to give up work when pregnant?
Or the ones where black/inuit/native American women were sterilised and given long acting contraceptives without their knowledge?
I know, lets go back to the days where women were banned from playing competitive football because it upset the men.
And the pass rate for the 11+ was lower for boys so girls didn't take too mamy spaces.

We were amazing at prioritising women. It's all the fault of the GRA and stonewall that everything's gone to shit.

Confused
OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread