The Times: Labour plans to simplify ‘dehumanising’ gender change process

[ResisterRex]

Read it and weep, vipers

"Labour will make it easier to change gender and is considering allowing a single family doctor to sign off on the decision under plans to “simplify” the process.

The party is considering how to make the legally binding certificate easier to obtain while still having guardrails to prevent mirroring controversial ­proposals in Scotland that would have ­removed doctors from the process ­altogether.

The plans include ditching a panel of doctors and lawyers that approve ­gender recognition certificates, the document allowing transgender people to have their affirmed gender legally recognised, and only requiring one doctor to be involved in the process.

The Times understands that one option under consideration is that the doctor could be a GP. Labour would ­also ­remove the ability of a spouse to object to the change. A source said the party wanted to make the process “less medicalised” but added that the plans would retain the involvement of a doctor and would not allow people to self-identify in order to obtain legal changes.

They said it had not yet been decided whether the medical professional would be a GP or a gender specialist, with the issue likely to go to consultation if the party wins the next election.

The discussions centre on concerns that if the single doctor was a specialist, a GP would still need to make the ­referral, therefore retaining the two-step process that Labour wants to drop."

Labour plans to simplify ‘dehumanising’ gender change process

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/604c739c-70b7-4819-866f-370ae67da6ab?shareToken=2a1dede2a48c5ec7388167f16bdd6cbb

Thank you. That is heartening news and I hope that we see plenty of media picking that up tomorrow.

Wonderful news, thanks for posting the link.

How do we move back to sex as the determining factor In accessing spaces/services if men swan about with passport/driver's license & birth certificate saying female ?

Which minimum wage worker will be expected to gate keep our spaces? by a saying "but you look like a bloke"

😩

Every party leader needs to be asked "Do either India Willoughby or Eddie izzard have a right to be in womans and girls changing rooms or womans and girls toilets"

They need to have a picture in their heads of actual men using specific women's spaces when girls are likely to be present.

They are side stepping the issue by talking about imagined men in places where its easier to stop these men entering - like prisons and hospital wards.

They need to answer when everyone can picture eddie izzard following a girl into a confined space.

I can’t understand why anyone would vote Labour by now, they’ve lost it

Apart from everything else, I am disappointed in Anneliese Dodds for referring inaccurately to spousal objection. It's the right of the spouse to exit the marriage. Utterly oppressive to remove it.

And I wish just one journalist would interrogate the claim that the process of obtaining a GRC is dehumanising and intrusive. Gender dysphoria is a medical diagnosis, of course you will be asked personal questions. Calling this dehumanising is the TRA trick of describing the innocuous in a vaguely sinister way.

This! I mean given how Freddie McConnell was able to get a GRC and then go onto have a baby thereby quite clearly failing to keep yo their side of the contract to “live as a man” it’s quite clear the whole thing is nonsense. In fact arguably it should be harder not easier.

GPs are overstretched & fed up. They’ll sign things off because they do not have the head space to argue with ppl.

so yeah Labour are still for then men not for you

Is it really sidestepping the issue by talking about prisons and hospital wards? These are the sort of places where having ID which identifies someone as the opposite sex will actually be important. Nobody checks ID when someone enters a toilet or changing room.

We don't know how many men with GRCs are already in women's prisons They are counted as women because that's what's on their birth certificate. If all Isla Bryson had to do to get a GRC was send £50 to Helen Webberley, he would have been in a women's prison and counted as a woman.

When people like Dodds say that they're going to protect women only spaces they never explain how this can be put into practice in the case of males whose legal documents all identify them as female.

Angry (but not surprised) that Labour would take this stance. Also worried that anyone thinks recent GC legal wins would make any difference. Those wins depend on the law, Labour could (and appear to be motivated to) change the law. Our progress could easily vanish.

Yes, most people agree with a broadly GC position. Unfortunately, most don’t understand how legislating based on GI principles will affect their lives, so it doesn’t feature in how they cast their vote. That’s what Kier et al are banking on.

I'm not sure most GPs will want to do this. I think there will be push back there.

Apart from everything else, I am disappointed in Anneliese Dodds for referring inaccurately to spousal objection.
I can't be disappointed in AD, as my opinion of her won't sink any lower.

WTF! Sorry, is this correct?

If a man “transitions”, the spouse can no longer divorce him?!

“Dehumanising and intrusive”.

Why are adult men, albeit special adult men, always prioritised.

I think it as Stephanie Hayden who boasted how easy it was, under current arrangement, to get a certificate. Observation and evidence seem to suggest that as well as adolescents, vulnerable adults have got caught up in the idea that “changing sex” will solve pre-existing problems. If we are to be kind we need more safeguarding not less. A few more hoops for some, to provide more protection for those that need it.

Anyone who has cared for an elderly relative will know how expensive, frustrating and time consuming it is to go through the Court of Protection. No, not a priority for Labour, though in fairness not for the Tories either. Your stubborn elderly parent refused to sign a Power of Attorney. They did not want to be a burden. Then has a stroke or something and you need to step in. It will be a year at least before you get the paperwork that gives you the ability to make the decisions, and to access the carefully saved rainy day fund, that will allow you to support your parent and allow them to spend of their days in comfort and with dignity. The Court of Protection is possibly the least user friendly of any Government process, so as well as fees, you are likely to have to use a solicitor. Derek Draper, with all his political connections, was an apposite reminder of how difficult it can be when there is no POA and the worst happens.

But no. Our politicians don’t care about those routine tragedies happening across the country in our very ordinary families. They are pinning their flag to the masthead. We need to make things easier and cheaper for those special men. The rest of us: women, children, vulnerable adults and the elderly, don’t count.

Keir Starmer did not convince me at any point on this topic - he had too many splinters up his arse. So this is not unexpected.

It's not fair to dump these decisions onto a single GP, either. It's not something they signed up for.

And I agree with a PP that every single interview with every single Labour candidate should be asking questions about India and Eddie, and women's and girls' changing rooms and loos.

It is so fucking enraging that the entire centre-left political class is just not listening.

I so done with politicians.

Depressing

I’m not sure why expectations on these people were higher tbh

Not aimed at pp but generally

I guess Labour have finally got to the point where they are confident of winning the GE without needing any gender critical votes.

I hope they're wrong.

A 'gender doc' like Helen Webberley? She'll be delighted to sign anyone off for a fee, I'm sure.

This is consistent with Labour's sex fudge.

According to them the category 'women' includes men with a piece of paper you can buy for £5.

This is exactly why women have not been convinced by Labour. I'd actually prefer the Greens' outright batshit TWAW than this weak sophistry

I think the Muslim Vote rebellion scared Starmer a bit and this is a desperate way to toss a fig leaf to another of the tribes in Labour's increasingly unstable voter coalition.

It's so disappointing, after so many signs that they were seeing the light.

Just as I was about to decide to give them my vote as well. Back to the drawing board for me.

Yes. This is why Starmer blathers on about 'legal women'. They plan to make it easy for any bloke to have a piece of paper saying he is a 'legal woman'.

If I could put myself in the shoes of a (not online) GP (not sure I ever could I’m no way clever enough but anyway) I would be horrified to have this forced on me - alone - to carry out.

Labour, you’ve lost me further lately what with this, and the Elphicke welcome.

And just like they cease to be an option.

I was thinking Starmer actually doesn’t want to win. It’s inexplicable otherwise. Look at what he’d inherit. They’ve got no chance of doing anything useful. Aside from the fact they are hopeless in their own right. The ‘women’s rights thing’ is such an easy win for him, but he won’t address it. In fact he digs deeper.

The fact they talk about a consultation after the election, is pretty good news isn’t it. Surely the vast majority of people will not agree with what is basically Self ID. (as shown in Scotland.)