Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Thread gallery
35
DameMaud · 03/06/2024 12:14

WarriorN · 03/06/2024 10:01

More from Sonia

Just to be clear: if you’re on the left & you’re dismissing an Equality Act amendment to protect women’s rights you don’t understand as hateful on the basis of who’s proposing it you’re as guilty as anyone of culture wars rhetoric in a sensitive debate about a conflict of rights.

x.com/soniasodha/status/1797549966338244659?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

Yessss! Sonia is on fire today!

CassieMaddox · 03/06/2024 12:14

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:12

No legal change then. Big difference. I love all this less parliamentary time lower cost lowering safeguarding nonsense. Just chuck men their legal female certificates and be done with it. Hopeless.

TRAs would be over the moon.

She hasn’t fucked anything

She’s got people talking about an important legal clarification.

Show quote history

Oh she has.
I'm very happy with this today. I've said for ages Labour/Conservative are basically the same on this issue, her interviews essentially confirm it. Males can legally become women and only be excluded from womens spaces where proportionate and necessary.
Businesses get to choose.
The Tories are doing fuck all to protect "womens single sex spaces" that they couldn't already do under the EA exemptions.

CrossPurposes · 03/06/2024 12:15

MagnetCarHair · 03/06/2024 12:05

100% of women don't have a penis. That's reality. We have colluded, with bad laws, with a fiction that some do and this lie shouldn't extend into the Equality Act.

Yes. Enough with this nonsense.

MagnetCarHair · 03/06/2024 12:15

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:12

No legal change then. Big difference. I love all this less parliamentary time lower cost lowering safeguarding nonsense. Just chuck men their legal female certificates and be done with it. Hopeless.

TRAs would be over the moon.

She hasn’t fucked anything

She’s got people talking about an important legal clarification.

Show quote history

If KB had fucked it I doubt you'd be spending your time here, railing against women who agree with her.

It's really the talking about it that grinds people's gears, isn't it?

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:16

CassieMaddox · 03/06/2024 12:14

Oh she has.
I'm very happy with this today. I've said for ages Labour/Conservative are basically the same on this issue, her interviews essentially confirm it. Males can legally become women and only be excluded from womens spaces where proportionate and necessary.
Businesses get to choose.
The Tories are doing fuck all to protect "womens single sex spaces" that they couldn't already do under the EA exemptions.

Show quote history

Yeh course you are.

You want that lovely Labour GP Self ID and no legal change

Fuck it you may as well get Boots to print out GRCs the way you’re going. Or an app?

Whatever make it easy, make it quick, make it as legally soft as possible

CassieMaddox · 03/06/2024 12:17

MagnetCarHair · 03/06/2024 12:15

If KB had fucked it I doubt you'd be spending your time here, railing against women who agree with her.

It's really the talking about it that grinds people's gears, isn't it?

Show quote history

😂ok

sugarapplelane · 03/06/2024 12:18

The guy’s an idiot. He and his party have had 14 flipping years to do everything that he’s now pledged to do.

It hasn’t happened in 14 years so forgive me for not believing him.

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:19

MagnetCarHair · 03/06/2024 12:15

If KB had fucked it I doubt you'd be spending your time here, railing against women who agree with her.

It's really the talking about it that grinds people's gears, isn't it?

Show quote history

I think the emoji count is some kind of indicator they go up a few notches

CassieMaddox · 03/06/2024 12:20

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:16

Yeh course you are.

You want that lovely Labour GP Self ID and no legal change

Fuck it you may as well get Boots to print out GRCs the way you’re going. Or an app?

Whatever make it easy, make it quick, make it as legally soft as possible

Edited
Show quote history

I want the Labour GRA review to make it much clearer what gender dysphoria means than "living as a woman".
They've said it will and also that nothing in that process will override the EA exemptions.
It's all splitting hairs because neither party are proposing an approach that materially changes access to single-sex spaces. Despite all Sunaks "a man is a man and a woman is a woman" guff.

ArabellaScott · 03/06/2024 12:25

CassieMaddox · 03/06/2024 11:35

Do you have a particular reason to think a panel is a better "safeguard" than an individual for a process where the criteria is basically "prove you've lived as the opposite sex for a period of time"?

We put less "safeguards" into assessing people for PIP and that has actually resulted in deaths due to the wrong decisions getting made.

Show quote history

You're quite right. The GRA must be scrapped, it's the only way.

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:27

Unfortunately Labour’s GRA is hard to scrap

But keep going. Taking any step to move away from TRA challenge is good

ArabellaScott · 03/06/2024 12:29

Well, either trans people can have a lovely gilt edged gender certificate that says they have whatever gender they like that day - cakegender wtf - and it is made absolutely and utterly clear that gender has no bearing on or connection to sex, and all laws are based on sex; or we scrap the GRA.

Which would be preferable? I don't care, tbh, one or the other.

MagnetCarHair · 03/06/2024 12:30

I would like to see the GRA scrapped. We've seen the unintended consequences of lying to be kind.

Runor · 03/06/2024 12:30

Cassie, I think you’re wrong - Starmer has never mentioned ‘single-sex spaces’ only ‘safe spaces’, and when he talks about protecting women’s rights, this needs to be understood in the context that he believes TWAW.

Meanwhile Sunak (but not all Tories, see Mordant and Noakes) is clear that ‘woman’ mean biological woman, and the manifesto looks to clarify that in law

You are putting a lot of trust in Starmer to support women’s rights in government when he’s been so determined not to in opposition. Or maybe what he’s offering is actually exactly what you want

ArabellaScott · 03/06/2024 12:31

MrsWhattery · 03/06/2024 12:11

an 80 year old transwoman who's had all the surgeries and is in prison for not paying their TV licence

I don't want that person in a female-only space, however lovely they are. They have no idea what it is to be female and will disrupt and damage the female cameraderie and mutual support and openness that comes from being with women only. There is a good chance their transition is borne out of a fetish and they get sexual gratification from being put in with women. Statistically they will retain male patterns and levels of offending. All of that matters.

Plus, as always with this argument, the focus is on the transwoman.

Women in prison have rights to privacy, dignity and safety. Their preferences, wants, wishes and needs have as much weight as those of the transwoman. No matter how lovely and sweet and non threatening that man is, he remains a man, and women have every right to expect single sex spaces that are what they say they are.

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:34

MagnetCarHair · 03/06/2024 12:30

I would like to see the GRA scrapped. We've seen the unintended consequences of lying to be kind.

I agree. I think it’s one of the worst pieces of legislation created. The creators lacked any foresight and overview of impact on women and children.

I’d love it scrapped. Labour have stated they will defend it and are some that they are proud of it. But worse are the next proposals which will really drive home what the GRA can do

Ease, access, no change in law - this is for men with GRCs

Helleofabore · 03/06/2024 12:35

Runor · 03/06/2024 12:30

Cassie, I think you’re wrong - Starmer has never mentioned ‘single-sex spaces’ only ‘safe spaces’, and when he talks about protecting women’s rights, this needs to be understood in the context that he believes TWAW.

Meanwhile Sunak (but not all Tories, see Mordant and Noakes) is clear that ‘woman’ mean biological woman, and the manifesto looks to clarify that in law

You are putting a lot of trust in Starmer to support women’s rights in government when he’s been so determined not to in opposition. Or maybe what he’s offering is actually exactly what you want

Shhh! The whole slippery language around 'safe spaces' and the never said 'single sex spaces' is inconvenient and usually dismissed.

Datun · 03/06/2024 12:35

People new to this will all reach the same conclusion, why the fuck have we got a GRA?

It's going to be news to quite a few people what a GRC involves, that it's got nothing to do with surgery, or whether or not the person is a fetishist.

There was always a conflict between the EA and the GRA. Both in who they protect, and how the law works.

And now everyone is talking about it. And everyone wants the bloody answers.

I can't wait for the reporting of what exactly is involved in issuing a GRC.

Also this from Michael Foran?

  • Require a new analysis of biological sex. The common law position will be reverted to and there are decades of caselaw on how to define biological sex in law.

Can any lawyers here clarify how case law defines biological sex in law?

Because if a man's got a GRC, which changes his birth certificate, how are you supposed to kick him out, despite him obviously being a man?

DameMaud · 03/06/2024 12:36

WarriorN · 03/06/2024 10:25

Useful post by Dr Michael Foran:

https://x.com/michaelpforan/status/1797558913698582579?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

An overview of the proposal to clarify the meaning of sex in the Equality Act.

Background: In recent years there has been significant uncertainty over the interaction between the Gender Recognition Act and the Equality Act. Some things are settled law, others are uncertain.

What is settled law:

  • The Equality Act protects both sex and gender reassignment. Sex refers to males of any age and females of any age. Gender reassignment refers to those who are proposing to undergo, are undergoing, or have undergone a process of changing attributes of sex.
  • Sex in law is, by default, biological sex. Everyone is legally classed as their biological sex except where a GRC changes sex for some purposes.
  • Being protected under gender reassignment does not change sex in law for any purpose. It protects against denial of employment, goods & services, or housing as compared to someone of the same biological sex who does not have the GR protected characteristic. So trans women by default men and are compared to non-trans men. (Green v Secretary of State for Justice).
  • Single-sex services are lawful. Schedule 3 of the Equality Act allows providers to set up and maintain single-sex services such as rape crisis centres and female-only changing rooms and toilets. It also allows them to exclude anyone on the basis of sex or gender reassignment once proportionate.
  • Proportionality does not require a case-by-case analysis. General policies can be proportionate and most policies are general (Reference by AG for NI re Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) Bill)
  • Being protected under gender reassignment does not entail an entitlement to use single-sex services intended for members of the opposite sex. (Croft v Royal Mail; Green v SoS for Justice; FWS2 [Inner House])

What is currently uncertain:

  • Whether sex in the Equality Act means (i) biological sex or (ii) biological sex unless modified by a GRC.
  • Whether biological females are protected as a distinct group under the Equality Act.
  • How precisely the Schedule 3 exceptions which allow for single-sex services operate. If sex means sex as modified by a GRC these exceptions become more complicated to rely on and that can affect how useful they are in practice, given concerted campaigns to spread misinformation about the law here.
  • Whether single-sex associations defined by reference to biology (eg. Lesbian walking group, informal support network for female victims of male violence) are lawful. If sex doesn't mean biological sex, these are unlawful.
  • Whether trans men who become pregnant are protected from pregnancy discrimination. If a GRC modifies sex for the Equality Act they likely lose protection.
  • Whether sexual orientation is defined in the Act by reference to biological sex or biological sex unless modified by a GRC.

What this proposal will do:

  • Clarify that sex in the Equality Act means biological sex, referring to the ordinary common law position from Corbett v Corbett.
  • Make it clear that single-sex services and associations are defined by reference to biological sex.
  • Make it clear that trans men are protected from pregnancy discrimination regardless of whether they have a GRC.
  • Make gender reassignment a reserved matter, preventing devolved parliaments such as in Scotland from legislating to introduce Self-ID, ensuring that the continuing operation of the s35 Order blocking the GRR Bill.

What this proposal will not do:

  • Remove the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.
  • Make it lawful to discriminate on the basis of gender reassignment in the provision of goods & services, employment, or housing.
  • Prevent services from offering a trans-inclusive service where proportionate.
  • Require a new analysis of biological sex. The common law position will be reverted to and there are decades of caselaw on how to define biological sex in law.

I'm away at the moment so won't be responding very frequently. This post was a break from my holiday and I'm getting back to it now!

Thanks for this Warrior

ResisterRex · 03/06/2024 12:37

Runor · 03/06/2024 12:30

Cassie, I think you’re wrong - Starmer has never mentioned ‘single-sex spaces’ only ‘safe spaces’, and when he talks about protecting women’s rights, this needs to be understood in the context that he believes TWAW.

Meanwhile Sunak (but not all Tories, see Mordant and Noakes) is clear that ‘woman’ mean biological woman, and the manifesto looks to clarify that in law

You are putting a lot of trust in Starmer to support women’s rights in government when he’s been so determined not to in opposition. Or maybe what he’s offering is actually exactly what you want

Shhhhhh. We're not meant to say this!

Datun · 03/06/2024 12:39

ArabellaScott · 03/06/2024 12:31

Plus, as always with this argument, the focus is on the transwoman.

Women in prison have rights to privacy, dignity and safety. Their preferences, wants, wishes and needs have as much weight as those of the transwoman. No matter how lovely and sweet and non threatening that man is, he remains a man, and women have every right to expect single sex spaces that are what they say they are.

Show quote history

Indeed.

I know it's hard for some people to ever see things from a woman's point of view. But why should women, Incarcerated women at that, with no choice, be used as a validation tool for a man with issues?

BeelzebubsGargoyle · 03/06/2024 12:40

It's been a depressing reveal of the fact that women are seen as lesser than men, this whole issue.

Transwomen don't want to be in with men? Bless! Budge up, women!
Women don't want to be in with transwomen? Bigots! Burn!

BackToLurk · 03/06/2024 12:42

SmudgeButt · 03/06/2024 11:50

Ok so no men in women's prisons. But even if they have fully transitioned? And so the flip side is that women that have fully transitioned to have all the male genitalia must be kept in women's prisons? Are we happy with that??

I'm fully against the self declaring bit and don't think that gender as a protected right is appropriate at this time. But there are going to be some difficult situations to deal with.

There are very few people campaigning for transmen to be housed in the male estate. Although in practice patterns of offending mean the point is almost moot

thefireplace · 03/06/2024 12:43

Helleofabore · 03/06/2024 11:50

You seem to be the one now making things up. You seem to be the one with absolutist view points and are really pretty hypocritical in your accusations.

No. I have not said that the proposed changes 'trumps' anything. I was responding to your 'but the funding' point pages back. Which you then leveraged women's murders as well to try to strengthen.

Show quote history

No, everything i have stated is backed up by the research, the whole premise of your argument (i believe) is to make life better and safer for females, that includes murder in a so called domestic setting, rapes, child abuse etc

All of which have either gone up or not being prosecuted.

You believe Badenoch an trust her to deliver substantial changes.

I do not, talk is cheap, if she said "We screwed up, had years to make these changes but didn't, we will do better"

i'd have more faith in her, instead she blamed her Govt calling an election and the SNP - that is treated us as idiots.

EasternStandard · 03/06/2024 12:46

thefireplace · 03/06/2024 12:43

No, everything i have stated is backed up by the research, the whole premise of your argument (i believe) is to make life better and safer for females, that includes murder in a so called domestic setting, rapes, child abuse etc

All of which have either gone up or not being prosecuted.

You believe Badenoch an trust her to deliver substantial changes.

I do not, talk is cheap, if she said "We screwed up, had years to make these changes but didn't, we will do better"

i'd have more faith in her, instead she blamed her Govt calling an election and the SNP - that is treated us as idiots.

Show quote history

Why do you want what Labour are proposing?

Do you want GPs to give GRCs and no legal change to lower legal threat from TRAs

Please create an account

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

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.